HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! (Page 12)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2007-05-16 7:49 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Veteran 143 Raleigh, NC | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Thanks -- being new at this, can someone explain what it means if the # goes up or down over time? I also find it ironic that in my case, 220 - HR _is_ my LT. Crazy, no? |
|
2007-05-16 9:01 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Elite 2515 Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! For your edification, my Run LTHR is ~191 and I've seen HRs as high as 206 when sprinting at the end of a race. I've been HR training for about 18 months or so and my LTHRs haven't really moved. I'm just faster at the same HR. Good luck with the HR training. Stick with it and you WILL get better and faster. Like you, I came from a no endurance sport experience background and I love the structure HR training provides me. I'm a commited disciple thanks to Coach Mike and great BTers like Joel (TH3_FRB)! Cheers! Tom |
2007-06-21 7:16 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Expert 1059 Lakeville, MN | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Bumppity bump bump |
2007-07-27 10:37 AM in reply to: #238438 |
Member 38 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Mike , I read your heart rate training article and was wondering what zone should I be in for my 1/2 ironman. I believe it is zone 3 but that seems high at 85-90% of LT. I though for the race I should be in the 75-80% to put together a strong run. Thanks for any advice. Toby |
2007-07-27 10:46 AM in reply to: #903828 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! toby 71 - 2007-07-27 9:37 AM Mike , I read your heart rate training article and was wondering what zone should I be in for my 1/2 ironman. I believe it is zone 3 but that seems high at 85-90% of LT. I though for the race I should be in the 75-80% to put together a strong run. Thanks for any advice. Toby Hi Toby It depends on your level of experience. For your first HIM I would say Zone 1/2 would be good - depending on your level of fitness. If you are realistically looking to place in your AG then you'll want to be pushing hard and Zone 3 will be your target. I hope this helps. |
2007-07-27 10:52 AM in reply to: #903845 |
Member 38 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! |
|
2007-07-27 1:52 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Extreme Veteran 405 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! I am getting ready to do a duathlon this weekend. Is it possible to use any of the HR results from the 10k run or the 5k run at the end to estimate this or should I just wait until next week and do the TT? |
2007-07-27 2:54 PM in reply to: #904275 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! I've been using the rule 98% of a 5k HR race avg and 95% of a 10k race HR avg. The 5k results were accurate to what I had done on a run TT. Now you're talking about using the HR avgs from the du runs. The HR run numbers are sure to be different than just running the 10k or 5k by themselves, so I don't think those % would work. |
2007-07-27 3:04 PM in reply to: #903845 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! mikericci - 2007-07-27 11:46 AM toby 71 - 2007-07-27 9:37 AM Mike , I read your heart rate training article and was wondering what zone should I be in for my 1/2 ironman. I believe it is zone 3 but that seems high at 85-90% of LT. I though for the race I should be in the 75-80% to put together a strong run. Thanks for any advice. Toby Hi Toby It depends on your level of experience. For your first HIM I would say Zone 1/2 would be good - depending on your level of fitness. If you are realistically looking to place in your AG then you'll want to be pushing hard and Zone 3 will be your target. I hope this helps. I'd like to add one thing that Mike passed on to me years back. Learn the RPE vs HR while training, it comes naturally after a while. During the HIM it may be sunny & hot, muggy, etc. Depending on the weather you'll get different HR readings. During my HIM run it was sunny and very warm to hot at times and my HR was reading High Z3 to Z4 but I was only pushing around RPE 5.
|
2007-08-23 5:30 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Pro 4054 yep, | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! bump for all the new people alot of info which I am going back over again and gain or new information. |
2007-09-06 6:30 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Extreme Veteran 405 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! So I finally got around to doing an LT test this morning. Now if I did this right here is what I came up with. Avg HR last 20 minutes: 179 Zone 1: 118/152 Zone 2: 153/162 Zone 3: 163/171 Zone 4: 172/178 Zone 5: 179/183 Zone 5+: 184/189 Zone 6: 190/198 I did this on a fairly flat track that is near my house. Not a running track per say, but I was able to keep a pretty good steady pace for the entire test. If this test is right then that would mean that I have been doing most of my run training in Zone 4. I haven't had a chance yet to look at the HR Zone based training programs, but I am going to guess that training at this level is a bit too high right? Now when I get around to doing my bike LT test, does this need to be on a flat route also or does elevation not matter? I have a relatively flat area that I could ride on, but it does have some hills especially on the way back. Last question, how often should one perform these tests? Can I safely use these tresholds for running through out the winter and then do a new test again in the Spring? I realize that if I have to move inside onto a treadmill that I will want to perform a new LT test for inside. Thanks! |
|
2007-09-06 9:51 AM in reply to: #953598 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! EABonney - 2007-09-06 7:30 AM So I finally got around to doing an LT test this morning. Now if I did this right here is what I came up with. Avg HR last 20 minutes: 179 Zone 1: 118/152 Zone 2: 153/162 Zone 3: 163/171 Zone 4: 172/178 Zone 5: 179/183 Zone 5+: 184/189 Zone 6: 190/198 I did this on a fairly flat track that is near my house. Not a running track per say, but I was able to keep a pretty good steady pace for the entire test. If this test is right then that would mean that I have been doing most of my run training in Zone 4. I haven't had a chance yet to look at the HR Zone based training programs, but I am going to guess that training at this level is a bit too high right? Now when I get around to doing my bike LT test, does this need to be on a flat route also or does elevation not matter? I have a relatively flat area that I could ride on, but it does have some hills especially on the way back. Last question, how often should one perform these tests? Can I safely use these tresholds for running through out the winter and then do a new test again in the Spring? I realize that if I have to move inside onto a treadmill that I will want to perform a new LT test for inside. Thanks! Hmmm, the spreadsheet that I got from Mikes website gave these numbers, I don't know which calc is correct but I've been using the numbers based on the calculation below with great results (LT175). I know near 150 for me is not zone 1 when you look at the RPE definition that are associated with HR Zones;
|
2007-09-06 10:15 AM in reply to: #953804 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! |
2007-09-06 10:15 AM in reply to: #953804 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Where did you get those RPE/HR zone descriptions from? At no point in Z2 should your breathing be "labored" and Z2 is generally not considered "strong". Z2 is you basic endurance pace...comfortable but not liesurely. Upper Z2 into Z3 your breather should become more rythmic but even near the top of Z3 I'd say "very labored" is a bit much. With a better set of definitions I think you might find that your current HR zones are more in line with the appropriate RPE. Donto - 2007-09-06 10:51 AM Hmmm, the spreadsheet that I got from Mikes website gave these numbers, I don't know which calc is correct but I've been using the numbers based on the calculation below with great results (LT175). I know near 150 for me is not zone 1 when you look at the RPE definition that are associated with HR Zones;
|
2007-09-06 10:35 AM in reply to: #953598 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Yes, consistently doing the majority of your training in Z4 is too much. Give these zones and a decent training program an honest chance (6-8 weeks at least) before passing judgement. For the bike test it is best to find someplace as flat as possible where you can hold a consistent effort level. I'd stick with a set of zones for 6-8 weeks before re-testing. EABonney - 2007-09-06 7:30 AM So I finally got around to doing an LT test this morning. Now if I did this right here is what I came up with. Avg HR last 20 minutes: 179 Zone 1: 118/152 Zone 2: 153/162 Zone 3: 163/171 Zone 4: 172/178 Zone 5: 179/183 Zone 5+: 184/189 Zone 6: 190/198 I did this on a fairly flat track that is near my house. Not a running track per say, but I was able to keep a pretty good steady pace for the entire test. If this test is right then that would mean that I have been doing most of my run training in Zone 4. I haven't had a chance yet to look at the HR Zone based training programs, but I am going to guess that training at this level is a bit too high right? Now when I get around to doing my bike LT test, does this need to be on a flat route also or does elevation not matter? I have a relatively flat area that I could ride on, but it does have some hills especially on the way back. Last question, how often should one perform these tests? Can I safely use these tresholds for running through out the winter and then do a new test again in the Spring? I realize that if I have to move inside onto a treadmill that I will want to perform a new LT test for inside. Thanks! |
2007-09-06 11:17 AM in reply to: #953845 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! TH3_FRB - 2007-09-06 11:15 AM Where did you get those RPE/HR zone descriptions from? At no point in Z2 should your breathing be "labored" and Z2 is generally not considered "strong". Z2 is you basic endurance pace...comfortable but not liesurely. Upper Z2 into Z3 your breather should become more rythmic but even near the top of Z3 I'd say "very labored" is a bit much. With a better set of definitions I think you might find that your current HR zones are more in line with the appropriate RPE. Donto - 2007-09-06 10:51 AM Hmmm, the spreadsheet that I got from Mikes website gave these numbers, I don't know which calc is correct but I've been using the numbers based on the calculation below with great results (LT175). I know near 150 for me is not zone 1 when you look at the RPE definition that are associated with HR Zones;
From the OP of this thread, also stated on this page of his website. BTW, I double checked the HR zones EABonney posted and it lines up with the Excel spreadsheet the OP has on his website today and with the BT HR Zone calculator. It must have had a change since I originally pulled the file in 2005 as the Bike % are also different. |
|
2007-09-06 11:23 AM in reply to: #953880 |
Extreme Veteran 405 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! TH3_FRB - 2007-09-06 11:35 AM Yes, consistently doing the majority of your training in Z4 is too much. Give these zones and a decent training program an honest chance (6-8 weeks at least) before passing judgement. For the bike test it is best to find someplace as flat as possible where you can hold a consistent effort level. I'd stick with a set of zones for 6-8 weeks before re-testing. Thanks Joel. That might explain my bouts of "burnout" that I have experienced since May. Since I am at the end of my season at this point, I plan on starting with these zones in my winter programs. I am going to do one for the bike also and just use them and give them a good try like you suggested and see what happens. Looking at some of the plans though say for running to stick to Z1-Z2...that is a major slow down for me and I am already slow as heck running. |
2007-09-06 11:33 AM in reply to: #953966 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! EABonney - 2007-09-06 12:23 PM TH3_FRB - 2007-09-06 11:35 AM Thanks Joel. That might explain my bouts of "burnout" that I have experienced since May. Since I am at the end of my season at this point, I plan on starting with these zones in my winter programs. I am going to do one for the bike also and just use them and give them a good try like you suggested and see what happens. Looking at some of the plans though say for running to stick to Z1-Z2...that is a major slow down for me and I am already slow as heck running. Yes, consistently doing the majority of your training in Z4 is too much. Give these zones and a decent training program an honest chance (6-8 weeks at least) before passing judgement. For the bike test it is best to find someplace as flat as possible where you can hold a consistent effort level. I'd stick with a set of zones for 6-8 weeks before re-testing. EABonney, it's humbling at first but pays off in the long run (no pun intended!). When I first started using the HRM I had to run and use short walks to keep my HR down. But in 8 weeks time you'll be amazed at the difference in your fitness as a result. |
2007-10-29 9:55 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Extreme Veteran 732 Omaha, USA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! bumpity bump |
2007-11-16 8:40 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Veteran 143 Raleigh, NC | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! I've been reading Daniels Running Formula, which lots of folks around here recommended. Loving the book, but he doesn't seem to think much of HR training. Rather, he seems to favor altering distance and pace as stresses to apply to the system over time. Thoughts / how do folks reconcile these? |
2007-11-16 8:50 PM in reply to: #1057886 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! You have to realize: 1. Dr. Jack is old school. Triathletes train differently than swimmer, cyclists and runners so keep that in mind. :-) |
|
2007-11-16 8:52 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Daniels Running Formula is great. It's not necessarily in conflict with HR training, just a different method to get at the same concept. You need some honest race efforts at a couple of distances to estimate a good vDOT to use this method. When I coach folks for longer running races i typically establish both their vDOT -based training paces and HR zones and use a combination to guide their training. More intense workouts (tempo, interval, and repetition) are typically better served w by using pace as a guide since HR lags effort on the higher end. |
2007-11-17 9:52 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Veteran 143 Raleigh, NC | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Thanks guys. Sometimes being new it's hard to separate what's meant for new people wanting to improve as efficiently (and as injury-free) as possible versus people trying to win the Boston Marathon. |
2007-11-17 3:46 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Veteran 143 Raleigh, NC | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Ok one more question, and this is somewhat training plan related. Most of the plans on BT (including the one I'm on) have the easy runs in Z1-Z2. That's a pretty big range for me, from like 135 - 169. Thoughts on which HR I should make that closer to? HR Zones and logs are fairly accurate now, I've just started a plan recently after running very very easy for a month to get back into the swing of things (that part wasn't logged). |
2007-11-17 4:06 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! For easy runs you should be somewhere in upper Z1 and lower Z2. I think the bottom end of Z1 is kind of arbitrary so i wouldn;t pay much attention to where the bottom end starts. If you've got a recovery session then maybe look to be more middle of the road to upper Z1. |
|