Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED (Page 16)

Planning to do an off-brand HIM - Welland - it's near Niagara Falls. Really good race - small but awesome PB course! I did it last year and got a nice PB.  

So, i finally did it. I used the HR testing guidelines on this site and updated my HR zones today.  Really cursing on the trainer today but I am very proud of myself for getting it done and it really shows how off the 226-age doesn't work. I'd always knew i had a high HR but it was a significant shift. Z2 should be much better for me now. 

Jen - Did you do the 30' test?  Take AHR for the last 20' and multiply by .95 for your LTHR?

Nice job getting it done - those are tough mentally but worth the effort!

What is your favorite degreaser and chain lube?

The one that the bike shop puts on .  I am terrible with bike maintenance!!  Hopefully somebody else can chime in and help out.

Alright lets talk some run training this week.

What metric do you use to guide your training?  This could be pace, HR or RPE.

I have typically always gone by pace and plugging my last race into either Mcmillan or Daniels.  Although, this winter, I have used HR pretty extensively and found it to be pretty reliable and matches up quite well with pace in good conditions.

I am sure we will switch back to pace when weather gets a little better.

I go by HR and I sort of listen to my RPE.  I'm a wuss when it comes to running.  I mentioned this before.  I can lay the hammer down on the swim and bike.  I'm learning how to do that on the run.  I've been base training for about 12 weeks now.  I had a 2 hour (1.5 hours in mid\upper Z2 outdoors) run over the weekend.  I must have been visited by the HR fairy because I was blessed with a faster pace than normal.  I'm usually bopping along in the upper 10s.  I was surprised to see 9:44.

I'd like to try and go by pace during my build\peak phase training.  Is it sort of like power training?  Train by the output (power\pace) instead of the input (HR).  My swim training is based off TPace.  My bike is based off power.  So why not base my run off pace?

It could be that your base training is paying off.  As you become more fit you are able to run faster paces at lower HR.  As a reference, I used to do a MAF test which is something that Maffetone came up with.  Basically, you calculate your MAF heart rate which was like 180 minus your age with some adjustments based on your history.  Anyway, mine came out to 150 bpm which is about the split between Z1 and Z2.  The test is that you warm up (1-2 miles) and then run 3 miles at this heart rate and see what your pace is for the miles.  I would always struggle to break 8 min/mi.  I just did a run recently where I was around 7:30 pace.  You are likely seeing some benefit to your run training.

Because HR can fluctuate for all sorts of reasons (heat, caffeine, sleeep, etc..), pace gives you an objective benchmark to get the required stimulus that is required from the workout.  I would say I generally prefer using pace over HR in most cases.

For my easy runs, I'm currently letting HR dictate for the most part.  I try to correlate this with RPE as well, but I have a nasty habit of lying to myself...."oh this feels easy" when it's really more in the moderate range.  That said, I have had a few runs where my easy HR actually didn't feel easy (felt more moderate), and then I let RPE override and slowed myself down.

For any type of interval work, I go by pace.  I'm really working hard at running my easy runs easy so that I can run my hard runs hard.  I definitely used to run my "easy" runs moderate....and my hard runs felt hard, but the paces and improvement over time just weren't there.

It tends mostly to be RPE, if i am honest with myself. 

I have loosely used HR training while training for tri - never really for run only training. I made sure to keep an eye on my HR when IM training in 2012 which was almost entirely in Z2 anyway so i just needed to keep effort reasonable. I didn't have to worry about strict of HR pacing. 

For some run cycles I used pace only - this past Fall I used a FIRST program to get my 10k pb and it was all pace based. There's not much easy running there. 

I guess swimming is a combo of pace and RPE - since she gives us pace times to shoot for. 

I am intending to use the HR for this training cycle. Thus the test I did yesterday. I just need to strategize on when I can do the run test. With this absolutely frigid weather.  I may have to do it at the Y but wear my garmin since the treadmills don't appear to be HR compatible (I do have polar strap too).  

But when i am not really running with any big goals i just run by feel and it is nice to take the pressure off. I have a good running buddy and we usually run at a pace at which we can gab with each other for the whole thing. The 'talk test' really is the best guage of RPE.   

Run training-I use a combination of HR and pace. Mostly use the HR just to keep myself in check as I tend to push easy runs into moderate sometimes. I have really worked on keeping my easy runs very easy over the Winter. The easy runs help build a solid aerobic base, build up fatigue resistance and make the legs fresher for the hard days.. In the Summer I typically ditch the HR monitor and just run by pace. It is so hot and humid here in the Summer I would basically have to walk to keep HR down in the "easy" range. That may not be very consistent but since I don't typically race with a HR monitor it is not a big deal for me and I can usually adjust pace to get the right RPE during training.

Yesterday was Mardi Gras and most of Mobile is closed for parades and festivities. So, I got a nice day off during the week. Was hoping to do a longish training day but weather and lingering cough kept me in the garage for a bike workout. Swim and run today.  

I have never seen that Friel method for calculating paces off of a 30 minute test.  The pace that FTP correlates too is generally around your 1-hour TT effort.  It seems like that method may error on setting your paces too aggressively but I guess it would depend on how efficient you are at testing.  I have generally always used a 15K race to calculate paces as it usually takes me right around 1 hour.

To you point about the harder intervals using HR - generally for the first 2 minutes you can generally ignore HR as it does delay but after that can be used just fine barring other factors at play, such as heat.  I would agree that harder efforts are better gauged by pace if conditions are good.  Wind can certainly play a factor when using pace and should be accounted for.

For the run, I used Friel's 30 minute test to establish zones.  10 minute warmup, then run hard for 10 minutes, hit lap and continue running hard for 20 minutes.  Take Avg HR for the 20 minute split.

For the bike, I did this on the training:

20 minute Warmup

3x1 minute @ 100+rpms w\ 1:00 RI

2x1 minute MAX w\ 5:00 minute RI

10 minute EZ

20 minute time trial FTP test (Take Avg power for FTP)

15-30 EZ

The run protocol looks ok and Friel defends that method basically saying that people cannot push themselves as hard on their own as they can in a race in order to justify taking the AHR from the last 20 minutes of the 30 minute run test.

However, for the bike test, I think you are likely overestimating your FTP.  I take 95% of that 20' number.  There is no way I can hold my 20 minute power for an hour, race or not.  You could supplement that 20' test with a 5' test and get a critical power number which Marc has discussed earlier in this thread.

I missed his post about 5 minute test.  Is there a link that goes more into this?  I always heard about the 20 minute.  I'm due for another FTP or CP test.  Not sure the difference.  More reading...

That was my understanding when it came to establishing HR zones for the run.  First 10 minutes and the heart rate is still climbing.

I'm due for another FTP test since I'm done with my 12 week base plan.  Next week starts 11 week build\peak\taper plan.  In December, I did my first ever FTP test on the trainer since 90% of my workouts are on it.  Not sure I did it "right".  Right being did I go all out for 20 minutes?  I actually think I was on the conservative side.  Throughout the training, it was all HR in Z1 and Z2 rides.  Some had 4x6x 3minute hardest gear @ 60-70 rpms HR in Z3 stuff.  Not many though.

Tell me about the critical power vs FTP and the 5 minute test.

It is just another term to confuse you - I am only half kidding.

Marc can likely explain this better than me, but CP 60 is essentially the same as your FTP or 60 minute power.  The 5' and 20' test is used to calculate your CP60 or critical power.  Basically, it makes corrections to your FTP (or CP60) based on how you perform each test.  The different tests also provide some data as to what you need to work on to improve your CP60.

Typically, the 5' test is around 120%FTP and 20' is around 95%FTP for somebody with all around fitness.  If your 5' test came out to 110%FTP than your VO2 would definitely be an area to concentrate on to improve your FTP or another way to term it is 'raise the ceiling' to allow for the 60' power improvement.  If your 20' test was not quite as good then working on longer efforts at FTP would be a better choice to raise FTP.

Marc ran a power mentor group last year and goes through this thoroughly.  Maybe he can provide a link to that when he pops in.

8 miles on the treadmill today with a main set of 4 miles at 6:04pace (1' standing recovery).  Really felt good to nail this.  The first half of each mile kinda sucked but then I seemed to find a groove and was able to maintain.  I am pretty pumped with that considering its February.

Just out of curiosity, why a standing recovery versus a slow run or walk recovery?  I'm not a great runner, so I won't pretend to know what's best, but I know for biking, my legs are much more receptive to starting another interval after doing an easy spin out of the legs on the recovery intervals.  I've done my running that way....maybe a minute is not so bad, but I can't imagine doing a hard interval, standing around for a couple minutes, and then trying to jump right back in at the hard pace again. 

Pretty darn impressive regardless!  I only wish I could do a single 6:04 mile!