General Discussion Triathlon Talk » HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 24
 
 
2005-09-10 3:58 PM
in reply to: #243697

User image

Pro
6582
50001000500252525
Melbourne FL
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Speaking of Zone 2 workouts. Anyone read the latest Runners World were a study monitored the HR's of Spanish elite runners during training? They found 71% of their time was in the Low HR Zone (<60%), 21% in the Mid and 8% in the High zone. Also found that runners that spent the most time in the low zone during training had the better races.

My HR monitor was ordered and should be here Monday. My tempo run is up next, I guess I'll try the Run LT test and calc my HR numbers. It'll be interesting too comparing my PE to the measured HRs.

What are you all typically seeing for a delta between the Run LT and Cylce LT readings?

Don


2005-09-10 4:26 PM
in reply to: #243841

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
The delta is ~8-12 beats. Although, I had an athlete at my house today that was 26 beats!
This was tested in a lab this week and was the same difference that we had in our field tests.
2005-09-11 12:06 AM
in reply to: #243848

User image

Extreme Veteran
570
5002525
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
mikericci - 2005-09-10 3:26 PM

The delta is ~8-12 beats.


If i've done a run TT but not a bike . . . I might take 8-12 from my run LT and have an guesstimate for my bike LT?
2005-09-11 7:27 AM
in reply to: #243994

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
That 'should' be close, but its best to test bike LT too.
2005-09-11 8:52 AM
in reply to: #237705

Veteran
209
100100
LasVegas
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Today I did a

Brick

10 mile bike Ave HR 116 PE 3 this is a Pace I and keep up for at least 31 miles did that yesterday.

3 mile run AVE HR 129 this is in zone 1 PE 8  I could probaly keep this up longer but it was not easy.

Time for both the bike and run is about 11 min off my PB on the same course for the same distance.

One thing that surprised me was how fast my HR spiked up as soon as I came of the bike withen 200 yards It

was at 140 took a lot of effort to slow it down to 130 range I wanted to maintain.

Is this about the level I should be training at?

What is Delta?



Edited by renegadebuddhacoach 2005-09-11 8:53 AM
2005-09-11 3:15 PM
in reply to: #244038

User image

Pro
6582
50001000500252525
Melbourne FL
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
renegadebuddhacoach - 2005-09-11 8:52 AM
What is Delta?



The difference between two numbers.

Where in FL are you located, I'm in Melbourne.

Don


2005-09-11 5:36 PM
in reply to: #237705

Veteran
209
100100
LasVegas
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
2005-09-13 10:10 AM
in reply to: #237705

Regular
75
252525
Canton, MI
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Just read through the thread and I have a question regarding the LT testing.

I saw that you were promoting a 30 minute TT test, but how do you feel about Joe Friel's method of testing in the Training Bible? Specifically, the treadmill test where you start at 6 mph and increase by 0.2 mph every minute until you can't go on any longer? I was thinking of conducting this test this weekend.
2005-09-13 10:13 AM
in reply to: #245814

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
I haven't tried it, but I have done a VO2 max test and it sounds similar. The LT test has been great for me and my athletes. The numbers are almost identical to the lab tests. Its an very effective protocol.
2005-09-13 10:59 AM
in reply to: #245814

User image

Pro
6582
50001000500252525
Melbourne FL
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
igbomb - 2005-09-13 10:10 AM

Just read through the thread and I have a question regarding the LT testing.

I saw that you were promoting a 30 minute TT test, but how do you feel about Joe Friel's method of testing in the Training Bible? Specifically, the treadmill test where you start at 6 mph and increase by 0.2 mph every minute until you can't go on any longer? I was thinking of conducting this test this weekend.


A treadmill is the last thing I want to be on when I'm maxing out a run. I've witnessed two treadmill spills, they were NOT pretty!

What I like about the 10/20 minute deal is I can use the 20 minutes as a 5k tracking tool, <21m/5k is one of my goals for 2006.
2005-09-13 11:15 AM
in reply to: #245861

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
yep, that is a true statement. I only get on a treadmill for testing. Otherwise I am outside the other 50 weeks a year that I run.


2005-09-13 2:40 PM
in reply to: #237705

Regular
75
252525
Canton, MI
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Thanks for the responses. The reason I was considering the treadmill test over the TT is because of recovery time. I am in the middle of a training program for a half-marathon and don't want to blow up my legs with my testing. And since I know that I couldn't maintain Friel's speed increases for 30 minutes, I was hoping that the shorter length test would allow me to recover quicker.
2005-09-13 2:47 PM
in reply to: #246060

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Actually, just the opposite is true. The LT test is more applicable to your 1/2 M training and you will recover pretty quckly from it, whereas the 'all out' effort may blow you to pieces for days and days....sounds like the treadmill test is an all out effort.
2005-09-13 3:02 PM
in reply to: #246065

Regular
75
252525
Canton, MI
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Great! I will run the TT in place of my Thursday medium distance run this week.

Thanks a lot for the advice!
2005-09-13 3:28 PM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Champion
19812
50005000500020002000500100100100
MA
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Mike,

I read your sports rotation article and found it very interesting.

I play indoor soccer from September until April either 1 or 2 times a week. Now until November once a week and November on twice a week. How would you integrate that into a run focus cycle? Consider it a different sport or part of running?  Obviously this is not a zone 2 type run. In the article run hours start at 4 hours a week in week 1.

When I play we play 2 25 minute halves....and we rotate on and off the field...about 5-6 minutes on and then same off which means I usually actually play 25 minutes a game.

Another question about this rotating focous....do you lose what you gained while you are focousing on another aspect of triathlons?

I have been greatly enjoying this thread and your sharing!! Thanks!

2005-09-13 3:35 PM
in reply to: #246121

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Kathy

Since you are running pretty hard during soccer, I would consider those your speed days, and just add in a long run on the weekends or whenever you can fit it in. If you can run 4-5xper week during your run focus, then you should be ok, even if 2 of those runs are soccer games.

The key to the sport rotation is to 'maintain' the fitness in the other sports, so, no you won't lose fitness.

Thanks for the kind words, I am glad you enjoyed the different approach.


2005-09-14 1:30 PM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Veteran
340
10010010025
Greenville, NC
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
ok, so I discovered today that A) you can't run hard the day after 6 x 2min Z4 intervals on the bike, just coming off a major cold. B) my super expensive Nike HRM doesn't like hurricanes. So not only couldn't I push hard, the data I got was useless. I have to use buh-Bump to get a decent readout from this HRM, and the rain just washed it away, and obviously messed with the connections. Nothing like looking down at your watch and seeing 227 to give you a heart attack.... err. Then push the leads hard against your chest and it instantly drops to 150, then climbs to 180 in 20s. Needless to say I'm disappointed. Run like a dog and nothing to show for it.
2005-09-14 2:44 PM
in reply to: #246771

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Sorry to hear you didn't have a good workout. You learned some good lessons - but the one missed was this:
There is no such thing as a 'bad workout' - it's only information. So - you worked hard, and you will gain from the workout - just rest up a few days before you try it again.
2005-09-14 8:18 PM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Extreme Veteran
570
5002525
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
"There is no such thing as a "bad" workout".

Great point. That should be someones sig.
2005-09-14 9:30 PM
in reply to: #247015

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Like this?
2005-09-16 7:46 AM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Veteran
219
100100
Centreville, MD
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

This thread inspired me to do a LT run test a couple weeks ago, but unfortunately I pushed too hard early and only made it 25 minutes.  I can honestly say I gave it everything...I couldn't have gone another step.  It was hot and humid which probably didn't help.  My avg. for the last 15 minutes was 177 so I figured I would back it off to 174 since I obviously couldn't maintain the pace I was running.  This morning, I tried a 40 minute Z4 run (167-174) but got my HR too high too early and ended up averaging 175 with most of my time spent in the 176-177 range.  I maintained this for about 30 min. - working hard, but not losing control of my breathing.  Does this mean my LT is more like 177 rather than 174?  I'm hesitant to redo the test with 2 races coming up soon - I had some knee pain when I did the test the first time. 

This has been a great thread - thanks for all the input!



2005-09-17 12:01 AM
in reply to: #247804

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Why a 40' Z4 run? Where did you get this workout from? That's crazy hard.

Your LT is in the 172-175 range to be safe. I think you can feel safe with those zones....watch the knee pain and make sure you ice..
2005-09-18 7:38 AM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Veteran
219
100100
Centreville, MD
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Thanks.  I'll stick with 174.  40 minutes - planned on including 5 minutes warm up and warm down with 30 minutes in Z4.  I thought that you should do a 20' to 40' Z4 run once a week.  Am I wrong on that?
2005-09-18 8:07 AM
in reply to: #248635

User image


8763
5000200010005001001002525
Boulder, Colorado
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
There is no right or wrong way to train, IF it works. For specific workouts, it depends on what time of year it is and where you are in your training cycle.

With the exception of a 10k running race or snow shoe race, I haven't done a 40' tempo run. I have done 40' of tempo in one day, but not all at once. So, in my opinion, should you run 40' tempo once per week? No.

I think some tempo is good, but it all depends on what you are racing for, your experience level etc. I hope that makes sense.
2005-09-20 2:44 PM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Veteran
252
1001002525
Chicago and therabouts
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

This thread has been great reading, so im finally jumping in.

I finally did it. 6 months of training using a HRM and using an Avg of different max pred HR for training...I finally went out and did a 30 min TT run.  I believe i did it the right way..15 min warmup...10 min at RPE about 7...(HR avg 165)  .then last 20 min. RPE.8-10 at the end...Had to back off a little bit with about 9 min to go (side stitch), but after a min, able to rev it up again... Avg HR for last 20 min--176.   So--my LT is 176, making Z2 150-160.  Ive been using 145-152, so not that far off and was actually probably pretty accurate 5-6 months ago.  But my real question is...

Should LT be that close to MHR?  True, i dont know what my real MHR rate is..calculated is about 184-186 (im 34 and my MRHR is 42), but i've never seen greater than 181 on my HRM. My understanding is that the more fit you get, the higher you can push your LT, but after only 5-6 months of developing a base, this seems a bit high to me.  This is kind of a round about way to ask if these numbers seem valid.  I hate to focus another 6 months of training using invalid numbers.  Any input is appreciated.

JT

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Rss Feed  
 
 
of 24