login
HR Training vs distance vs time vs...
-
No new posts
 2009-04-14 10:13 PM |
Member  6 Toronto |  Subject: HR Training vs distance vs time vs...Hi everyone, To say I am confused, is a bit of an understatement. Just to set the stage, I am 35, 245lbs (lost 45 in the last 7 months) and committed to a Tri on July 5. 1. Is it "better" to train using a heart rate monitor and go for a specific DISTANCE, say a 5k run, knowing that's the length of the run I will have to do in July, keeping my HR in the zone, even if it means running 5 steps and walking three...or... 2. Is it "better" to train using a heart rate monitor and go for a specific TIME, say 30 minutes, because my training plan tells me to, keeping my HR in the zone, even if it means running 5 steps and walking three...or... 3. Is it "better" to train NOT use a heart rate monitor and go for a specific DISTANCE, say a 5k run, knowing that's the length of the run I will have to do in July, pushing myself to run as much as possible...or... 4. Is it "better" to train NOT use a heart rate monitor and go for a specific TIME, say 30 minutes, because my training plan tells me to , pushing myself to run as much as possible...or... 5. Should I forget the training plan times and distances, do as much as I can, going as hard as my body and mind will let me, as often as I can? I have been running a few times a week for 5.25km, which takes about 40 minutes. However I am only in the HR zone for no more than 10 minutes of that time. I can feel myself getting "better", not having to walk as much, stronger mentally, etc, but the manual I got when I signed up for my Running Room Tri clinic says going out of the zone is more harmful then helpful. I am really uncertain because I was going to do this tri clinic, as well as continue running at lunch and start cycling 9km each way to work. Now I am afraid I am going to overtrain and just pack the whole thing in before the race. Any advice? Thanks, Craig |
 2009-04-14 10:21 PM in reply to: #2085087 |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
| 2009-04-14 10:29 PM in reply to: #2085087 |
Regular 102 | Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... this is my own humble opinion. I haven't tri'd for long but have been a runner for years. Anyways...I think you are making this WAY too complicated. If you are a beginner. I would do time and perceived effort. The time will depend on the length of the tri you are signed up for...sprint? oly? HIM? For a start here is my advice and experience. DON'T go as hard as you can everyday. Alternate hard and easy days or you will get injured. It might be a good idea to incorporate one full rest day every week as well. Get used to time on the bike, this is the longest portion of the race. Get in the water and start swimming. Try to get your technique decent even if you need lessons or a swim coach. This will make you much more efficient and comfortable in the water. If your race is an Open Water Swim, get in the open water beforehand to make yourself comfortable. Practice transitions. It was a huge shock to me going from bike to run, my legs were all wierd! Practice will help this greatly. Triathalon 101 is a great book, with training plans included. There are also great training plans on this site as well as tons of other books. It all depends on current level of fitness, specific areas of weakness/strength, and the distance you are training for. |
| 2009-04-14 10:34 PM in reply to: #2085102 |
| Member 6 Toronto | Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... The max HR is a chart broken up by age...apparently my max HR is 187. The ranges they have listed are: Base training (aerobic) 50-70% HR max - 93-131bpm for me Threshold training 70-85% HR max - 131-159bpm for me Speed training 85-100% HR max - 159-187bpm for me |
| 2009-04-14 11:00 PM in reply to: #2085087 |
Expert 987  Durham, North Carolina | Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... If you are just in the beginning stages of running ... and have till July for your first sprint ... then don't worry about HR ranges right now. .. just run at a comfortable pace ... a pace where you could carry on a conversation ... and run for time ... if you have to split it up by running some then walk a minute or two then run some more ... fine ... Search this forum for Lactate Threshold or LT Testing ... and you will see that figuring your LT first and then calculating your HR zones from that is much more accurate then 220 minus your age ... ... if you are just beginning .. an LT test may be too hard or stenous right now .. so just run easy for time ... at least 3 to 4 times a week. As Scout7 would say: "to get better at running, run lots, most of it easy, some of it hard." |
| 2009-04-15 7:00 AM in reply to: #2085087 |
| Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... The only bad option you mentioned was the last one. That's the path to staleness, and possibly injury. Other than that, time vs. distance is just a measure of volume. Both work equally well. HR vs. Pace vs. RPE are just measures of intensity. All three work equally well. Try each one, learn about it, and apply it. You will find what works best for you. If you have a training plan in mind already, then use it. |
| 2009-04-15 7:12 AM in reply to: #2085126 |
Champion 7595  Columbia, South Carolina | Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... fester808 - 2009-04-14 11:34 PM The max HR is a chart broken up by age...apparently my max HR is 187. No. Please don't determine your max HR by age. Those formulas are notoriously off for many people. Even better, don't worry about it. Use something like LTHR. If you're interested in training by HR, you might start with the articles here. |
| 2009-04-15 7:34 AM in reply to: #2085087 |
| Coach 10487 Boston, MA | Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... there is not better or worse; except for #5 all options have pros and cons and I use all of them with my athletes based on what they prefer. Some use RPE exclusively, some others HR and some others pace/power. Find a plan that suits your needs, use the measuring you prefer the most and just traing consistently. |
| 2009-04-15 1:29 PM in reply to: #2085087 |
| Member 6 Toronto | Subject: RE: HR Training vs distance vs time vs... Thanks to everyone for all their help! I think I am going to follow the training plan the clinic shows me...after all, I am paying for it
Cheers, Craig |
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK