LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2006-10-29 11:28 AM |
Extreme Veteran 370 Arnhem | Subject: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Hi, I ran a 10km race this morning. Had my HR monitor on to record my heart rate as I wanted to also use this race as a LT test. The 10km took me 39' 11" (a new PR !!!) so this should be long enough for the test. using my HR data from kilometers 4 to 9 my Average HR was 179 (dropped the first 3 km which took me just under 12', as the first 10 minutes shouldn't count. Also dropped the last 1 km as I gave it all I had to get my PR and my HR jumped up to 186). so my LT is 179. Now my questions: According to the Joe Friel training bible training zone tables, this puts my running Zone 2 at 153-162 BPM. Should I be doing my long endurance runs in this zone? This is way above what I have been doing for this first year of training. I usually do my long runs (2 hours or so) between 140-150 average. Don't think I could keep going so long at above 153 BPM ! My maximum HR is 189. I measured this this year at the end of a interval session of 4x1000m by sprinting full out at the end of the last interval until I couldn't keep going any more. Would this LT I have tested today indicate that my max HR is probably higher, and I should probably try and test that again, or can the LT get so close to the max HR ? Or is max HR irrelevant and should I just work with the training bible zones. Thanks for sharing your experience. |
|
2006-10-29 11:32 AM in reply to: #582239 |
Master 2006 Portland, ME | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Those are great questions and sorry I don't have any insight for you but I just wanted to congratulate you on you new PR....nice run! |
2006-10-29 3:58 PM in reply to: #582239 |
Member 101 | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs damn i dont have the book right here in front of me....double check your method for determining LT, i thought that there was a bit of math involved. ie: 10kk TT multiplied by a certain fraction to give you your LT. I coulda swore that it wasnt just your ave HR for that time, but i could be wrong. you're right, thost HR zones do seem rather high. then again so does your LT...maybe you're in better shape than you thought! lol i'm not an expert, but i'm from the school of thought that max HR is useless. You're better off with Friel's training zones, they seem more useful. Max HR is so individualized that mass based training programs sketch me out, but determining your own personal LTHR and anaerobic endurance allows you to base off of a useful training program like Friels |
2006-10-29 4:14 PM in reply to: #582349 |
Elite 3650 Laurium, MI | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs you should not feel like you can't maintain zone 2. The zone 2-zone 3 border is the region where it's super uncomfortable but sustainable. So try a few runs with your new zones and if they don't feel right, then assume you did it wrong and your LT is too low. |
2006-10-29 6:27 PM in reply to: #582356 |
Champion 8936 | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs That's still well below LT. You should be able to hold the 2-3 border for quite some time. Not that you should or anything. vortmax - 2006-10-29 4:14 PM you should not feel like you can't maintain zone 2. The zone 2-zone 3 border is the region where it's super uncomfortable but sustainable.
|
2006-10-29 6:42 PM in reply to: #582239 |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs First of all - ignore max HR - doesn't really mean anything from a fitness standpoint. As for your test - your avg HR for this run is probably a little higher than your actual LT as LT is usually around the level you could maintain for one hour. The 30' TT is used in training as few people have the ability to maintain the focus and motivation for an hour outside of a race. For you, a 15km race would probably give you a better indication of your LT from a race perspective. One of the references that I have says that a 10k as a race will give you a result of 107% for LT so I would take your total avgHR and divide by 1.07 to obtain your LT. For my long runs I typically start in z1 and finish in z2 to ensure that I am pacing myself to finish stronger than I start so you may want to look at building towards having your runs finish between 153-162 (if you are going to use 179). As others have mentioned z2 shouldn't feel like you are killing yourself, however as you haven't spent a lot of time training in this area, it may feel harder than it actually is. Slowly build into spending more time in z2 (long and short runs) and it should become more comfortable. However, there are athletes that will find different levels harder than others I have heard of athletes who find high z2 efforts to be challenging to maintain even though they can race comfortably for an hour at z4. Congrats on the great race and best of luck with your continued training, Shane |
|
2006-10-29 9:33 PM in reply to: #582239 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Read this article by Joe Friel about aerobic threshold training http://www.ultrafit.com/newsletter/january06.html#JF The variety of adjust ment factors to determine your "true" LT wheather you did a 5k, 10k, 15k, etc are all just approximations anyway. You will never get it exactly right. Throughout your training you should be continuing to test your zones and re-test your thresholds thus narrowing your true zones as the season progresses. Since you did a legitimate test, I would use the zones you came up with as a starting point. The training may seem too hard because you've been training in your zone 1 the whole time as the above article points out. Also, I don't think you need to disregard the last 1k just b/c your HR jumped. The method uses teh average heart rate for the last x-10 minutes of the test so the relatively higher HR at the end is a smaller percentage of your average. I'm not saying that you did this, but if one holds back just a little to save enough for that finishing kick, that may underestimate your LTHR. If I were you, I would use the average of the last 29 minutes of your test and just start testing your training zones. And congrats on your PB by the way! |
2006-10-30 8:02 AM in reply to: #582239 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Simon de Kerpel - 2006-10-29 9:28 AM Hi, I ran a 10km race this morning. Had my HR monitor on to record my heart rate as I wanted to also use this race as a LT test. The 10km took me 39' 11" (a new PR !!!) so this should be long enough for the test. using my HR data from kilometers 4 to 9 my Average HR was 179 (dropped the first 3 km which took me just under 12', as the first 10 minutes shouldn't count. Also dropped the last 1 km as I gave it all I had to get my PR and my HR jumped up to 186). so my LT is 179. Now my questions: According to the Joe Friel training bible training zone tables, this puts my running Zone 2 at 153-162 BPM. Should I be doing my long endurance runs in this zone? This is way above what I have been doing for this first year of training. I usually do my long runs (2 hours or so) between 140-150 average. Don't think I could keep going so long at above 153 BPM ! My maximum HR is 189. I measured this this year at the end of a interval session of 4x1000m by sprinting full out at the end of the last interval until I couldn't keep going any more. Would this LT I have tested today indicate that my max HR is probably higher, and I should probably try and test that again, or can the LT get so close to the max HR ? Or is max HR irrelevant and should I just work with the training bible zones. Thanks for sharing your experience. Nice run. As a rule of thumb, if you forget your zones, just think to run about 20-30 beats below LT so for you 149-159 - that's a good effort aerobically, What I would do to get used to those higher then usual aerobic efforts would be to warm up per normal (140-150) and then add in say 2x15 minutes in the middle of Z2 - 155 for you) and add to this each week until you can do the majority of your in mid Z2. Congrats on the PR! |
2006-10-31 5:11 AM in reply to: #582239 |
Extreme Veteran 370 Arnhem | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Thanks for those answers all ! And that interesting article ! For next season I wil start pushing my long runs into Z2 progressively. Hopefully this will help me keep on improving my speed. I'm also going to test that LT more frequently next season to keep my zones adjusted to my fitness level. PS: I've taken so much good advice from this site over this first year of training that yesterday I decided to give something back: I became a Bronze Member ! |
2006-10-31 4:49 PM in reply to: #582239 |
Fishers, IN | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs No way 179 is your LT, that is ~95% of Heart rate maximum of 189 (that is in the VO2max range). Your LT should be around 160. As for your long slow runs probably in the 145 range. I personally use heart rate reserve, but there are lots of ways to do this. You can also calculate based on your recent race performance (probably the best way to get training zones). Based on your 10K time here are the typical paces you should train at: Whatever heart rate corresponds to these values should be pretty accurate. Workout Pace/mi Anaerobic intervals 5:25.9 VO2max intervals 5:46 Lactate Threshold runs 6:29.1 (by the way this is what you should currently be able to do 15k at-that is 1:00:28-pretty good) Steady runs 6:58 Easy runs 7:44.5 Easy runs include daily recovery runs between hard workouts, as well as long runs (weekly or every two weeks). Recovery runs (often 20 minutes to an hour) allow you to recover for the next hard workout, but also keep up your baseline of mileage, which is supposed to be important to the runner's general endurance and to their ability to handle and recover from tough workouts and races. Long runs are said to be crucial to aerobic efficiency; they are usually between 90 minutes and three hours long, depending on the runner's race distance and weekly mileage. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold just about indefinitely, aerobically speaking. It often is said that while it is a mistake to run easy workouts faster than appropriate, it is very hard to run them slower than appropriate, so the value given by the calculator might be used as a maximum (with no extra points for going that fast!). Steady runs are normally less than 15 miles in length, with 8 to 12 being most typical. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold for 3 hours in race conditions. Lactate Threshold running aims to increase the pace at which lactate starts to accumulate (and slow the runner down). This is defined as a pace the runner can probably hold for an hour in race conditions. Some threshold workouts: 20 minutes straight; or, intervals of 4 to 8 minutes with 30 seconds to 1 minute rest. VO2max running is at a pace where lactate does accumulate. These runs aim to increase the pace at which the runner begin to demand as much oxygen as they can at any pace, as well as to improve the runner's tolerance for lactate and for running when it hurts. Typical workouts: 1 to 5 minute intervals with rests equal to or somewhat shorter than the intervals. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold for 10 minutes in race conditions. Anaerobic intervals are typically short (less than three minutes), and allow lots of rest (for instance, 2 to 4 times the duration of the intervals). These are said to aid with stride mechanics (efficiency) and generally to increase the runner's speed. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold for four minutes in race conditions. Friel wrote a book, but it is kind of offensive the way they have to turn this stuff into zones to make it appear different from the standard running texts. I have read his cycling book as well, he writes in a kind of convoluted fashion. My opinion on this probably goes against the mainstream opinion. |
2006-10-31 5:00 PM in reply to: #584622 |
Fishers, IN | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Forgot to provide reference/link. Running is fairly old, these guys pretty much have this stuff down and I find these calculators to be very good. Different varieties appear in different places. Much of the work goes to Jack Daniels, David Costill, and other exercise phys guys. This particular training zone pace stuff comes from an old running site I am familiar with called Merv's running website. I don't think much discussion goes on there anymore but the calculators still are available: http://merv.stanford.edu/runcalc |
|
2006-10-31 6:54 PM in reply to: #584622 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs rc63413 - 2006-10-31 2:49 PM No way 179 is your LT, that is ~95% of Heart rate maximum of 189 (that is in the VO2max range). >>>This is ASSUMING 189 is his real max, which we don't know. We do know he can hold 169 for a 10k though. A well conditioned athlete can hold well over 90% of max racing so you really don't know unless he was tested in lab. Your LT should be around 160. As for your long slow runs probably in the 145 range. I personally use heart rate reserve, but there are lots of ways to do this. You can also calculate based on your recent race performance (probably the best way to get training zones). Based on your 10K time here are the typical paces you should train at: Whatever heart rate corresponds to these values should be pretty accurate. Workout Pace/mi Anaerobic intervals 5:25.9 VO2max intervals 5:46 Lactate Threshold runs 6:29.1 (by the way this is what you should currently be able to do 15k at-that is 1:00:28-pretty good) Steady runs 6:58 Easy runs 7:44.5 Easy runs include daily recovery runs between hard workouts, as well as long runs (weekly or every two weeks). Recovery runs (often 20 minutes to an hour) allow you to recover for the next hard workout, but also keep up your baseline of mileage, which is supposed to be important to the runner's general endurance and to their ability to handle and recover from tough workouts and races. Long runs are said to be crucial to aerobic efficiency; they are usually between 90 minutes and three hours long, depending on the runner's race distance and weekly mileage. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold just about indefinitely, aerobically speaking. It often is said that while it is a mistake to run easy workouts faster than appropriate, it is very hard to run them slower than appropriate, so the value given by the calculator might be used as a maximum (with no extra points for going that fast!). Steady runs are normally less than 15 miles in length, with 8 to 12 being most typical. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold for 3 hours in race conditions. Lactate Threshold running aims to increase the pace at which lactate starts to accumulate (and slow the runner down). This is defined as a pace the runner can probably hold for an hour in race conditions. Some threshold workouts: 20 minutes straight; or, intervals of 4 to 8 minutes with 30 seconds to 1 minute rest. VO2max running is at a pace where lactate does accumulate. These runs aim to increase the pace at which the runner begin to demand as much oxygen as they can at any pace, as well as to improve the runner's tolerance for lactate and for running when it hurts. Typical workouts: 1 to 5 minute intervals with rests equal to or somewhat shorter than the intervals. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold for 10 minutes in race conditions. Anaerobic intervals are typically short (less than three minutes), and allow lots of rest (for instance, 2 to 4 times the duration of the intervals). These are said to aid with stride mechanics (efficiency) and generally to increase the runner's speed. We define this as a pace the runner probably can hold for four minutes in race conditions. Friel wrote a book, but it is kind of offensive the way they have to turn this stuff into zones to make it appear different from the standard running texts. I have read his cycling book as well, he writes in a kind of convoluted fashion. My opinion on this probably goes against the mainstream opinion. >>yep, it does. And that's fine, but the LT tests I have done for triathletes, not runners, have been very accurate when straight up against lab results, otherwise, I wouldn't use them. I think your tables and data is coming from run coaches who coach runners, not run coaches who coach triathletes or triathlon coaches who coach runners - so take the data with a grain of salt. Run training for triathlon is different from run training for runners. Once he has a good sense of pace from the HR parameters he has now - he'll be able to tell rather quickly what Zone 2 is. |
2006-11-01 7:35 AM in reply to: #584705 |
Fishers, IN | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs I agree heart rate reserve is the way to go and that is what I use. You are right, we are not certain that 189 is the true max, time will tell, though I bet it is close based on the max at the finish of the 10K. Tri's are, as pointed out, a whole nother beast, typically you drop out much of the base miles due to the effect of the other training stimulus (along with the time crunch of three sports) make it less necessary. Lab data would certainly be best, however most of us do not have ready-access to a lab. We do have access to our recent racing data. LT varies considerably throughout a training cycle, as noted by the statement 'a well conditioned athlete'. As our condition improves, the closer LT approaches VO2max. LT is not static, unlike the Heart rate max and to a lesser extent resting heart rate. This is why I find basing LT on a percent of the approximately static value of heart rate reserve is somewhat lacking. Either way, as noted, I have a lot to learn about triathalons and am enjoying it quite a lot. |
2006-11-02 12:41 AM in reply to: #584705 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs mikericci - 2006-10-31 5:54 PM >> Run training for triathlon is different from run training for runners. Mike, can you elaborate on this point, aside from the obvious less time available for running that is instead diverted to cycling? Different b/c of race goals, potential fitness gains, etc? Also, mike, you really need to learn how to reply to quoted posts so that your comments aren't lost... Your comments go OUTSIDE the nested "{QUOTE}{/QUOTE}" tags (had to change brackets to curlies so you could see it). If you want to insert something, copy & paste the end/beginning quotes tags and put your comments between... Edited by AdventureBear 2006-11-02 12:43 AM |
2006-11-02 7:49 AM in reply to: #586174 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs AdventureBear - 2006-11-01 10:41 PM mikericci - 2006-10-31 5:54 PM Mike, can you elaborate on this point, aside from the obvious less time available for running that is instead diverted to cycling? Different b/c of race goals, potential fitness gains, etc? Also, mike, you really need to learn how to reply to quoted posts so that your comments aren't lost... >> Run training for triathlon is different from run training for runners. mikericci - 2006-10-31 5:54 PM Like this? ;-) Your comments go OUTSIDE the nested "{QUOTE}{/QUOTE}" tags (had to change brackets to curlies so you could see it). If you want to insert something, copy & paste the end/beginning quotes tags and put your comments between...
|
2006-11-02 7:56 AM in reply to: #586174 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs AdventureBear - 2006-11-01 10:41 PM mikericci - 2006-10-31 5:54 PM Mike, can you elaborate on this point, aside from the obvious less time available for running that is instead diverted to cycling? Different b/c of race goals, potential fitness gains, etc? >> Run training for triathlon is different from run training for runners. I could literally write a book on this. In short, when training for triathlon, you hardly ever feel fresh. You swim, bike, lift weights AND run. You hardly have time to stretch, recover, take a nice walk to loosen the legs. You are going from one workout to the next or back to work etc. So from the get go, your are more fatigued. Add in that its much easier to focus on one sport, and it changes your entire mind set. If you got up every day and all you had to do was a get a run in, that's a pretty easy day for a triathlete. Mentally, physically etc. As a pure runner you aren't carrying around the extra upper body weight of a swimmer and you probably wouldn't need to be lifting much, if at all. Your training would change as well. You would have more high quality days, more days of running twice, more long runs per week and so on. When I ran in college, we had track work on Tues/Thurs and race on Saturday. Monday was a long run, Wed was a medium run, Friday was a short pre-race run. That is just much different than how a triathlete would train. |
|
2006-11-02 10:39 AM in reply to: #582239 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Thanks for the clarification, and good work on the formatting too. ;p To summarize it's mostly a matter of time and focus, and thus some of the quality and recovery work that would other wise be done is lost? How in the world do decathalete's find time to train for all of their sports??? |
2006-11-02 10:51 AM in reply to: #586557 |
Pro 4675 Wisconsin near the Twin Cities metro | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs AdventureBear - 2006-11-02 10:39 AM How in the world do decathalete's find time to train for all of their sports??? If you've seen some of them run the 1,500 meters you'll realize they don't spend a lot of time training for that particular event... |
2006-11-02 10:51 AM in reply to: #586557 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs AdventureBear - 2006-11-02 8:39 AM Thanks for the clarification, and good work on the formatting too. ;p To summarize it's mostly a matter of time and focus, and thus some of the quality and recovery work that would other wise be done is lost? How in the world do decathalete's find time to train for all of their sports??? Pretty much. And if you think about running solo and you had 10 hours a week to train, that would be about 80-100 miles a week for a good runner. That leaves a lot of time to recover, stretch etc. Decathletes - most time is probably spent on form and they probably train 3 sports or more per day. Good form will go a LONG way in decathalon. The longest they run is 1500m, so it isn't like they 'need' to run 2:00 runs or anything. |
2006-11-02 10:53 AM in reply to: #586576 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: LT test and zone 2 training zone for long runs Birkierunner - 2006-11-02 8:51 AM AdventureBear - 2006-11-02 10:39 AM How in the world do decathalete's find time to train for all of their sports??? If you've seen some of them run the 1,500 meters you'll realize they don't spend a lot of time training for that particular event...yeah - exactly - their times are pretty slow even for this DII college runner! ha ha! 4:40 gets you pretty far in the 1500 for a decathlete. :-) |