POLL --- Do you use a heart-rate monitor in your RUN training? (Read 383 times)


And in the end...

     

    But that's not using it for training. That's just feedback and analysis that can just as easily be determined with time, pace, or effort.

     

    So I don't think that's really "proper use" of a hrm.

     

    You could just as easily use a race or time trial (or even a workout) in the same way:

    "5k race in 20 mins, 8 weeks later, 5k race in 19 mins."

     

    The race has provided an objective measure of a base improvement in fitness.

     

     

    My example reflects how some use HR as a training tool, like Maffetone. Periodic reassessment of HR is the basis for adjusting the training. You can use whatever you like. As I said, it's just a tool.

    ------------------------

    The GITM is moot.


    And in the end...

      Is that on a treadmill so the environment is constant? Otherwise it has all the issues of the "improper" use you showed except for the age-based zones.

       

       

      It could be on a TM, or not. It should at least be the same route and similar conditions. If conditions are not similar, that has to taken into account. It's just one piece of fitness feedback that some people like to use.

      ------------------------

      The GITM is moot.

        Something tells me the title of this thread is oversampling people who use HRMs in training. The current 34 Always/Usually to 43 Seldom/Never does not reflect what I see in the running community.

         

        Of the dozens (possibly hundreds) of real life runners I know and run with on a regular basis, I can think of maybe a couple who regularly use a HRM--and they tend to be triathletes.

        Runners run.

          This.  There are over 100 people in my semi-local group.  I'm one of the few who wears an HRM.  And...

           

          Something tells me the title of this thread is oversampling people who use HRMs in training. The current 34 Always/Usually 43 Seldom/Never does not reflect what I see in the running community.

           

          Of the dozens (possibly hundreds) of real life runners I know and run with on a regular basis, I can think of maybe a couple who regularly use a HRM--and they tend to be triathletes.

           

          I use mine sometimes, but just for data to look at afterwards at this point.  When I first started running, it was useful because I had very little idea what runs should feel like (the "What the heck is an easy run?" phase).  I think MAF/whatever is useful for learning to run easy, but I also think it's dangerous to get stuck relying on it.  I have days where MAF feels easy.  I have days where it feels hard.

           

          These days, I have turned my Garmin into an oversized Timex (display set to time only, no auto-lap) because I really, really prefer running that way.  Splits, HR, elevation, and the like might be something I look at after.  It might not.  I got used to wearing the HR monitor, so I slap it on out of habit.  During base-building, I might care about it again.

          "When a person trains once, nothing happens. When a person forces himself to do a thing a hundred or a thousand times, then he certainly has developed in more ways than physical. Is it raining? That doesn't matter. Am I tired? That doesn't matter, either. Then willpower will be no problem." 
          Emil Zatopek

          DoppleBock


            Agreed - Of all the runners I know personally ~ Say 100 ish.  I know 2 that use a HR monitor as a series part of training.  One of those 2 has heart issues and only uses the alarm function.

             

            Something tells me the title of this thread is oversampling people who use HRMs in training. The current 34 Always/Usually 43 Seldom/Never does not reflect what I see in the running community.

             

            Of the dozens (possibly hundreds) of real life runners I know and run with on a regular basis, I can think of maybe a couple who regularly use a HRM--and they tend to be triathletes.

            http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

            2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

             

              Something tells me the title of this thread is oversampling people who use HRMs in training. The current 34 Always/Usually 43 Seldom/Never does not reflect what I see in the running community.

               

              Of the dozens (possibly hundreds) of real life runners I know and run with on a regular basis, I can think of maybe a couple who regularly use a HRM--and they tend to be triathletes.

              FWIW, I was one of the current 12 who said "Occasionally / Depends".  I think MAF is for endurance training, and not for the everyday 10k / 1/2 marathon runner, but I know nothing.

               

              But, this might be why triathletes follow HR training.

              From Mark Allen, 6 Time Ironman Champion:
              "When I entered the sport of triathlon in the early 1980’s, my mentality was to go as hard as I could at some point in every single workout I did. And to gauge how fast that might have to be, I looked at how fast the best triathletes were running at the end of the short distance races. Guys like Dave Scott, Scott Tinley and Scott Molina were able to hold close to 5 minute miles for their 10ks after swimming and biking!
              So that’s what I did. Every run, even the slow ones, for at least one mile, I would try to get close to 5 minute pace. And it worked…sort of. I had some good races the first year or two, but I also suffered from minor injuries and was always feeling one run away from being too burned out to want to continue with my training.
              Then came the heart rate monitor. A man named Phil Maffetone, who had done a lot of research with the monitors, contacted me. He had me try one out according to a very specific protocol. Phil said that I was doing too much anaerobic training, too much speed work, too many high end/high heart rate sessions. I was forcing my body into a chemistry that only burns carbohydrates for fuel by elevating my heart rate so high each time I went out and ran.
              So he told me to go to the track, strap on the heart rate monitor, and keep my heart rate below 155 beats per minute. Maffetone told me that below this number that my body would be able to take in enough oxygen to burn fat as the main source of fuel for my muscle to move. I was going to develop my aerobic/fat burning system. What I discovered was a shock.
              To keep my heart rate below 155 beats/minute, I had to slow my pace down to an 8:15 mile. That’s three minutes/mile SLOWER than I had been trying to hit in every single workout I did! My body just couldn’t utilize fat for fuel.
              So, for the next four months, I did exclusively aerobic training keeping my heart rate at or below my maximum aerobic heart rate, using the monitor every single workout. And at the end of that period, my pace at the same heart rate of 155 beats/minute had improved by over a minute. And after nearly a year of doing mostly aerobic training, which by the way was much more comfortable and less taxing than the anaerobic style that I was used to, my pace at 155 beats/minute had improved to a blistering 5:20 mile.
              That means that I was now able to burn fat for fuel efficiently enough to hold a pace that a year before was redlining my effort at a maximum heart rate of about 190. I had become an aerobic machine! On top of the speed benefit at lower heart rates, I was no longer feeling like I was ready for an injury the next run I went on, and I was feeling fresh after my workouts instead of being totally wasted from them."

              2014 Goals:

              #1: Do what I can do. <DOING>

              #2: 365 Hours training <NOPE, INJURED>

               


              Petco Run/Walk/Wag 5k

                I always wear an HRM - don't have much choice really, Dr's orders. Am post heart attack with medicinally reduced max hr. Have been directed to keep HR at less than 90% when racing and much lower for training. Being an old fart, I like the easier training style of MAF LHR and Galloway's run/walk approaches since both are easier on this broken down body while allowing me to get out and enjoy what I surprisingly fell in love with - running. Am also a data freak - retired engineer - what would you expect! LOL

                bob e v
                2014 goals: keep on running! Is there anything more than that?

                Complete the last 3 races in the Austin Distance Challenge, Rogue 30k, 3M Half, Austin Full

                Break the 1000 mi barrier!

                History: blessed heart attack 3/15/2008; c25k july 2008 first 5k 10/26/2008 on 62nd birthday.

                  But, this might be why triathletes follow HR training.

                  From Mark Allen, 6 Time Ironman Champion:
                  ...tl;dr...

                   

                  Yeah I know all that and wasn't really wondering why triathletes use HRMs more than runners, just observing that they do.

                  Runners run.

                  JimR


                    There's no option for never.  Only seldom/never.

                       

                      Yeah I know all that and wasn't really wondering why triathletes use HRMs more than runners, just observing that they do.

                       

                      I know you know.

                      I was answering more for the many who "always/usually" use HR (because of Maffetone) that doesn't really apply to them in their shorter distance training.  In other words, my answer wasn't geared for you to read even if it was in response to your post.

                      Cheers,

                      2014 Goals:

                      #1: Do what I can do. <DOING>

                      #2: 365 Hours training <NOPE, INJURED>

                       

                         

                        I know you know.

                        I was answering more for the many who "always/usually" use HR (because of Maffetone) that doesn't really apply to them in their shorter distance training.  In other words, my answer wasn't geared for you to read even if it was in response to your post.

                        Cheers,

                         

                        Fair enough. The quote still doesn't really explain why triathletes would benefit from HRM training any more than runners unless (for some unexplained reason) they are doing all their running way too fast and (for some other unexplained reason) a HRM is the only way to prove it to them.

                         

                        There are any number of ways Mark Allen could have figured out that doing all of his running at 5 minute pace was a bad idea, and that building an aerobic base before doing a ton of hard workouts was a good idea. Like, say, by looking at how really good runners train, for example.

                         

                        I would suggest to you that triathletes just really like owning equipment. Most of the hardcore triathletes I know have a collection of bikes worth more than my car and have shoes (for biking!) that cost more than my year's worth of running shoes. They also like data. A lot. So a HRM just feeds into those two obsessions, even if it's not adding much value in training.

                        Runners run.

                           

                          I would suggest to you that triathletes just really like owning equipment. Most of the hardcore triathletes I know have a collection of bikes worth more than my car and have shoes (for biking!) that cost more than my year's worth of running shoes. They also like data. A lot. So a HRM just feeds into those two obsessions, even if it's not adding much value in training.

                           

                          Nail head, meet hammer.

                             

                            The quote still doesn't really explain why triathletes would benefit from HRM training any more than runners unless ...

                            I'm a student in this game (triathlons), and only follow the writings of my guide (Friel, who's similar to Allen in training methodology).  I agree with your comment and cannot refute it.

                            Two years ago, I would have answered "Always / Usually" for the poll.  Since then, I've transitioned to "Occasionally/Depends" because I can predict my readings and have better endurance experience.

                             

                            Regarding your other comments regarding the tools / toys (bikes / shoes / monitors), I would agree.  It's a challenge to ride and race without getting caught up in the aero advantages (wheels / helmets / bikes) and the data collection toys (Watt Meter, HRM, cadence monitor, etc.).  I train and race without toy advantages such as carbon wheels, aero helmet, watt meter, or cadence monitor, and there are few within the tri community that do without all 4 of these.

                            2014 Goals:

                            #1: Do what I can do. <DOING>

                            #2: 365 Hours training <NOPE, INJURED>

                             

                               I would suggest to you that triathletes just really like owning equipment. Most of the hardcore triathletes I know have a collection of bikes worth more than my car and have shoes (for biking!) that cost more than my year's worth of running shoes. They also like data. A lot. So a HRM just feeds into those two obsessions, even if it's not adding much value in training.

                               

                              +1.

                               

                              C'mon.  Any of us who know very many triathletes know the general truth in mikey's statement here.

                              - Joe

                              We are fragile creatures on collision with our judgment day.

                                 

                                Regarding your other comments regarding the tools / toys (bikes / shoes / monitors), I would agree.  It's a challenge to ride and race without getting caught up in the PRECEIVED aero advantages (wheels / helmets / bikes) and the data collection toys (Watt Meter, HRM, cadence monitor, etc.).  I train and race without toy advantages such as carbon wheels, aero helmet, watt meter, or cadence monitor, and there are few within the tri community that do without all 4 of these.

                                 

                                If aero was truly that much of an advantage then Chrissy Wellington should cut off her pony tails, lose the biking cloves and wear an aero helmet.

                                 

                                The laboratory wind tunnels and the open road are two different places.

                                 

                                "I just bought a set of Zip 808's...how much time will that save me?"  Have you heard that one before?

                                 

                                Seriously, the sport of Triathlons has been ruined by equipment. Just one mans opinion.