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

     

    My point was that training has got to fall under the category of health and enjoyment or some other large category of life. Doesn't seem valuable as an "end in itself."

     

    By the way, you are talking to a 2:35 marathoner and competitive sumbitch, if that makes any difference. I think my experiences in getting wherever I've gotten in running are exactly what make me eschew the reductive form of training as a means to "fitness/times/speed." Getting "there" takes a lot more than "tools reporting to users."

     

    MTA: sorry about the words like "eschew" -- I am writing quickly! I should come back to this later.

     

    Always eschew obfuscation!

       

      Always eschew obfuscation!

       

      Yes, that and don't post on a message board while grading papers.

        When I first started running I thought the HRM gave me useful data. As I gained some experience, I realized the data wasn't really all that useful.

        I think it may be more accurate to say that as you gained experience, HR data became less useful.

         

        I've worn the stupid strap since I got a garmin fall 2009.  The HR reading helped me early on to keep an "easy" pace/effort and to find (what was at the time) my tempo pace/effort.  In turn, that feedback helped me learn the feeling of easy, tempo, and other pace windows.  These days, I run by feel ... and I really don't know why I still keep putting that Garmin anaconda around my chest!

        “Everything you need is already inside.” -- Bill Bowerman

           

          Yes, that and don't post on a message board while grading papers.

           

          I feel some sadness for those undergraduates who will never understand why their essays were not quite up to par.

          - Joe

          all running goals are under review by the executive committee.

          J-L-C


             

             

            Yes, it is training with a HRM because the feedback from the HRM is being used to adjust the training. You mean that it's not being used to effect training during an actual run, and that's just a difference in definition of 'training'. To me, a lot of my training happens when I'm not running. To your example, if one knows their MaxHR then one can setup appropriate training zones and do their workouts using the HRM. Most do not know their actual MaxHR so they use the tool incorrectly. They are guessing at their zones. Your example of 'using it to ensure you stay under a max hr for an easy day' is quite misleading. 'Easy' would be generally in the range of 65%-75% of MaxHR. Though, if you wanted to be even more precise you would use your Heart Rate Reserve (HRR) and run at 60%-70% of that MaxHRR. People can use a HRM how they see fit, though I view it's greatest value as a feedback mechanism post-run. I believe there is greater value in learning to gauge effort be paying attention to the body's own feedback.

             

            You mentioned Maffetone before as someone who would advocate using a hrm "properly" but even then you gave an example of its use in evaluating whereas Maffetone would suggest using the hrm while you are running to ensure you're staying at the proper intensity.

             

            So not even the person you mention for your example would agree with what you're saying about its proper use.

             

            If you don't know your maxhr or lt then you have no business using a hrm at all because you cannot train with it. You could only use it as an evaluative tool which is NOT its sole intention.

             

            Yes, it is meant to be used to affect your actual run.

             

            HRR isn't really more precise. It's a silly formula that makes your intensities higher when you're not in shape and lower when you are in shape. I don't think it should ever be used.

             

            Yes, of course people can use it as they see fit, I just don't think your illustrations on "proper use" are correct. You're not explaining how to properly use it in the course of your training, you're just giving an example of how you can use it in place of a stopwatch.

            J-L-C


               

              In my highly unscientific observations of the matter just the opposite has been true.  The more serious and competitive the runner, the less likely he is to use an HRM.  Obviously this is a generalization and not universally true, but to me it seems that it's the wannabe's (triathletes have already been discussed separately) who feel the need to try lots of technology to help them improve.  I don't hold that against them or intend it in a disrespectful way, but in general, it seems like it is the fast guys, the ones who are truly "training", who already know their bodies really really well, and they don't have nearly as much use for what an HRM has to tell them.

               

              Interesting point. Do any elites use hrms? Doesn't seem that way. And when I hear elite coaches talking about hrm they really don't seem to grasp how individual hr variance really is.

               

              Salazar gave a talk at NXN about easy runs and pace and then out of the blue he said something to the effect of, "if you're using a hrm, it should be in the 140s". Roll eyes

               

              For someone with a max over 210, the 140s would be an entirely different effort than it would be for someone with a max in the 190s or even lower.  It's just so individual and all of these references to it seem to completely miss that.

               

              Even the  hr ranges in  Daniels' books are way out of whack, imo. The tempo ranges and interval ranges he gives for certain workouts are higher than I typically hit at the ends of races!

                 

                I feel some sadness for those undergraduates who will never understand why their essays were not quite up to par.

                 

                Ha ha, so it goes. Wink

                   

                  Interesting point. Do any elites use hrms? Doesn't seem that way. And when I hear elite coaches talking about hrm they really don't seem to grasp how individual hr variance really is.

                   

                  Salazar gave a talk at NXN about easy runs and pace and then out of the blue he said something to the effect of, "if you're using a hrm, it should be in the 140s". Roll eyes

                   

                  For someone with a max over 210, the 140s would be an entirely different effort than it would be for someone with a max in the 190s or even lower.  It's just so individual and all of these references to it seem to completely miss that.

                   

                  Even the  hr ranges in  Daniels' books are way out of whack, imo. The tempo ranges and interval ranges he gives for certain workouts are higher than I typically hit at the ends of races!

                   

                  In the group I train with there is one guy who wears a HRM. He is a younger guy (~26) in law school who a couple years ago ran a 3:45 1500. Anyways, we all made fun of him for running too hard a couple weeks back because he posted his data for an early season fartlek and his heart rate on each of the intervals was in the mid-190s.

                   

                  Then last night, a couple weeks after that workout, he had to take a leak during the rest on one of our pieces and he ended up 50m back of the group. It was a 4 minute piece, and he caught us about 3 minutes in.

                   

                  It was then that it sorta dawned on me how he got to 3:45.

                     

                    In my highly unscientific observations of the matter just the opposite has been true.  The more serious and competitive the runner, the less likely he is to use an HRM.  Obviously this is a generalization and not universally true, but to me it seems that it's the wannabe's (triathletes have already been discussed separately) who feel the need to try lots of technology to help them improve.  I don't hold that against them or intend it in a disrespectful way, but in general, it seems like it is the fast guys, the ones who are truly "training", who already know their bodies really really well, and they don't have nearly as much use for what an HRM has to tell them.

                     

                    Hey still bluesky, This ^....should answer your stupid effing question! I'm rather blunt with my posts.

                    Ricky

                    —our ability to perform up to our physiological potential in a race is determined by whether or not we truly psychologically believe that what we are attempting is realistic. Anton Krupicka


                    Dad of a real runner

                       

                      Hey still bluesky, This ^....should answer your stupid effing question! I'm rather blunt with my posts.

                       

                      Ooooo.  Two days to come up with that snappy reply.  Good one.

                       

                      By the way, I don't completely disagree with your assessment.  I've been using my hrm only since the 1st of the year and already have stopped using it on a daily basis.  My main reason for getting it was I felt I was doing my long runs too fast, and I wanted a measurable way of seeing that.  By using the HRM on runs where my only intention is to get in some miles greater than 15 it does help keep me in a reasonable training range.  The rest of it is just another thing to track on the training log;  time, distance, elevation change, pace, and now HR.  Gives the data freek in me something to do when I'm not trolling the forums.  Big grin

                        My motorcycle doesn't  have a tachometer on it.   I have a good feel for it though and know when that engine is racing.   I feel the same way about my heart too.  When it's really thumping, it lets me know just that.


                        day after day sameness

                          poll

                          Choosing my words carefully has never been my strength I've been known to be vague and often pointless

                            This poll needs another option: "HELL NO"

                            JimR


                              poll

                              Not JUST a poll.  A poll by ROD.

                              bap


                                I used to but I've stop obsessing. Now I can't even find it. I do use a foot pod to check my turnover during shorter races. I reached 240 steps per minute at the end of the Fifth Avenue Mile a few years ago.

                                Age 52

                                2016 Targets - 100 - 13.2s, 400 - 62s, 800 - 2:30, Mile - 5:40