RunningAHEAD - Topic: Should I see a cardiologist

123 4

Should I see a cardiologist - problems with LHR training?? (Read 1214 times)

Anelope

posted: 3/2/2008 at 10:12 PM

Quote from Tchuck on 3/2/2008 at 6:48 PM:

BKA,
These can be done year round (less volume in off season) without hurting base if you do them correctly.

I never understood the philosphy behind "ruining" an aerobic base. I hear all the time people afraid to run over xx HR because it will ruin your aerobic base etc... Personally I have always raced my best and been the most fit keeping a balance of workouts. It all falls in line pretty well with the hard easy principle. Comes a point when you push the envelope in your workouts, back off(super copmensation)and race very well. The only reason as I can see it that you can not maintain this level of training is because you will burnout. But from a physiological standpoint I can not see how one "hurts" your aerobic energy system. Their seems to be a belief that for every step you run anaerobicly it withdrawls from your fitness. I can not find solid evidence supporting this claim.

I think even hardworkouts(anaerobic sprints for example) can be maintained year round provided you modulate both the volume and recovery.

Tchuck	posted: 3/2/2008 at 11:17 PM
	Anelope, You confirmed my point exactly. Balance is key.I am all for a multi-pace approach year round once the foundation is built. Faster stuff can be done year round if done smartly. Many newer runners think running faster more often makes them faster. Many times fast running is done before they even build their aerobic foundation. They and many runners teach themselves to run anaerobically which leads to oxygen debt in longer races. They improve rapidly short term but their progress comes to a grinding halt without building the foundation. Building the aerobic foundation first teaches the body to run more aerobically. With more miles, time and smart training, one runs faster and faster aerobically not needing to go anaerobic and doesn't face the oxygen debt or will not be forced to slow down in longer races. The high mileage runner can mix in more in offseason. The lower mileage beginner/intermediate runner would provide no benefit to high volume offseason speed work. Fast speed work helps you peak. Perhaps improve your race performance 3%. Maybe a tad more in some individuals. If the non experienced runner hammers in the offseason, they will get injured and stale and progress stops and often regression occurs. Anelope - you would not hammer or do high volume 1 mile - 3K paced intervals year round without a race coming. You do some to stay in touch with speed but not high volume or as long a duration in offseason right? As races approach you up your volume and intensity to peak. This is exactly what I am saying.
	Those who try, fail! Those who do what it takes to succeed, succeed!!

Anelope

posted: 3/3/2008 at 12:42 AM

That is exactly what I'm saying. The way I see it is you have maintenance and training. You can manipulate recoveries and work intervals depending on your goal race and where you stand in terms of time. An example would be- 16 weeks out from your marathon per say you can do 15x 1 min on 2 off 5k pace. 6 weeks out you would have morphed that into 5 mins on 4 off(al la v02 max intervals). This is nothing inventive really. Coach Joe rubio coaches using this exact format. Coach Vigel another one. Frank Shoter did the same 3 workouts everyweek with very little varation.

One thing I do disagree with you on is how you say beginners should first build the base. Here is another philosphy I don't understand. A base as I see it is all aspects of running. Aerobic, anaerobic, speed, power, strength etc...I think even raw beginners can do this if they do it intelligently. Operating on a 14 or even a 21 day cycle and you can build on all systems while allowing for recovery. In fact I think working on running form at fast speeds is just as important as aerobic running itself. Build yourself a joggers form and not only will you get injured when trying to run fast but you will have a hard time becoming effiecient at running at higher efforts. It wasn't till my second year of running that I realized I have been overstriding and pounding the crap out of my knees for 2 years. Once your in that habit it's hard to break...kinda like having to learn to write with your left hand when you are a righty. The newer to runnig you are obviously the more "easy" running you should do in proportain to everything else. I still don't understand where these lines got drawn in running though. Easy, tempo and 5k pace are all closly related if you ask me. Spending your first year of running just getting out the door having fun isn't a bad idea but attempting to get to a magic weekly number before you do anything else is when people get off balance. You build and build beliving the notion if you ever run fast you suddenly "ruin" what you have built. I'm not opposed to MAFF, HADD or any form of low HR base building. It works great for many runners, some race well off of that alone, don't get injured and are content with it. Others find a balance by going from one phase to another and that could work. Their are other like myself(and frank shorter)who just require all different tyoes of running for improvment to occure. I suspect the OP may fall into this catorgie of runners.

Tchuck	posted: 3/3/2008 at 4:31 AM
	I understand what you are saying but I disagree when talking about the true beginner. I think it depends on your definition of beginner. Some beginners I have coached who want to run are in their aerobic comfortable zone by walking. Even with a jog their HR soars to 95-100% of max. There is no aerobic work being done. They are forced to walk because of anaerobic overload. You have to build this up. Certainly there would be adaptation if this person kept pushing but what fun is that. This person would throw up if trying to push the running. Even people who have some elliptical or biking base who start running will quickly go anaerobic. Very slow jogging with walking is my recommendation until their HR stabilizes a bit. A beginner has to also get used to the pounding. There is no purpose to doing faster work when slow work is demanding by itself. It really is common sense. Speed work for a beginner is pointless when their body is reacting like it is doing speed work from just jogging. Every person is individual and responds differently than others, but you are always safe if you build slowly.
	Those who try, fail! Those who do what it takes to succeed, succeed!!

Nobby415

posted: 3/3/2008 at 5:08 PM

I'd have to say I pretty much agree with what Tchuck had to say. First, let me take care of the original inquiry. I've gotten a couple of MAF books but haven't had a chance to read yet. It seems like quite an interesting method and, if done correctly, had produced reasonable results. Certainly it seems to me a very good way for a beginning runner. There are a lot of things come to play in "running fast" or simply "running well". Not every rules can be applied to everybody; not one single factor would contribute to running faster/better (and this would be my argument to those who love to point out lab results because they, and rightfully so, only look at one single variable at a time). Anybody read a story about Lasse Viren (how many actually know who he is)? Way back in the 80s when I read about how he prepared for the Olympics; he did a series of interval training. It said something like "In a workout like this, Lasse's hear rate gets close to 200 but because his legs were tired from high altitude training, it was 'only' 180..." Is low heart rate ALWAYS a good thing? Well, the thing is; when the body goes through high stress, your heart would have to beat a lot. If it's not capable of beating a lot, it's not advantageous. I would almost think that it is not a bad thing to het it (HR) up quite high once in a while. So, yes, I guess you can say I don't necessarily buy in to MAF method 100%. I think it's a sound idea, but I wouldn't do it, and I don't think I'll like it. He (what was his name again, Phil?) went out with Lorraine Moller for a short period. Lorraine actually filled me in with his story... We were going up this rugged dirt path I call "a goat path" on the west side of Boulder. We went up some of the steepest hills over rocks and roots... We were breathing quite hard (a mile high altitude as well!) and she said, "This is like fartlek; to get your heart rate way up high... But with (MAF method), you're not supposed to do that..." I was in Breckenridge, CO, this Christmas. One day, I was runinng up one of the ski hills (this is 9000 feet to begin with); bad footing with snow and ice... I thought my heart was going to shoot out of my mouth! And I loved it! I don't wear HRM but I do check my pulse once in a while. When doing some repeats, I know it goes up beyond 190. At my age (42...well, a bit more!), it's way beyond, supposedly, maximum HR. So I get a kick out of the fact I could push my heart like I was 20 years younger.

I guess the bottom line is; why are you running? What is your objective? If to keep your heart rate low is your objective; by all means. But if your objective is to run well and feel good about it, if your heart rate is a bit higher than what you thought it's supposed to be, screw it! As long as you feel good about it, forget those numbers and restrictions.

Having said that, here's how I'd approach beginning runners to explain what's going on in their bodies.

As we all know, every action we make requires oxygen. Depending on the intensity, it requires more oxygen than other activities. If the requirement of the oxygen of that particular intensity is within your body's ability to assimilate, transport and utilize oxygen; then that activity is "aerobic". If the intensity surpasses your body's ability (known as Maximum Oxygen Uptake level, or VO2Max), then it becomes perhaps somewhat misleadingly known as "anaerobic*". And also some people might argue about lactic acid and lactate or whatever the bad guys are; but the point here being that, with anaerobic type exercise, your blood pH will lower and becomes acidic. This happens all the time and it's not that big of a deal as long as it's recovered quickly but with intensive anaerobic type activities, your body's pH level gets quite low and remain low for quite some time. When this happens, your body's ability to recover gets affected adversely--your body's enzymes work in a very narrow pH in alkalin condition and their functions will be affected adversely so even though you're eating right, your body can't obsorb proper nutrients and rebuild the body. So basically it's not so much of "anaerobic workouts destroy your aerobic capacity" or "you can't do intervals when you're building the base". You can even do some sprint work if you want to during your base-building phase, and can be quite beneficial if done correctly, as long as the effort is short and sharp and alactic. But here are some problems I'd have with beginning runners doing too much "fast" running:

* Because their fitness level is low, their form will be all over the place--in other words, they'll start to struggle and this can be very bad for a proper running technique.

* Because their fitness level is low, even a slight speed increase could push them over their VO2Max line (like, it's easier for a 10-minute-mile runner to get anaerobic by running 9-minute-mile pace than a 7-minute-mile runner to get anaerobic by running 6-minute-mile pace and it would hurt them more).

* Most likely, their connective tissues and tendons and ligaments, as well as muscles, are not that strong enough that even a slight increase in speed can invite injuries.

It would be so much easier for a well-conditioned runner to "balance" his/her training with long easier paced running and shorter faster workout than someone starting out to run. I believe the "trend" has shifted so much in the past 10+ years that we have so much more wide range of people starting to run. I just recently checked Arthur Lydiard's jogging book. He talked about a weekly schedule of running 15 minutes 4 days a week; one 30 minutes and one 45~60 minutes day with one day rest. This was the beginner's program. Today, those who are attempting a marathon would do less than that. Cross training is a main stream; many people don't seem to even run so many days. I think there are lot more out-of-shape individuals starting to run, which is absolutely wonderful; but the schedule, particularly the initial stages, needs to be altered a little bit. I feel most of the so-called beginners schedule are (1) basically watered-down "regular" schedule--meaning, if the elite runners were doing 120 miles a week of running with twice a week quality workouts, they would schedule you to do twice a week "quality" workout days irrespective of whether you run 50 miles a week or 15 miles a week. If they do 10X800 at their 5k pace, they would schedule you to do 7X800m at YOUR 5k pace. Now, having said that, I feel many of "real" beginners programs don't push them hard enough--meaning they pamper runners a bit too much, giving them way too many walking breaks or "off-days". I think a good example is FIRST program where you ONLY run 3 days a week. I think, after the initial build-up, most of us can easily handle 5 days a week. All in all, I'm not trying to be politically correct here, I think C25K is a great program although I would tweek a few points. And I personally wouldn't worry about "quality" untill you can run continously (I mean, without walking break) for close to an hour COMFORTABLY. That's, with a simple quick-and-dirty calculation, if you do it 4 to 5 times a week, would be approximately about 20~25 or so miles a week. Then you can probably start thinking about having ONE day of some sort of quality workout. I mean, let's face it; I'm sure some people might do really well off 20MPW. I mean, I'm sure in the past someone had become an Olympic medalist off that much training! But those people running 20MPW is totally different from most of today's "runners" doing 20MPW. You can NOT even compare.

* Today, some may arguem that the correct term of "anaerobic" is actually "without oxygen", in other words, like doing some running holding your breathe. My interpretation of "anaerobic" is without "enough" oxygen; in other words, you are creating oxygen debt. Some technical people might argue that I'm not correct but for the argument sake for this discussion, let's say this is what I mean.

turboterie1 view log	posted: 3/3/2008 at 5:17 PM
	Quote from Tchuck on 3/3/2008 at 4:31 AM: I understand what you are saying but I disagree when talking about the true beginner. I think it depends on your definition of beginner. Some beginners I have coached who want to run are in their aerobic comfortable zone by walking. Even with a jog their HR soars to 95-100% of max. There is no aerobic work being done. They are forced to walk because of anaerobic overload. You have to build this up. Certainly there would be adaptation if this person kept pushing but what fun is that. This person would throw up if trying to push the running. Even people who have some elliptical or biking base who start running will quickly go anaerobic. Very slow jogging with walking is my recommendation until their HR stabilizes a bit. A beginner has to also get used to the pounding. There is no purpose to doing faster work when slow work is demanding by itself. It really is common sense. Speed work for a beginner is pointless when their body is reacting like it is doing speed work from just jogging. Every person is individual and responds differently than others, but you are always safe if you build slowly. I'm coaching a group of beginners right now and I find the above to be very true and that is why our program is made the way it is. We start our beginers with a run/walk program and slowly build them up to running 30 minutes continuously.
	Finished my first marathon 1-13-2008 in 6:03:37 at P.F. Chang's in Phoenix. PR in San Antonio RnR 5:45:58!!!!!! on 11-16-08 Marathon coach for Albuquerque Fit The only thing that has ever made any difference in my running is running. Goal: Sub 5 marathon in 2009

JakeKnight view log	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:01 PM
	I sometimes wonder if the stress of constantly monitoring your heart rate is ironically bad for your heart. Somebody should do a study. Or write a book. What if your HR during LHR training approaches your MAF and the resultant anxiety as you stare in horror at your HRM causes your HR to actually exceed your MAF? Is your base ruined?
	E-mail: JakeKnight2002@aol.com -----------------------------

jEfFgObLuE view log Frustrating Project	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:13 PM modified: 3/3/2008 at 7:23 PM
	Quote from Anelope on 3/2/2008 at 10:12 PM: I never understood the philosophy behind "ruining" an aerobic base. I hear all the time people afraid to run over xx HR because it will ruin your aerobic base etc... Folks, MAF is simply a tool to keep you from overtraining -- from running too fast on your easy days. No more, no less. Just a way to keep you running slow, so that you can run more w/o injury, and build your aerobic capacity. It's not magic, and the number is a ballpark guideline for a ceiling on your easy pace. And much like its cousin formula, 220-age for maxHR, it's wrong for a lot of people. Run hard on your hard days, 2~3 times/week max. Run conversationally easy on your easy days. Stress. Recover. Repeat. If it takes using an HRM at your MAF to take it easy, then do what works for you. Exceeding your MAF target has no physiological effect other than to potentially lead you to overtraining if you do it all the time every run. MTA: fixed typo. Should by physiological, not psychological. This is what happens when your typing skills consist primarily of "getting close" and letting spell-check do the rest.
	20th Century: 800m: 2:04 \|1600m: 4:37 \|3200m: 10:06 \|5k: 16:23 \|10k: 35:38 \|15k: 54:20 25k: 1:35:59 21st Century: 5k: 19:42 \|10k: 43:00 "Do not allow children to mix drinks. It is unseemly, and they use too much vermouth." Steve Allen Oswald acted alone.

JakeKnight view log	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:14 PM
	Quote from jEfFgObLuE on 3/3/2008 at 6:13 PM: Folks, MAF is simply a tool to keep you from overtraining -- from running too fast on your easy days. No more, no less. Just a way to keep you running slow, so that you can run more w/o injury, and build your aerobic capacity. It's not magic, and the number is a ballpark guideline for a ceiling on your easy pace. And much like its cousin formula, 220-age for maxHR, it's wrong for a lot of people. Run hard on your hard days, 2~3 times/week max. Run conversationally easy on your easy days. Stress. Recover. Repeat. If it takes using an HRM at your MAF to take it easy, then do what works for you. Exceeding your MAF target has no psychological effect other than to potentially lead you to overtraining if you do it all the time every run. You're never going to sell any books with that approach. Don't they teach marketing at U of M?
	E-mail: JakeKnight2002@aol.com -----------------------------

Run To Win view log Blaine Moore	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:20 PM
	Quote from jEfFgObLuE on 3/3/2008 at 6:13 PM: Exceeding your MAF target has no psychological effect other than to potentially lead you to overtraining if you do it all the time every run. I beg to differ. Based on the fears and complaints of MAF runners when they go 1 bpm over their stated heart rate, there are plenty of psychological effects. Psychosomatic psychological effects, to be sure, but there certainly are some. There aren't any physiological effects, though, other than that you ran a little faster so you might get into a little bit better shape than you otherwise would have. Remember, folks, it's all fun and games until you snap your leg because you ran too fast. (And stepped into 2 foot pothole without noticing and kept running.)
	Run to Win I just started using Twitter - anybody else on there? http://twitter.com/RunToWin

Dustin view log formerly RacingThoughts	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:28 PM modified: 3/3/2008 at 6:28 PM
	Reminds me of last time I tried counting my resting heart rate without a HRM. My heart rate would be steady and slow before I started counted. Then when I'd start counting it in my head it would get all crazy and speed up, just because I was paying so much attention to it.

jEfFgObLuE view log Frustrating Project	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:31 PM
	Quote from Dustin on 3/3/2008 at 6:28 PM: Reminds me of last time I tried counting my resting heart rate without a HRM. My heart rate would be steady and slow before I started counted. Then when I'd start counting it in my head it would get all crazy and speed up, just because I was paying so much attention to it. I was in a hospital once hooked up to an HRM and found that by thinking about Michigan State, Ohio State, Notre Dame, and the Florida Triumvirate of Evil (UF, FSU, Miami), I could cause my HR to go up. Too bad I didn't record the data -- it would have been interesting to see word the rankings were in terms of stress level (defined as points above resting).
	20th Century: 800m: 2:04 \|1600m: 4:37 \|3200m: 10:06 \|5k: 16:23 \|10k: 35:38 \|15k: 54:20 25k: 1:35:59 21st Century: 5k: 19:42 \|10k: 43:00 "Do not allow children to mix drinks. It is unseemly, and they use too much vermouth." Steve Allen Oswald acted alone.

Run To Win view log Blaine Moore	posted: 3/3/2008 at 6:43 PM
	Quote from jEfFgObLuE on 3/3/2008 at 6:31 PM: I was in a hospital once hooked up to an HRM and found that by thinking about Michigan State, Ohio State, Notre Dame, and the Florida Triumvirate of Evil (UF, FSU, Miami), I could cause my HR to go up. Too bad I didn't record the data -- it would have been interesting to see word the rankings were in terms of stress level (defined as points above resting). I've done that before, not so much thinking about school athletic programs but just by trying to raise and lower my heart rate by sitting there. They were recording it at the time and it annoyed them because they couldn't figure out why it kept spiking and dropping so suddenly.
	Run to Win I just started using Twitter - anybody else on there? http://twitter.com/RunToWin

Nobby415

posted: 3/3/2008 at 7:51 PM

Quote from Run To Win on 3/3/2008 at 6:43 PM:

I've done that before, not so much thinking about school athletic programs but just by trying to raise and lower my heart rate by sitting there. They were recording it at the time and it annoyed them because they couldn't figure out why it kept spiking and dropping so suddenly.

What the heck are you guys talking about, thinking about athletic program!? Remember in "That '70s Show" when Red had to wear a meart monitor around his wrist to make sure he's not getting excited, then a beautiful lady walked by and it started to beep like crazy? I remember Lydiard talking about this female athlete he was coaching and every time this young handsom team doctor checked her heart rate, it's higher than normal... A question to checking resting heart rate first thing in the morning, his reply was, "It depends on who you're sleeping with..."

Run To Win view log Blaine Moore	posted: 3/3/2008 at 9:14 PM
	Quote from Nobby415 on 3/3/2008 at 7:51 PM: What the heck are you guys talking about, thinking about athletic program!? Remember in "That '70s Show" when Red had to wear a meart monitor around his wrist to make sure he's not getting excited, then a beautiful lady walked by and it started to beep like crazy? I remember Lydiard talking about this female athlete he was coaching and every time this young handsom team doctor checked her heart rate, it's higher than normal... A question to checking resting heart rate first thing in the morning, his reply was, "It depends on who you're sleeping with..." When I was 2 years old I goosed a nurse while my father was getting a physical. I was back in my chair in the corner looking all nonchalant before she could turn around and to this day she still doesn't believe that it was me and not my father. He told me last year that she still gives him a dirty look every time he goes in even though it's been (at that point) 25 years. That has to count for something, right? (Nothing like getting started at a young age...)
	Run to Win I just started using Twitter - anybody else on there? http://twitter.com/RunToWin

123 4