What's more important...heart rate or pace? (Read 1541 times)

Ok, I'm not trying to start a war here and the fact that I posted here means that I'm talking about beginning and intermediate runners. There's a post in the gears forum about buying a 205 vs 305 and most people that have chimed in seem to indicate that they don't care about HR. This doesn't make sense to me because if I have to look at a number, I think HR is much more important than pace. The biggest problem most beginners face is either over- or under-training. If someone tells me that they ran 10 miles at 9:00/mile that means nothing. If the same person tells me they ran that with an avg HR of 200 BPM then I would suggest they slow down before they die. If they say their HR was 70 then I would suggest they speed up.

Actually neither absolute value tellls you anything. HR needs to be relative to LT HR or VO2max HR although max HR can be used also. This is why I always people how their breathing was or were they able to talk or whatever.

I understand that during a race, pace is everything but what's the obsession with pace during training? I understand that level of effort or feel may be a better indicator than HR but it takes a long time to dial those things in properly.

Actually, if you work at it, it's not that hard. I "learned" to run by HR training and learned to correlate HR and effort. When running hills, the HR response might be too slow to properly gauge your effort. If I went too hard or too long, I'd be gasping, almost hyperventilating. With signals like that, I learned quickly to recognize body signals preceding that. Using your HRM based on HR zones, you'd be likely to keep pedal to the metal too long - like holding gas pedal down until you hit the speed limit and going over it, rather than backing off before hand. Yes, there are still times and conditions when things don't always line up right. But I rarely look at HR during race, and am usually clueless about pace. I'm just headed for the finish line, managing my energy resources up and down hills to get there in the fastest time I can. If one believes in the benefits of various physiological zones for training, then there is a reason to be conscious of effort in training. For me, I find breathing / feel is most correlated with zones followed by HR. But typical estimates of zones are just surrogates for lactate concentration or whatever other measure. IOW, I just run. I should mention also that low HR training is not the same as regular HR training, although for some people they may be similar (for others, they're drastically different).

However, if you're just starting out and you're obsessing about your pace then I still contend that if you WANT to look at a data point then look at HR.

I contend that you worry (aka 'obsess', but I don't mean to be pejorative) about pace and numbers more than 85% of the beginners that I work with. Many beginners I know are excited as all heck to run that first mile nonstop... and then their first 3 miler. Some collect finish times, but many do not worry about it as much as "how far did I go? how far did I go?" Edited to add: Some ask me to help them calculate a pace. And a few of those ask me "what does that mean?" Certainly not 85% of them, and certainly not enough for me to declare that my "beginners love pace". I think you extrapolate somewhat. Maybe not a lot. I do know folks who obsess about a 10:01 mile versus a 10:05 mile. That you do this is not a bad thing... it's just an aspect of the way that you are approaching things. Just be aware that not everybody is like that. I just ran 4 miles. I finished with a heart rate of 120. In and of itself, I have no idea what that means, except that I was not running super duper hard.

I'll agree that most runners at the beginning run too fast. And I still contend that as a beginner it is ok. If you do ANY reading here or elsewhere, eventually the concept of slow down will get there. As you try to increase your mileage it will come by default. I went through a period of running too fast. Discovered that wasnt a good idea. Most people do at some point. Some take longer than others.

A lot of you that have chimed in are not what I would call beginning runners.

A) we were all beginners at one point. B) ummmm....do you think running advice from people who are no longer beginners is invalid and that people who are new to the sport have more valid opinions? I am not saying dont use your HRM, if it works for you great. But I disagree wholeheartedly that it is more IMPORTANT than pace, effort, or none of the above - ESPECIALLY for a beginning runner.

I thought it was this thread... I can't really remember but I was reading it, thinking, just how correct the late Arthur Lydiard was. of couse, I'm biased because I'm running the Lydiard Foundation! But you know, way back in 1961, he started the first ever organized jogging club. They had 20 people, the youngest being 50 and the oldest 74. Every single one of them had a history of at least one heart attack. NONE of them could run a half a lap around the local track (200m) without stopping. Eight months later, EVERYONE of them was running 20 miles WITHOUT stopping. Eight of them completed a full marathon. And, apparently, they ran it in around 4-hours. Considering so many people running today...so much SLOWER, only proves to me that he was doing something right. Beginners LOVE numbers. Yes, they love to know how fast (pace) they should be running and all. But then again, everybody else is eating McDonald and that doesn't make it "good for you". Of course, the end result of that is obesity being nation's epidemic... It's all marketing driven; to sell garmin and to sell heart rate monitor and to sell whatever else it may be! Lydiard's group did what they did with simple pair of sand shoes and shorts. No GU, no garmin, no energy drink, no coolmax, no GoreTex... So what would he say? He would tell you to "go by how you feel." Would beginning runners like to hear that? Absolutely NOT! It's difficult because there's no point of reference--they need to actually use their brain and "senses". This is the nation of "XXX for idiots"; everybody loves to be spoon-fed; they all want a simplified formula. In regards to interval training, we say, "Go by how you feel"; and at letsrun.com message board, we will get crucified with people (or at least one individual under several different posting names) yelling at us saying "such a bogus training method can NOT be the best training!" They all want numbers. Well, that aside, however, if you ABSOLUTELY have to choose one over the other; then heart rate would be a better choice. It reflects "effort" level. 10-minute-mile pace is world different from 10-minute-mile pace when you came home from stressful work day. But HR of 140 when you feel invincible (maybe 9:45 pace???) is an easy effort just as 140 on stressful day (perhaps 10:45 pace???). One of the leading US runners in the 80s, Jon Sinclaire, was being coached by one of Lydiard's protege, John Davies. He was told to run on HR, not pace. So did Kim Jones when she was being coached by Benji Durden. Of course, Jon said it's like driving a car by looking only at tacometer, not speedometer! ;o)

One of the best ways of learning something is by experience. If you make the mistake of running too fast and pay the price for it, you will remember how that feels. If you start slow, finish strong, and have a great run, you will remember that too. If you run a lot of runs at paces in between, you will remember how those feel. How can a beginner learn to run by feel if they don't make mistakes and learn how those mistakes feel?

I do think beginners with poor aerobic base should use a HRM as a brake.

I have a buddy that took up running almost a year ago. He goes up and runs trails around a reservoir nearby. It's a little under 7 miles. His goal was to make it around without taking a walk break. Every now and then I go up with him. It's usually when I want a nice recovery run. I just let him go and follow him around, walking when he wanted to walk. I told him a few times that he was going too fast. I could tell because he could barely talk to me. Anyway, one day I decided to do an experiment. I told him that he was going to follow me. So we went around quite a bit slower than we would had he led. Guess what .... he made it around without walking. It ended up taking longer than he had been taking even with the walk breaks, but he made it. So he didn't need a watch, or an HRM, or any gadget (I had my Garmin, but did not use it to monitor pace). He did it with just a pacer. The first thing he said to me is, "Now I have to make it by myself". Well, he went the next weekend and did just that. So, in one run with someone pacing him, he learned how to slow down.

Well, I dunno if you'd like what you call "my world" that much. From what you've posted, I think it would make you itchy and bored. And yes, what Nobby posted is different from what I posted. This is ok. Nobby is a far better runner than I am, and based on what I've seen an orders-of-magnitude better coach and mentor than me. I'm very ok with this. I have a different perspective gained from the type of person who has come to me for help. It's a big world

Oh, I don't know about that! ;o) I was doing some step running with one of the girls I'm coaching last night. The other one said she wanted to join. I actually told her that I prefer her not because I didn't think she was quite ready and this might "invited injury". My Achilles was so sore that, this morning, I couldn't even walk! Here' an injured coach telling his runner to be careful because it "might invite injury"... Convincing, isn't it!? Well, at least I always tell them to "do as I tell you; not as I do!" For MDRA (Minnesota Disatnce Running Association), I've done coaching for Beginning Women Running Class in the past 4 years. We usually have about 40~5o "students", and we're talking about majority being 10~15 minutes for one mile! Just ONE mile. We do a mile "time check" in the first week and the 8th and final week. Sure, we lose some of them; but for those who completed the course, in the past 4 years, 100% of them improved. It is quite exciting. But, of course, I always don't forget to point out that it's got NOTHING to do with coaching; if you haven't done anything and get out and run a mile; then you started to do SOMETHING, 8 weeks later you WILL improve! ;o) I'm against numbers. But when you have 40+ people with varing ability, you've got to come up with SOMETHING to keep them motivated, something measurable, some reference point. Checking your resting HR is actually a very good indication of your fitness level... One lady once asked me about treadmill running. She said she was discouraged that her "pace" was actually slower than, say, a few weeks earlier and she feels more tired... I tried to figure out and asked a few questions. It turned out she was running twice as long as before (30 minutes vs. 15)! Well! I actually told them, IF they run on treadmill, the trick number that they should do is to put the towell over and voer the meter so you have no idea how far or how fast or how long they are running! Go by how you feel. You've GOT to learn to listen to your "Inner Coach". In fact, if you miss that out in the very beginning, it will be hell of a harder work later on to regain that sense. It is even more important in the very beginning to learn this discipline than later.

I have a buddy that took up running almost a year ago. He goes up and runs trails around a reservoir nearby. It's a little under 7 miles. His goal was to make it around without taking a walk break. Every now and then I go up with him. It's usually when I want a nice recovery run. I just let him go and follow him around, walking when he wanted to walk. I told him a few times that he was going too fast. I could tell because he could barely talk to me. Anyway, one day I decided to do an experiment. I told him that he was going to follow me. So we went around quite a bit slower than we would had he led. Guess what .... he made it around without walking. It ended up taking longer than he had been taking even with the walk breaks, but he made it. So he didn't need a watch, or an HRM, or any gadget (I had my Garmin, but did not use it to monitor pace). He did it with just a pacer. The first thing he said to me is, "Now I have to make it by myself". Well, he went the next weekend and did just that. So, in one run with someone pacing him, he learned how to slow down.

I did the exact same thing with a friend of mine who was basically killing himself. He'd been running 3 miles @ 9:00/per and I took him on about a 4 mile run that took about 45 to 50 minutes. When we were done I asked him how he felt and he said he felt great. Then he asked how far we'd gone and I told him and I could see him doing the math in his head and he asked me, "Why the hell did we run so slow?"