Forums >General Running>AHR / Speed as fitness indicator
Evolving body parts
Okay, I remember doing MAF tests on a track a while back. Then again, you can't have the same conditions for these tests either.
I'd even suggest that focusing too much on outside numbers can prolong the perceived effort learning curve.
+1, I got my first GPS/HRM watch for this fall since I was planning on doing more road workouts now that I'm out of college. All the extra data did was confirm everything that I was "feeling" from perceived effort. i.e. I picked up this portion of a run, I was working extra hard to hit this interval etc.
I guess what I'm trying to say is if you practice listening to your body, you can get all the feedback you need, and like in education, that data is more useful if you can figure it out yourself, rather than having something/someone tell you. (Yes it does take a while to learn how to listen)
Know thyself.
I too don't run many races as my Saturdays and many Sunday mornings are not available as long as the kids are swimming (which is the foreseeable future). In this case I think, learning perceived effort and seeing if I am getting better at the said effort is more valuable since I don't have that feedback from the best fitness predictor out there - which is races.
One reason my PR's are stuck for the past 3 years is because I have not run many races during this period.
Used a HRM for a while this summer as the running was feeling extra labored even on short 4 mile runs and wanted to see if I really lost that much fitness in the two months I took off. Once confirmed that my HR is not much higher, but the perceived effort was definitely higher maybe due to the time off or the July temps or whatever, I stopped using the HRM as I am lazy and searching for the equipment is a chore I don't want to be bothered with , but can totally understand how someone can be motivated by seeing extra data.
Sultan of slug
Time to throw another wrench in your gears: Heart rate varies tremendously throughout the day, even given a constant effort:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/health/nutrition/10best.html?pagewanted=all
Time to throw another wrench in your gears: Heart rate varies tremendously throughout the day, even given a constant effort: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/health/nutrition/10best.html?pagewanted=all
Very interesting. So those late evening workouts on the treadmill at the house where I've been thinking that my treadmill speed must be off because my HR is lower than it should be for the pace that I'm running might actually be accurate? I have it set to 2% incline and it still seems that the pace is about 15 or 20 seconds faster than it should be based on my HR.
I can't remember ever running on my treadmill in the mornings with a HRM for comparison. I might have to do that this weekend just for giggles.
Looking back on when I kept my chart I'm not sure I can reach any conclusions based on this because typically it is much cooler in the mornings and much warmer in the evenings so that could have something to do with it as well.
Age: 50 Weight: 224 Height: 6'3" (Goal weight 195)
Current PR's: Mara 3:14:36* (2017); HM 1:36:13 (2017); 10K 43:59 (2014); 5K 21:12 (2016)
I was a big HR-analyzer for the first two years of my life as a runner. I also don't race very often, so I was using MAF tests to pick race speeds. The results for this were okay for longer races like the marathon, and way, way off for shorter races like the 5K.
Since ditching it, and often running with just a Timex instead of a GPS watch, I've really, really gotten better at this whole "run by feel" thing. I thought the people who didn't like HR monitors were nuts for a long time. Now, I can't imagine wanting/needing something else to tell me how hard or easy a run was.
Interestingly, too, my average "easy pace" has stayed about the same, and maybe even slowed a little, since I don't try to hit a certain minimum HR, but my race times have improved significantly. I picked my last race's goal time based on how I was hitting workouts and how they felt. It was the best race I've had yet--both by time and feel throughout.
"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
Fair enough, guys. Honestly, most of the time the data should and are in sync with what I feel how well or bad I am doing. But it's nice to put a number to it.
I guess a hobby runner like me without a coach relies on trial & error, internet wisdom and these simplistic pseudo sciectific experiments. In the mean time I do enjoy running a lot, don't worry
As a fellow hobby runner without a coach, that's all that matters in the end.
I can just relate to this grappling and have found more enjoyment now that I look to myself for how a run went rather than my watch. But if you like analyzing numbers--by all means, do so.
Fair enough, guys. Honestly, most of the time the data should and are in sync with what I feel how well or bad I am doing. But it's nice to put a number to it. I guess a hobby runner like me without a coach relies on trial & error, internet wisdom and these simplistic pseudo sciectific experiments. In the mean time I do enjoy running a lot, don't worry
Of course, if you run inline, heel-strike, and don't swing your arms, i.e., mimic a tyrannosaurus rex, ostrich, cat, or load-carrying Kenyan woman, your heart-rate will instantly drop by 20%* *Sport Jester reference for those who didn't get it
Of course, if you run inline, heel-strike, and don't swing your arms, i.e., mimic a tyrannosaurus rex, ostrich, cat, or load-carrying Kenyan woman, your heart-rate will instantly drop by 20%*
*Sport Jester reference for those who didn't get it
Actually, I thought about running as inefficiently as possible and then running my "normal" way and see if there were any differences In HR. I haven't had a chance to try it. My gut feeling is that I won't see a 20% worsening by running inefficiently.
Oh, I almost forgot:
RA is actually a great and simple tool to monitor the HR/speed or pace relationship. I have a weekly report of the runs (you could certainly filter for a specific type or a distance range), then the list shows the AHR ang average speed for the week. It nicely averages out the differences in the runs and you get an idea of the trend.
You can do this as a monthly report, too, but the temperature then has a larger effect.
Now if only Eric would add compound or calculated fields to the reports ... We're talking geek heaven.