Adding hill repeats (Read 916 times)

nothing major, the largest is an 800 yard-long section that climbs maybe 300 - 400ft

This does not sound insignificant, to me. By my calcs (not sure if they're right), that's around a 13% grade. MTA: this helps me: http://www.runningahead.com/forums/post/ea498a257d23446d93fb41c5d8619fb6#focus

the largest is an 800 yard-long section that climbs maybe 300 - 400ft

400/(800 x 3) = 0.167 = 16.7% grade.

Grade is just rise / run, converted to %. So your hill may be about 12 % (300/2400ft) if estimates are accurate. If you're using an online source, like mapmyrun or whatever, a lot depending on accuracy and scale of the underlying elevation model. Where I am in Alaska, it's really bad = useless for rolling hills. I was looking at someone else's elevation profile (mapmyrun, maybe, but don't remember) the other day, and it had a really boxy look to it (artifacts of the model), but her hills were smaller than yours. (Most hills that I worry about these days, I can get a first cut from a topo map, then refine the data with a gps with barometric altimeter after I run it.) But for hill workouts, what you probably want to worry about is how it feels. Assuming you're doing the hill workouts for speed, as opposed to matching some race topography or mostly leg strength, I'd find something that I can run up where I can focus on some forward motion rather than upward. For me, it tends to be near 5-8% give or take a bit. When I get much above 10% (like in the 20-30% range like my rolling hills and some of the mtn trails), then form is sufficiently altered and it's too much resistance for me for that type workout. The steeper hills emphasize strength, and the more gradual ones emphasize speed. For length of hill for what I normally do, I usually like something in the 2-10 min range. Higher intensity stuff I'd probably do on a 30-45 sec hill (I'm at gasping stage at 45 sec on a long staircase, no matter how slow I run.) Longer stuff can be over 1 hr, but that's not the type workout you're looking for. Or you can use something like Lydiard hill drills. Oh, and definitely do not trust Forerunners (at least the 305) for hill data. They are notoriously bad. It's amusing to see it generate a hill in the middle of a flat trail. Handheld garmins with barometric altimeters give better results.

That's probably more than you want in a hill repeat session, but it will toughen you up though! You most likely will never encounter such a grade in a race, so best to train for what you will!

Perhaps in road races, but not too unusual in trail races, esp. mtn races.

Most mapping tools measure the ground surface at 1/10 mile increments, so you don't have the resolution to determine this. Garmin and Motionbased does a better job in that it has a higher resolution. But you need to make sure that for this type of measurement you have the MB Gravity Service turned off. The Gravity Service tries to correct the elevation based on USGS reference data. This is useful for most runs, but not for this. RA will ultimately have higher resolution.

But what I've learned from experienced trail racers, these would definitely be the ones you'd walk, not run.

Depends on length of race, size of hill, and experience of the runner. Yes, in ultras, most people would be hiking them. The experienced mtn runners will run up 15+% extended hills in shorter races. But our local ones have 30% mtns to train on. Notice I said "experienced". Some of the shorter races will have rollers or even 700 ft hills that are 15+%. Rollers can be 30% or so. But even the experienced ones hike the 50% slopes in a "5k" (3000 ft of up in 1 mi). I had an early start on one of our races, and the lead runners were reaching the top (3000ft in 4 mi, steeper at the top end) about the same time I was - and they were running - maybe not fast, but they were running. Those guys are awesome.

AKTrail - that's not a bad idea, I think I've got a large protractor somewhere. At least I'd get an idea of what a particular grade looks like by eye, that's more than adequate for my purposes. Trent - thanks for pointing out the RA elevation feature. Naturally, it's not working this morning At any rate, there aren't too many hills around here, so I have to take what I can get. Note the elevation profile of our local marathon, which, incidentally, is the first annual this year! Anyone looking for a fast course? http://www.trailof2cities.com/2008course.html Arla