Low HR Training

12

First LHR Long Run. (Read 638 times)


Future running partner.

    I've been running without a HRM for a long time (w/ exception of treadmill). I bought a Garmin 305 last week. Tried my usual, what I consider an easy 3.5 mile run last week. G305 registered and avg. pace of 10:11, avg. HR of 155 and high HR of 169. Tuesday, I do a 135min run with the goal of keeping my HR below 144. This was really hard. Even the slightest incline would cause my HR to go over. On down hills my HR would drop to about 136. Once I reached about 90min of running it was impossible to keep my HR below 144 at all, but I still managed to keep it around 150 toward the end. My avg. pace went way way down to a 12:25/mile. My avg. HR rate was 146. Here is how I felt. During the run I felt if I walked every time my HR went over, that I would have spent most of my workout walking. I felt like I was forcefully trying to run slow. After about 7-8 miles, I still felt very fresh. Then I started noticing some fatigue that I am not used to. Toward the end of the run I felt like it was more tiring to run slower than to pick up the pace a bit. When I finished, I was breathing normally, but my legs where really tired. Two weeks prior I did another 135min run and completed 13.75 miles. I was actually way more tired after this LHR version then my faster paced run 2 weeks ago. WEIRD! Confused The good thing was, not including the 15min of warming up; my run only decoupled 6% from 15min to 135min. Yesterday I did a 5 mile run. My avg. hr was much lower 138 and it was much easier to keep it below 144. Also my pace was quite a bit faster 11:54/mile. I still felt like I was forcing a slow run however. This morning I did a 3.5 mile run. I forgot the HRM, but I still managed to keep the pace to around 12:25. Finally, I felt natural at this pace, and wasn't forcing it. My legs are sore this week in different places then usual. Anyway, I thought this experience was interesting and would like to know what other’s thoughts and experiences are on starting LHRT.
      My experience was very similar. Before doing MAF, my stride felt much more fluid and running felt easier. When I started MAF, my stride felt choppy and inefficient and my legs felt weak and unsteady. I hardly breathed, and hardly sweated. It did not feel taxing at all, except for my legs. They were completely fatigued at the end. It was strange to not feel fatigued at all otherwise. I first attributed the fatigue that I felt in my legs to the fact I was probably using different muscles to go slower. But then thought maybe I was working the slow twitch muscles more, and they were fatiguing? Sort of like when you do weight lifting and try to isolate certain muscles. Maybe I was isolating the endurance muscle fibers more? This was six months ago. I now have about 450 miles under my belt most under MAF, and I do not get that feeling any more. I can't quite pinpoint when I no longer noticed it. Improvement or change is so gradual with MAF, it is sometimes hard to pinpoint when things change at all.


      My Hero

        Although I haven't officially started LHR training, I have tried off an on (by feel) to see what would happen by slowing down the pace. I have this 10 mile loop that I run in the 8:45-9:00 min. per mile pace which is a hair faster than I normally do my longer (than 10) runs in. One day I did this 10 mile run in 11:30's. Just like you and run48, my legs felt like toast at the end of the run. The next day however, I experienced a soreness in my legs that felt like I had run too many intervals! I thought this was rather strange... Perhaps someone can provide a technical explanation to this?


        run-easy-race-hard

          important to have a feel what's going on: temperature dewpoint weight before and after run amount of fluid in run
            I did felt the same thing when I started MAFfing. My conclusion then was that the soreness was caused by the fact that the weight of my body stayed longer on my supportive leg then before (slower pace, thus lower cadence). You can try to increase your cadence up to your previous normal rate by shortening your stride, thus your legs are moving as fast as before you started MAF but your pace is slower. I would not mind about the soreness. It will disappear after few months.
              MAF forces you too use your slow-twitch muscle fibers, and this will cause soreness and fatigue at points where you didn't feel it before when you were running in sugar-burning zones all the time. The soreness and the feeling that you are "running weird" goes away, and eventually you will be back to the same paces at which you used to train, but using sumptuous, eternal fat and at a much lower level of exertion and stress. If you're going to play the MAF game, I suggest you walk if you can't keep your HR down. If you can't stay under MAF with just running, then your aerobic system is in sorry shape. Walk until your HR gets back down to MAF -10 to -15, then start running again. This won't hurt you, though you may not enjoy it. But if you want to maximize the MAF base training, it's important to stick to the rules. Personally, I have run as slow as 14:00-15:00 at the end of hot weather long runs. TINY STEPS! Still running. Keep going! --Jimmy


              My Hero

                I would not mind about the soreness. It will disappear after few months.
                A few months? Shocked jimmyb - I certainly wouldn't have a problem walking if that was what it would take to do a proper and correct MAF cycle. In fact, if that were the case, would mean I have a lot of progress ahead of me Big grin but I really don't know where I'm at until I can get an HRM. I know I have a certain level of aerobic fitness, but I do know that as in the Hadd article, haven't squeezed the tube of toothpaste from the bottom but somewhere in the middle.
                  My legs were real sore after my first MAF run, esp. the outside on my hips and down. I am in my third month and still have slight soreness after long runs, but my 3 - 7 milers are fine. Keep at it, it works.


                  Future running partner.

                    I am actually trying to aim for MAF-3 right now. That first run was pretty tough, but the 2 since then have felt much smoother. I have had greater success at keeping the HR even lower. So it looks like the transition into this kind of training should be fairly quick. Like many of you said, I think the tiredness I felt after that first run was do to a different kind of stimulus than I am used to ( a la fat burn metabolics ). I think the soreness that occurred the days after was do to more emphasis on different muscles that occurred by running slower. My soreness seemed to be isolated more to my rear and my quads just above my knee. Before, soreness would occur higher on my quads and in my calves. I am actually combining some ideas from Hadd, Joe Friel and Gordo for my base training, which incidentally has me starting off running sub MAF. I ran an LT test and discovered my LT is roughly 179. Gordo suggests that Aerobic Threshold (AeT) is somewhere around 80 to 90% of this or Friel zone 2. The actual AeT varies between athletes and can have to do with level of conditioning. Since I am not sure where I fall, I am starting at the bottom (80%). Periodically on long runs of 2hrs+, when weather is good, I'll do a decoupling test suggested by Friel. If after 2hrs of running Pace/HR delta is less than 5%, then I will start running at a slightly higher effort similar to how Hadd has his athlete slowly increase workout intensity over the course of his athletes marathon training. Ill attempt to add on 5bpm each time decoupling is < 5%.="" once="" i="" get="" to="" about="" 90%="" of="" lt="" and="" decoupling="" at="" that="" effort="" is="" /><5% again, then my base training will be complete and i will start working on the other factors. again,="" then="" my="" base="" training="" will="" be="" complete="" and="" i="" will="" start="" working="" on="" the="" other=""></5% again, then my base training will be complete and i will start working on the other factors.>
                    GMoney


                      Hadd has an interesting take on your experience in Part III of "Hadd's Approach to Distance Training". Look at it here www.electricblues.com/Hadd.doc As I understand Hadd's thought, unless you're regularly running at aerobic levels you aren't really training your slow twitch muscle fibers (or you're just overwhelming them by running at speeds they alone can't support). As a result, he says, when you force your body to rely on them to the near exclusion of other muscle fibers by doing slow speed running you find you're comparatively untrained. I'm not a physiologist, but I think there's at least some truth to this. However, I'm inclined to think that there are other factors at play as well. For instance, you might have to retrain your stride a little to run at lower speeds, oryour brain might have to learn (or relearn) different muscle activation patterns associated with slower running. If your stride feels awkward or forced, then you may also be placing more stress on your connective tissues, fascia, and other soft tissues which could lead to soreness. Any of these could result in you experiencing more fatigue in your legs after a slow run. The good news from Hadd (at then end of Part III) is that after 10 weeks of his version of LHR training he was feeling and running a ton better.
                        . If after 2hrs of running Pace/HR delta is less than 5%
                        I suppose I could Google this to find out, but what does that mean? Less than 5% of what? Can you provide a hypothetical example? Thanks.


                        Future running partner.

                          I suppose I could Google this to find out, but what does that mean? Less than 5% of what? Can you provide a hypothetical example? Thanks.
                          Here is an article all that will explain it well. http://www2.trainingbible.com/pdf/AeT_Training.pdf THe WKO+ software on TrainingPeaks.com calculates this for you.
                            Here is an article all that will explain it well. http://www2.trainingbible.com/pdf/AeT_Training.pdf THe WKO+ software on TrainingPeaks.com calculates this for you.
                            Interesting. Is there a way to calculate it without paying 99 bucks for the software?


                            Future running partner.

                              Yes. Split your run in half, by time or distance. If you split your run by time: For each half divide avg HR into distance (distance/avg HR). Then subtract the first half quotient from the second half quotient. Then divide the difference by the first half quotient and you will get a percentage. If you split it by distance you can use time/avg HR. The difference is your answer will likely be a negative number, unless your aerobic fitness is that extremely high. A couple flaws with this. 1. Heat and high humidity can cause the percentage to be high, due to cardiac creep. 2. Try to run on a flat course or run 2 loops around the same course. If one half has more uphill then the other this can screw up results. 3. The warmup can cause the results to be higher. In WKO+, on a 2 hr+ run, if I counted the first 15min I got over 8% decoupling. By not includeing the first 15min, it was only a little over 6%. I am trying to find out if the 5% allowance is to account for warmup, some creep or both.
                                Yes. Split your run in half, by time or distance. If you split your run by time: For each half divide avg HR into distance (distance/avg HR). Then subtract the first half quotient from the second half quotient. Then divide the difference by the first half quotient and you will get a percentage. If you split it by distance you can use time/avg HR. The difference is your answer will likely be a negative number, unless your aerobic fitness is that extremely high. A couple flaws with this. 1. Heat and high humidity can cause the percentage to be high, due to cardiac creep. 2. Try to run on a flat course or run 2 loops around the same course. If one half has more uphill then the other this can screw up results. 3. The warmup can cause the results to be higher. In WKO+, on a 2 hr+ run, if I counted the first 15min I got over 8% decoupling. By not includeing the first 15min, it was only a little over 6%. I am trying to find out if the 5% allowance is to account for warmup, some creep or both.
                                OK, I tried this on my 20 miles long run today. For the first half (timewise). I did 9.88 miles AHR 133.5. Second half 10.12 miles AHR 141. So did the above magic calculation and got I think 3.02%. What does that mean? I guess that's good? Is it 100 * (9.88/133.5 - 10.12/141) / (9.88/133.5)
                                12