Soldato
Seems sensible.
If you go at a middle pace between your run and walk, how does that affect your HR?
If you go at a middle pace between your run and walk, how does that affect your HR?
Platypus' Beginners Guide to Running
- Thread starter platypus
- Start date
Caporegime
Dunno, that'll be something I'll be doing next Monday when it's the 25 minute non-stop session.
Picked these up from Footlocker for little over £105, Ultraboost '20.
They actually sent 1/2 size bigger but the fit is good. Unsurprisingly worlds apart even just walking around the house from the bog standard Cloudfoam fashion trainers.
Will remember to wear my HRM this time and aim to knockout 10km in around 50 minutes after work this evening. Have found it interesting how high my HR is in comparison to cycling, straight in to Z5 more or less which is likely down to a lack of conditioning but also using more musculature.
Hoping today is a little easier on the calves & shins.
They actually sent 1/2 size bigger but the fit is good. Unsurprisingly worlds apart even just walking around the house from the bog standard Cloudfoam fashion trainers.
Will remember to wear my HRM this time and aim to knockout 10km in around 50 minutes after work this evening. Have found it interesting how high my HR is in comparison to cycling, straight in to Z5 more or less which is likely down to a lack of conditioning but also using more musculature.
Hoping today is a little easier on the calves & shins.
Soldato
Hang on - Zone 5 HR, i.e. 90-100% of your max HR, i.e. MAX effort?
Might just be me, but that's not a healthy HR to be in when running for anything longer than a few minutes - pre-existing cycling fitness or not...
I'm running 5k in sub-26 minutes, and did my first 10k trail run in just over an hour the other day (started C25K in December, had pre-existing MTB fitness), and my HR for the PB 5k maxed at 171 at the end and average was 152. On my 10k run I was at 166 max and 151 average. My Max HR is 188. Pace on the 5k was 5:07 /km, and 6:11 /km for the 10k.
Also, if you're new to running, despite having good fitness from cycling, take it slow - you'll just overwork your ankles/calves/thighs and end up injuring yourself. Your body and muscles need to time to adapt to the new stresses on them.
one does have to carefully talking about HR zones. The standard has 3, but some people use 7, while 3 is likely the closest to a physiological mapping.
Also, very hard to get maxHR. resting HR is oK with a smart watch but hard to measure manually. And watch based optical HR is pure junk.
a true zone 5 effort will be super hard after about 2mins, near death after 3-4,max 5-6 minutes for most before you collapse.
Also, very hard to get maxHR. resting HR is oK with a smart watch but hard to measure manually. And watch based optical HR is pure junk.
a true zone 5 effort will be super hard after about 2mins, near death after 3-4,max 5-6 minutes for most before you collapse.
Might not have been clear that I was referring to Z5 cycling which probably correlates to Z4 running? I've no idea on what the usual % inefficiency of carry over is from cycling to running.
Nevertheless I sustained what would be Z6 on the bike for today's run for 50 minutes
so based on RPE I'd hazard a guess at 10%.HR is subjective though and the demands of cycling disciplines vary greatly: MTD, Road, TT etc all condition you differently aerobically along with the ability to tolerate lactate and maintain threshold output.
Absolutely agree & noted.
YOLO'ing it periodically in an unstructured fashion doesn't yield results. Sprint work and shorter duration runs right now appeal and are more enjoyable so will probably dable with those for a while.
Flat but tough enough. 49:57 10KM.
https://www.strava.com/activities/3272094251
HR is not subjective, which is why it is s useful training metric.
if you are new to running dont do any intervals for a few months unless you want to get injured. If you really enjoy high intensity then do hill repeats - find a big steep hill and rub up as fast as you can, walk or jog back down slowly.
if you are new to running dont do any intervals for a few months unless you want to get injured. If you really enjoy high intensity then do hill repeats - find a big steep hill and rub up as fast as you can, walk or jog back down slowly.
Sorry but HR is entirely subjective and is not an absolute measure of effort. If you want an objective measure of effort - use power. Lack of sleep, stress and illness will all impact HR at a constant intensity and I have witnessed this first hand on the bike both out on the road and on the turbo.
HR zones and max BPM varies between individuals, which doesn't mean than one person is working harder than the other just because the absolute BPM is higher. Without applying a % of max or zones it's pointless.
Not looking to rock the boat but classifying HR as not being subjective I can't agree with
Soldato
Well I can see that you've got a fair few cycling miles under your belt... 
I'm guessing the fitness you're bringing to running is far in excess of most people who start running.
Just out of interest, what is your max heart rate? An average of 179bpm over 10k makes me go weak just at the thought of it!
I would still say to go steady on the running as it'll be using muscles you never use on the bike, pay attention to your body and don't overwork it
I'm guessing the fitness you're bringing to running is far in excess of most people who start running.Just out of interest, what is your max heart rate? An average of 179bpm over 10k makes me go weak just at the thought of it!
I would still say to go steady on the running as it'll be using muscles you never use on the bike, pay attention to your body and don't overwork it
lack of sleep, stress and illness are not subjective and are critical in determining the training stress. If you sick and you HR is higher then that id an objective measurement that your working harder.
BPM varies between people which is exactly why you normalize it based on heart rate reserve.
power is meaningless because people weigh different amounts and the effort required to work at a specific power will depend on muscle fatigue, oxygen levels in atmosphere (important at altitude), temperature, sleep, sickness. Power ignores all the objective differences that are important to running. HR incorporated many of the factors that dictate the difficulty of a run.
This is why power meters for running are almost never used because it is too far removed from the objective difficulty of running.
If it hot, you have to run at a slower pace to maintain a correct HR. If you tried to maintain power your effort level could increase exponentially and very soon you could be in a very bad state. By following HR you can normalize efforts between training and compare efforts across different weather/seasons.
Moreover, your HR at a specific pace is the singles biggest predictor of run performance - VO2max. Power has no such predictive powers at all
BPM varies between people which is exactly why you normalize it based on heart rate reserve.
power is meaningless because people weigh different amounts and the effort required to work at a specific power will depend on muscle fatigue, oxygen levels in atmosphere (important at altitude), temperature, sleep, sickness. Power ignores all the objective differences that are important to running. HR incorporated many of the factors that dictate the difficulty of a run.
This is why power meters for running are almost never used because it is too far removed from the objective difficulty of running.
If it hot, you have to run at a slower pace to maintain a correct HR. If you tried to maintain power your effort level could increase exponentially and very soon you could be in a very bad state. By following HR you can normalize efforts between training and compare efforts across different weather/seasons.
Moreover, your HR at a specific pace is the singles biggest predictor of run performance - VO2max. Power has no such predictive powers at all
he is the one that will get injured and proclaim how unhealthy running is, perpetrating the myth.Well I can see that you've got a fair few cycling miles under your belt...
Just out of interest, what is your max heart rate? An average of 179bpm over 10k makes me go weak just at the thought of it!
I would still say to go steady on the running as it'll be using muscles you never use on the bike, pay attention to your body and don't overwork it
Soldato
True, I use the 5 zone method where zone 5 for me is 97-100% of my MaxHR of 188 which as you say, would result in me collapsing after about 2-3 minutes, if I'm lucky!
I use a HR strap for running and a garmin optical sensor for normal day to day stuff, seems to be a decent combination.
We might disagree but I would hope you not think I'm that ignorant to be as stupid as somebody who has done no weight bearing exercise in two decades, decides to run a 5km with little to no training, acquires injury and then proclaims that running is dangerous and unhealthy
Well I can see that you've got a fair few cycling miles under your belt...
Just out of interest, what is your max heart rate? An average of 179bpm over 10k makes me go weak just at the thought of it!
I would still say to go steady on the running as it'll be using muscles you never use on the bike, pay attention to your body and don't overwork it
Max HR during a crit was 186bpm, my last 10m TT averaged 172bpm over 25 minutes and peaked at 182bpm. I've witnessed 10% drops in power (and corresponding HR drift) moving from a traditional road bike setup to TT/Tri positioning for a few weeks before narrowing with efficiencies in the new position to be able to sustain road power in TT position which is quite hard to do.
Would hazard a guess that my max running HR is somewhere around 200bpm.
I just don't compare my HR to anybody elses because I've seen such massive variance within the cycling community. With people who quite literally can't get over 150-160bpm to those in excess of 200bpm. That said I don't discount that as a generalisation you might find value in evaluating how hard an effort could be for someone from it but really without knowing max it's a little misguided.
Ta, I've been under-recovered on a few occasions cycling so I'm familiar with when to ease up
one big difference between cycling and running is economy. If you cycle at 200w then you are no faster/slower than a pro cyclist at 200w (if you can keep the same aerodynamics) .
in running, running at the same power can give wildly different run performance because run economy is incredibly important. Runners can have vastly different cardio vascular fitness levels but very different performance due to economy.
Running economy is best measured as heart rate and pace. The most important way to increase economy is simply lots and lots of easy running.
in running, running at the same power can give wildly different run performance because run economy is incredibly important. Runners can have vastly different cardio vascular fitness levels but very different performance due to economy.
Running economy is best measured as heart rate and pace. The most important way to increase economy is simply lots and lots of easy running.
HR training works for running really well (and before power meters became cheap for cycling as well) , sure you will get very good amatures/pros who know their bodies very well, but if you want to improve over a period of time with specific goals then personally i think its the only way to train for those with busy lives, Quality over quantity and while its perfectly possible to run and improve without one, HRM training will just result in better quality training.
I cant recommend it enough really, my pace has improved so much while maintaining zone 2 workout (I use 7 zones and follow a 80/20 Triathlon program) and quite happily do a 10k in under 60mins without going out this zone.
Seriously though, pick up a cheap HRM and strap for £50 maybe even cheaper if you get secondhand watch and get started using HRM to improve more efficiently over the long term. Just be mindful to see the benefit you will still need to put the time it will not make things happen overnight but more like 2-3 months and it is really frustrating for 6 weeks as you will just want to go and i was constantly having to hold back.
I am a big believer in it especially now that i am older and need to be more sensible with my training. It takes longer to recover from injury when pushing 49, and have a fair amount of cycling/swimming along side the running. (well less swimming atm of course) ,Its just worked for me and i highly recommend the 80/20 series of training programs/ books to go along with it as well,
Word of warning wrist based HR is shockingly bad when running, get a strap
I cant recommend it enough really, my pace has improved so much while maintaining zone 2 workout (I use 7 zones and follow a 80/20 Triathlon program) and quite happily do a 10k in under 60mins without going out this zone.
Seriously though, pick up a cheap HRM and strap for £50 maybe even cheaper if you get secondhand watch and get started using HRM to improve more efficiently over the long term. Just be mindful to see the benefit you will still need to put the time it will not make things happen overnight but more like 2-3 months and it is really frustrating for 6 weeks as you will just want to go and i was constantly having to hold back.
I am a big believer in it especially now that i am older and need to be more sensible with my training. It takes longer to recover from injury when pushing 49, and have a fair amount of cycling/swimming along side the running. (well less swimming atm of course) ,Its just worked for me and i highly recommend the 80/20 series of training programs/ books to go along with it as well,
Word of warning wrist based HR is shockingly bad when running, get a strap
The highest I ever get my HR running is about 176 but doing Crossfit or blasting on the air bike I can see 192-194 for a very short period of time.
When running if I can keep my HR at 170 or below I feel like I can carry on almost indefinitely. Once I see about 172 on my watch I feel like I need to back off.
Does that just mean I have a mental block?
When running if I can keep my HR at 170 or below I feel like I can carry on almost indefinitely. Once I see about 172 on my watch I feel like I need to back off.
Does that just mean I have a mental block?
Heart rate is age dependent for starters and if you are using a watch then its wrong, they cant cope when exercise kicks in.
If i run with my HRM strap on at my nice and steady pace of 125-132 bpm which is around a 6/10 perceived effort the same effort and using the wrist heart-rate registers at 150-160, it just doesn't work well at all
So no you do not have a mental block just bad DATA
If i run with my HRM strap on at my nice and steady pace of 125-132 bpm which is around a 6/10 perceived effort the same effort and using the wrist heart-rate registers at 150-160, it just doesn't work well at all
So no you do not have a mental block just bad DATA
Caporegime
Interesting stuff. I have managed to borrow my sister's Polar chest strap which is ancient as it comes with its own watch rather than any Bluetooth functionality. Going to wear it tomorrow and check to see what it says compared to the Garmin watch.