Platypus' Beginners Guide to Running

Blackvault said:
I guess my resting heart rate can vary while watching TV. It can be anything from mid 50s to mid 60s. Typically my resting heart rate thats calculated is around mid 60s. Personally I think the GPs assessment was wrong. I went to see a cardiologist and they suggested a whole battery of tests to check out my heart but to go back to the GP given that he felt the GP had brushed me off. I went back to the GP and suggested these tests and their advice was to go privately and send close to a grand on it. This was probably 1.5-2 years ago and I've not seen that much of a difference in getting fitter and for the HR improving and just accepted I have to run slow and have a high HR.
Click to expand...

That's a shame about your GP, it's disappointing to be dismissed like that, especially if i specialist has suggested them. Out of interest how does the chest strap report on occasions when you're truly smashing it?

JustBen said:
Anyone tried the puma velocity nitro trainers?
Seem to be well priced and look pretty good. Need something a bit softer on the heel than my brooks vapour 4.
Also tempted by the nike pegasus 4.
I think for looks the saucony endorphin shift look great

I was originally going to grab the hoka mach 4 but then got put off by the wear on the sole
Click to expand...

I didn't actually realise Puma made running trainers, i've never really seen them whenever i've been looking. I quite like reviews on RunRepeat to try and get a base impression of trainers.





Was checking out some of the premium features on Strava and turns out it doesn't think much of my current fitness! The two red circles are from when i did the Manchester Marathon and then a half marathon a few months later. I doubt my fitness spiked that much so i'm not putting too much into the graph, but it does highlight areas where i believe i was in a "peak"

Jan to April 2020 i was really working on fitness and losing weight so can see why that builds up

Then May was my birthday and i dropped off a bit, then got back to some long distance running towards the end of June

In August the 3 Towers Ultra was cancelled and i lost motivation for some of the longer runs i was doing.

December i then ramped up with motivation ready for an Ultra in February and then January i beat my HM personal record before being plagued with loads of little injuries which leads me to now!

rbvayBX.png
 
JustBen said:
Anyone tried the puma velocity nitro trainers?
Seem to be well priced and look pretty good. Need something a bit softer on the heel than my brooks vapour 4.
Also tempted by the nike pegasus 4.
I think for looks the saucony endorphin shift look great

I was originally going to grab the hoka mach 4 but then got put off by the wear on the sole
Click to expand...
I've not tried the Puma velocity nitro but recently got the Reebok energy floatride 3 for £60 and have been seriously impressed. It's basically an Adidas boost foam based daily shoe but a lot lighter and cheaper than any of the Adidas branded shoes. It's soft and bouncy and quite a fun shoe.

I assume you mean the Nike pegasus 37 or 38? They both have the same midsole and I've done about 700 miles in the pegasus 37. It's a reliable all rounder but maybe a bit heavy and lifeless. It's also not that exciting and look a long while for me to get comfortable with it (about 100 miles). I've now replaced it with the Reebok shoe and definitely do not regret it.

The Hoka mach 4 is more of a speed work shoe, hence the high wear on the sole as it's built for lightness/speed. If you're specifically after a Hoka than the Clifton 7 is their neutral daily shoe, but I don't actually find Hoka's EVA midsole to be all that soft. It's comparable to the softness of the Brooks midsole for me.

Do keep in mind though that your brooks vapor 4 is a stability shoe, not a neutral shoe like all the ones mentioned above.
 
The fitness & freshness feature in Strava is a bit of a joke. It's based upon your relative effort metric so just encourages you to do loads of intense training. Weekly mileage is a better metric to base your fitness from.
 
dwarf said:
The fitness & freshness feature in Strava is a bit of a joke. It's based upon your relative effort metric so just encourages you to do loads of intense training. Weekly mileage is a better metric to base your fitness from.
Click to expand...

Yeah, weekly mileage also looks pretty poor in graph form :p. Oddly enough Garmin seems to have my VO2 max as not dropping too considerably which is probably a better mark of fitness, but that doesn't make sense as i'm certainly struggling a lot when i get to the end of short runs that should be very easy.

The Strava stuff is weird, some parts are useful, but then other things that you'd want to see are really difficult to find or not available at all.

What's actually quite interesting though is that if i look at monthly mileage, even feeling like i was barely running, i still did 69 miles in March and 45 in April. Whilst being a far cry from the >100 i was doing most months in 2020, it's still 10-15 a week and more than most people. I'm also on track for my first >20 mile week for the first time since the 20th Feb when i did that 28 mile run which skewed that particularly week.

Have also signed up for a gym with the intention to try and nail some long rower/bike workouts to try and build my cardio fitness back up without hammering my ankles. Although this morning i woke up at 6am, then rolled back over and went to sleep. Only to then feel lazy when i heard my daughter getting up at 7 to go to her gym :(
 
dwarf said:
It's based upon your relative effort metric so just encourages you to do loads of intense training.
Click to expand...

That's not my experience with it, although I do cycle more than I run. My bigger RE's are always the longer efforts. Yes, if your heart rate doesn't go over 100, it wont raise much of an RE, but generally it seems to work out quite well if I've been putting effort in and for how long.

For example, looking at the last couple of weeks, I have some reasonably intense 48 minute training sessions with RE's of 55, 23 and 57, then a couple of reasonably steady, if not leisurely, 40 mile outdoor rides of around 2½ hours scoring RE's of 110 and 121. I then have a 1 hour 20 outdoor ride, second fastest I've ever done, with an RE of 117. Then I have a hilly 4 hour ride that scored 287. I personally think that's a good mix of effort and time?
 
dwarf said:
I've not tried the Puma velocity nitro but recently got the Reebok energy floatride 3 for £60 and have been seriously impressed. It's basically an Adidas boost foam based daily shoe but a lot lighter and cheaper than any of the Adidas branded shoes. It's soft and bouncy and quite a fun shoe.

I assume you mean the Nike pegasus 37 or 38? They both have the same midsole and I've done about 700 miles in the pegasus 37. It's a reliable all rounder but maybe a bit heavy and lifeless. It's also not that exciting and look a long while for me to get comfortable with it (about 100 miles). I've now replaced it with the Reebok shoe and definitely do not regret it.

The Hoka mach 4 is more of a speed work shoe, hence the high wear on the sole as it's built for lightness/speed. If you're specifically after a Hoka than the Clifton 7 is their neutral daily shoe, but I don't actually find Hoka's EVA midsole to be all that soft. It's comparable to the softness of the Brooks midsole for me.

Do keep in mind though that your brooks vapor 4 is a stability shoe, not a neutral shoe like all the ones mentioned above.
Click to expand...

Yes i was looking at the pegasus 38, had a quick look in sports direct and they had some in but for the price i might as well get them in the colour variant i prefer if i get them.
I've been for a couple of runs in my Nike 270's as they're softer on the foot than the brooks, i can't imagine these are vary stable with the big air bubble around the back. The vapor i got fitted 2-3 years ago but my running has changed quite a bit. my stride for example used to be quite long but now i have what i'd describe as tiny little steps in comparison. Do tend to land a bit on my heel which maybe why i noticed the brooks vapor being hard, unless of course that's down to the couple of extra stone and the age of the shoe.

Looking at reviews is always interesting and in some cases confuse things. So.. Fordy runs has a review of the puma nitro and he really rates it,in the comments someone asks if they're alright for the heavier runner and he suggests Asics GlideRide 2 (doesn't say why though)
 
@Blackvault might be worth asking your GP to get a 2nd opinion or changing GP if you are concerned about it or feel they are ignoring your concerns.

Anyone else with a Garmin been having issues with GPS lately? My 645M the last week has lost signal after about 5 miles for all 4 of my runs this week. Prior to this it had happened once or twice but this is just ridiculous now especially when doing distance based intervals and it under estimating pace.
 
Itchytrigg said:
@Blackvault might be worth asking your GP to get a 2nd opinion or changing GP if you are concerned about it or feel they are ignoring your concerns.

Anyone else with a Garmin been having issues with GPS lately? My 645M the last week has lost signal after about 5 miles for all 4 of my runs this week. Prior to this it had happened once or twice but this is just ridiculous now especially when doing distance based intervals and it under estimating pace.
Click to expand...
I've got the same watch and it's been fine the last week.
 
JustBen said:
Anyone tried the puma velocity nitro trainers?
Seem to be well priced and look pretty good. Need something a bit softer on the heel than my brooks vapour 4.
Also tempted by the nike pegasus 4.
I think for looks the saucony endorphin shift look great

I was originally going to grab the hoka mach 4 but then got put off by the wear on the sole
Click to expand...

Got the Puma today I have been through loads of brands but never had Puma runners before went out for 6.5 miler in them and they are really nice, good cushioning I like the heel cushion with a nice spring.

Ive come from Adidas Ultraboost PB 20 as Adidas are generally my favs I couldnt get on with the Nike Peagsus range.
 
Is there any site that shows what shoe has replaced what? For example New Balance Beacon v3 doesn't seem available anywhere which suggests it's been superseded by another model but i cannot see anywhere what with :( I'm trying to get together a list of shoes to try out going of numerous reviews including those who have a rotation of a few shoes. I'm not one for always wanting the newest of things so for example Adidas Ultraboost 20 can be had for £80 as an easy/recovery run whereas the new ones are around £150
 
Out of interest, what would people say was the best cross training for running between cycling and rowing?

As well as some strength work to try and overcome injuries, i figure a few sessions at the gym on either of the above would be great to work on fitness without killing my ankles. Just not sure which one would be most beneficial.
 
JustBen said:
Fordy runs has a review of the puma nitro and he really rates it,in the comments someone asks if they're alright for the heavier runner and he suggests Asics GlideRide 2 (doesn't say why though)
Click to expand...

The GlideRide 2 is more for someone who wants a lot of rigidity in a shoe. It's got a lot of foam beneath your foot but it's not a plush or soft shoe. I can see why he would recommend it to a large runner as it's solidly built and the firmer foam will give you more stability and it will last for ages.

To me it's a bit of a strange shoe with a large rocker (sole curves up and the toe is way off the ground) but its had some good reviews. Definitely try it first as the rocker may not be what you are after at all.

Martynt74 said:
Out of interest, what would people say was the best cross training for running between cycling and rowing?

As well as some strength work to try and overcome injuries, i figure a few sessions at the gym on either of the above would be great to work on fitness without killing my ankles. Just not sure which one would be most beneficial.
Click to expand...

I always thought cross training is meant to compliment your main activity and utilise similar muscles. Cycling is more similar to running than rowing so I would say that it is better. Depends what you enjoy most though. If you hate cycling then rowing will be a better choice as you will do it more often.
 
AndyCr15 said:
That's not my experience with it, although I do cycle more than I run. My bigger RE's are always the longer efforts. Yes, if your heart rate doesn't go over 100, it wont raise much of an RE, but generally it seems to work out quite well if I've been putting effort in and for how long.

For example, looking at the last couple of weeks, I have some reasonably intense 48 minute training sessions with RE's of 55, 23 and 57, then a couple of reasonably steady, if not leisurely, 40 mile outdoor rides of around 2½ hours scoring RE's of 110 and 121. I then have a 1 hour 20 outdoor ride, second fastest I've ever done, with an RE of 117. Then I have a hilly 4 hour ride that scored 287. I personally think that's a good mix of effort and time?
Click to expand...

I think the relative effort stat is ok, it's how it's then incorporated into the fitness & freshness graph that I think is flawed. Your fitness falls of way too quickly if you don't do another big effort activity in the days when you really should be recovering. The cynic in me thinks that it's Strava encouraging you to post more content to their platform.
 
dwarf said:
I always thought cross training is meant to compliment your main activity and utilise similar muscles. Cycling is more similar to running than rowing so I would say that it is better. Depends what you enjoy most though. If you hate cycling then rowing will be a better choice as you will do it more often.
Click to expand...

I guess, and it makes sense since so many people choose cycling. I'd say i probably prefer rowing as it feels more engaging over time and i generally hate indoor cardio!

The other option is the Nordic Ski Erg, however i've only used it on a short tabata workout and was dead, not sure if i could do that for a solid 30 minutes or so even at a lower intensity!
 
Cheers, i think i've settled on rowing as i enjoy it a lot more and as you say it's good for the whole body rather that purely leg based. Plus i think if i got into the cycling side, i'd then end up spending a fortune on bikes and my hobby list doesn't need something else costing me money!

Forgot how hard rowing can be though, did 1500m at the end of todays workout and felt exhausted! My plan is to build up to do a 5k at the end of each session. Last time i did it in around 22 minutes so that feels like a good way to finish off a workout. I feel like 20 minutes on the bike by comparison would be less effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom