94% max heart rate for marathon duration?!

tdlynch

I've been reviewing the data from the FR 405, and it seems my heart rate was ridiculously high for the duration of the marathon. I ran with a pal and we chatted until about 20 miles, the pre-arranged point where we agreed to run our own race.

Excluding the highest and lowest readings (which incidently was the first mile and last 400 yards), I ranged from 168 to 178, or 91 to 96% of theoretical maximum. There was minimal drift within the range: the peaks where on the miles with hills rather than those later in the race.

While I accept my heart rate was perhaps a little higher because of the excitement of a race and my pace what a little faster than long run training pace (long run pace averaged 8:00 min miles, raced on Monday at 7:10 min miles), I still managed to conduct a conversation for most of the race.

According to Glover and others, marathons should be run in and around 85% of max.

Even using the minimum of my range (168), for this to be 85% of my theoretical maximum I would have to be 22 years old - and I'm 35!

I'm grateful that I didn't have sight of my heart rate on Monday morning, in which case it would've proved a massive distraction.

I am interested in the views of others:

• What was your HR range during the marathon?
• Can you consistently stay in the 90+% for 3+ hours?
• How large can the maximum theoretical rate error be? As much as 10-15 beats?
• How can I accurately calculate my maximum heart rate?

Woddle

Hi there my average HR was 82% for the marathon and the week before it was 91% for a 4.4 cross country, my max is 198 and I got this number form a 5 mile race back in May when I knew my last sprint finish was near 100% and my garmin gave me the feedback of 198. so I use this now when calculating the odd training run and stuff.
I would have thought a 91 % average for a marathon is extremely high and maybe you don't know your max, I'm only guessing.

Krusty_Clown

Hi, why don't you provide a link to your data on Garmin Connect or MotionBased, and we can have a better look? Everyone's different, particularly with respect to HR, but should follow general patterns.

Here's my marathon, on Garmin Connect. My heart rate average was 156. Started at around 137 and finished (sprint) on 181. I figure my max is around 191 (based on a sprint-finish in a recent 10k). So my average HR was around 82% of max. I didn't really hit 90% until the sprint, and don't think I could sustain it, if I had. I'm 36 years old.

This is what it looked like (you can ignore the initial spike, which is a technical issue with my HR monitor).:

Krusty_Clown

Actually, my average HR for the Donadea 10k a few weeks ago was around 90%, so I can sustain it for 10k anyway!

T runner

An average of 173 being 85% of max would give you a max of 204ish.
This isnt unusual it just means youve proably a relatively smaller/more efficient heart than the model for the theoretical max you used. 204 might be conservative as 85% might be near optimum for the marathon-you may be closer to 210.

At 35 last my heart went up to 211 going up a hill. Glad to hear theres more than one of us out there!

tdlynch

Here's the link to the Garmin Connect page.

I've also attached an an image of my HR graph.

I like the sound of "more efficient heart"; I don't like the sound of "small heart"!!!

Abhainn

tdlynch wrote: »

I am interested in the views of others:

• What was your HR range during the marathon?
• Can you consistently stay in the 90+% for 3+ hours?
• How large can the maximum theoretical rate error be? As much as 10-15 beats?
• How can I accurately calculate my maximum heart rate?

Well done tdlynch again on your excellent result. I recall you did 3:07 with a great negative split. Not bad for first marathon at 35!

1. Ok will say again everyone is different. There are endless contributing factors that will affect your heart rate during a marathon.
But for me Monday was my 4th marathon, 3rd this year. Age 37 since yesterday. Running since Feb 2007
Finish time 3:03. HR average was 162. My estimated HR max is 187 but never calculated professionally. Time in >90% zone 35 mins.
This felt better than Berlin marathon end Sept. Time 3:01. HR average 168. Time in >90% zone 1:34. (Still haven't recovered!)

2. Doubt it. But I stand to be corrected. Apparantly elite marathon runners e.g Radcliffe exceed 90% of the HR max during the full duration of the race.


3.& 4. You can get is measured accurately in a sports lab. I think boards contributor Racing Flat is the expect on that.

tdlynch

Cheers Abhainn, everything just fell into place on Monday and I am delighted with my time. It really helped to be able to run with a training partner for the first 20 miles.

I'm convinced my max heart rate is higher than the average: I struggle to run within the predicted zones and often feel like I'm not pushing it hard enough. I've always put this down to lack of fitness.

But then having just completed the marathon, I must be reasonably fit. And it'd be impossible to keep 90%+ effort going for 3 hours. And I was chatting away for a good two thirds of the run.

Would love to accurately test my max HR...

T runner

Heres a couple of tests from this link.
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/hrm2.htm
Have a look at the medical considerations in the Link if you chose to attempy either.

Stress Test 1
For this test you need a good hill. The hill needs to take you about two minutes to run up it and of sufficient gradient to ensure you are breathing hard at its summit. The test begins around five minutes running time from the hill. Gradually accelerate towards the hill achieving 85% MHR (for the first time) at the base of the hill. As you hit the hill, maintain your speed by increasing your effort. Your heart rate will rise and you will tire. Without falling over, keep an eye on your monitor and make a mental note of your highest heart rate as you work towards the top of the hill.


Stress Test 2
For those unfortunate enough to live in an area lacking hills it is possible to carry out a test on a flat piece of road or at your local running track. The plan of attack is to run 800 meters very quick. For the first 400 meters run at up to your current 90 to 95% MHR (to be achieved by the end of the first lap) and for the last 400 metres go for it. During this second lap, you must work at 100%. Very fit athletes may have to repeat this test after a few minutes rest (minimum of 65% MHR) to be able to achieve a true maximum. This test is very reliable.

Racing Flat

The Op has kindly invited me to reply to this thread...

IMHO people should not use HR monitors unless they have proper HR data to work from. Max HR is only one part of this. More important might be HR at physiologically easy running pace (so you can calculate at what rate you should do your easy runs), HR at the lactate turnpoint (so you can calculate your tempo run heart rate) HR at VO2max pace and max HR for interval and speed sessions. These can be worked out by professionals through a fitness test. Many physiology departments at Universities will have these facilities and they often need human guinea pigs for research purposes so you might get a test done for free there, or else some of them charge and there is also a firm in Sandyford (Dublin) I think who do this privately.

You go on a treadmill (if you are a runner, or bike if you are a cyclist or Concept 2 if you are a rower...) and run. Every 3 mins they up the speed slightly (e.g. 10kph for 3mins, 11 for 3 mins, 12 for 3 mins etc.) until you can go no further. To really calculate as accurately as possible your VO2max and max heart rate, they encourage you to go to complete exhaustion, so you are in a harness in case you collapse! (I didn't collapse but I've heard of an Olympic athlete who did - maybe that's the difference!)

Before you start and throughout the test, they monitor your HR (usual HR monitor) and oxygen and carbondioxide (face mask) and blood lactate concentrations (take drop of blood every 3 mins). From this they can work out all the data mentioned above, so they provide you with the correct HR or HR zones for each of your runs.

When I had this done first, and started training accordingly, I noticed a change immediately - improvements in performance and having much more energy, not being as tired and not getting run down or colds as much. The difference was beforehand I would do most easy runs at 7.30pace, regardless of course, conditions etc so maybe that was just me being silly. In my new correct HR zone I was at 8min mile pace. This was strange at first as it felt I wasn't training as hard, but it meant I was able to do better on the key sessions - intervals and tempo runs. Also, runs on the day after the hard sessions were only 8.30-9.00mile pace. If you're tired, the HR monitor tells you to run slower, so you don't overdo it and so you don't get run down as much.

So even though 4 of my 6 weekly runs were done much slower than previously, I was doing better in races. The other thing I was doing wrong, is I was probably doing tempo runs too fast - by going at the correct HR, even though it was still a tough session, I could sustain it for longer, if appropriate.

With consistent training, pace will gradually increase for any given heart rate. As you improve, you will need to be reassessed, to determine your new appropriate HR zones - so every 3-6 months or so you should be reassessed.

Example:

1st test (went to them in January of this year, said I'd been stuck at around 62mins for 10miles for 2 years, wanted to break 60mins. During test, got to 18 on TM, lasted 90secs or so at that level)

Max HR 193
HR at lactate turnpoint 182

Prescribed training zones
interval sessions >185
tempo runs 175-180
easy runs 150-160

In March, broke the hour for 10miles, having followed the training plan and zones fairly religiously. So in June went back to them and said I wanted to break 3 hours for marathon (PB 3.06).

2nd test
Max HR 187 (got to 19, knew I'd 'beat' the last time, knew I'd never manage 3 mins so stopped immediately. Also knew that the max HR figure wasn't important to the testers. I'd say if I'd tried to hold on for 90secs or so, it would have been a test closer to the exhaustion point so probably would have been 193 or so)
HR at lactate turnpoint 178

Prescribed training
interval >180
tempo 170-175
easy 145-150

Did not stick to the plan as much, figured it was not marathon specific enough, so made my own plan, butdefinitely kept to the HR zones. Broke 3 in September. I also ran PBs over 3miles, 5miles and half marathon during this training period. BTW I'm in my 5th year of running, and as I said I had plateaued, so it's not just beginner improvements. Also, they put a lot more emphasis on tempo runs than interval sessions, probably because of my target race distances.

So I recommend HR training, but only if done based on correct individual data, although it might not suit everyone.

tdlynch

The is quality information lads, thanks a million. I'd have to pay through the teeth to get it from a professional, and probably wouldn't get the same level of detail

Interesting that it's the lactate threshold that's important, not the max heart rate.

Will try out a couple of the tests and report back.

MCOS

Thanks for that post RF, interesting and makes a lot of sense. I'm only running about 18 months so I'd say It will be a while before I plateau. I intend to get a watch in the new year though to train with HR (not exclusively though).

Looking back over my training diary this year I see a flaw. All of my long runs were at marathon pace or slightly quicker. For the DM I averaged 7'55" per mile. My last long run (Oct 4) was 23m at 7'55" per mile. My 21m was at 7'57"/mile and the 2 18m were at about 7'50"/mile. Anything tempo was also flat out. That said I could not have pushed myself to anything better the my pb on Monday.

It was a bit niaive I guess . The next time I do a marathon (not for a while) I want to get 3'15 as I'd love to do Boston.

Would you recommend I slow my LSRs and tempo runs down?

I plan to do a few 10ks and maybe a 1/2m before I do the next marathon so I should have a better idea of my different paces.

Racing Flat

tdlynch wrote: »

Interesting that it's the lactate threshold that's important, not the max heart rate.

Well, you're never going to want to be at max HR are you? Except for maybe the last few strides of a race or a very short race. Max HR is useful to know if you want to work off 70-80% of this for easy runs, 90% for tempo runs etc. but again, these zones are generic, just like 220-age or any other heart rate max formula. My HR at lactate threshold was 92% the first time, somebody else might be at 80%...so very hard to comment on your 94% marathon HR as we don't know your true max and we don't know your HR at LT. Interestingly, world class marathon runners run the marathon at a HR just fractionally below their LT HR. Wheras if my LT HR is 178, i can't imagine my average HR was much higher than 160 or so in the marathon.

MCOS wrote: »

Looking back over my training diary this year I see a flaw. All of my long runs were at marathon pace or slightly quicker. For the DM I averaged 7'55" per mile. My last long run (Oct 4) was 23m at 7'55" per mile. My 21m was at 7'57"/mile and the 2 18m were at about 7'50"/mile. Anything tempo was also flat out.

Would you recommend I slow my LSRs and tempo runs down?

Just to clarify, your 'flaw' if it was one was one of pacing rather than using incorrect HR. I am by no means an expert, and would hate to give advice without enough details, but it does seem like your long runs might have been too fast. I think they shold be done 10-20% slower than marathon race pace. You could also do some marathon pace runs where you might do up to 15miles or so at marathon race pace - but to do any more than this would be just like a race, so you'd 'leave your race on the track' as they say. My marathon pace was 6.50 while my long runs started at about 7.50 pace and gradually through the training programme increased to about 7.20 pace (without extra effort, just due to the effect of training, ie getting better). But I also did 14 miles at 6.48 pace a few weeks before.

Don't know what you mean by tempo being flat out, but it depends on what you want from the session. Tempo just means running at a certain pace - you could do a tempo run at marathon pace, at 10k race pace at lactate threshold pace etc,. so based on what you want to achieve for the session dictates the pace. I generally use tempo runs to improve lactate threshold, so do them at this pace. Typically I would do 2 x 20min reps at this pace, but when I was 10 mile training I was doing 3 x 20min (can't imagine being able to do this now!) and coming up to the marathon I stretched it out to 45mins continuous. Daniels recommends 1 x 20 mins, no more, Peter Coe 1 or 2 x 20mins...

But as you ran a PB and if you think you got as much out of yourself as you could, why change anything? I'd only ever change anything if I was not improving as desired.

tdlynch

I did my LSRs at about 45 secs to a min slower than my marathon pace. Interestingly on the day, with the benefit of the taper, marathon pace didn't feel any harder than LSR pace.

My tempos were 15 to 30 secs faster than marathon pace, which I could maintain for about an hour or so.

Interestingly, on my last LSR (20 miles), I raised it to marathon pace for the last 5 miles. While this felt really tough and took a lot out of me, it gave me the confidence that I could maintain the pace for a significant period of time. I'll be doing more of this next time round.

Didn't do any interval or sprint training, so that's what I'll be working on over the Winter in prep for a Spring marathon. And maybe sub-3...

Racing Flat

tdlynch wrote: »

on the day, with the benefit of the taper, marathon pace didn't feel any harder than LSR pace.

Bingo!

tdlynch wrote: »

Interestingly, on my last LSR (20 miles), I raised it to marathon pace for the last 5 miles. While this felt really tough and took a lot out of me, it gave me the confidence that I could maintain the pace for a significant period of time. I'll be doing more of this next time round.

Tergat reckons those type of runs gave him the extra bit needed to go from being a brilliant marathon runner to the WR holder. His long runs were 24 miles which started at normal long run pace, but gradually picked up the pace, so that the last 2 miles were faster than marathon pace, effectively all out for the last 2 miles. you'd want to be experienced and strong to this though.

tdlynch wrote: »

Didn't do any interval or sprint training, so that's what I'll be working on over the Winter in prep for a Spring marathon. And maybe sub-3...

Don't need to overdo this but a session a week, or every fortnight would be ideal. I'd lean towards longer intervals - 1k and 1mile reps. Doing mile reps at 6 min pace may be more beneficial than doing 400s at 5 min pace or 800s at 5.20 pace if you want to run a 6.50 pace marathon as far as I know.

tdlynch

Just as a follow-up, I wore the heart monitor during a speed session this week: 12 x 400 with 2 min recovery. Clocked 197 as my maximum HR. A graph is attached and the intervals and peaks are easily identified!

My marathon HR numbers now make perfect sense: average of 173 (88%) and maxed at 185 (94%).

Once I've fully recovered from the marathon, I'm going to get tested in a lab and that'll make for an interesting comparison. But I reckon it'll not be far from 197.

And will continue to chart max HR during speed sessions, looking also to speed of recovery as an indicator of improving fitness.

T runner

From MCOS:

"Looking back over my training diary this year I see a flaw. All of my long runs were at marathon pace or slightly quicker. For the DM I averaged 7'55" per mile. My last long run (Oct 4) was 23m at 7'55" per mile. My 21m was at 7'57"/mile and the 2 18m were at about 7'50"/mile. Anything tempo was also flat out. That said I could not have pushed myself to anything better the my pb on Monday."


Hi MCOS

Was wondering how you were feeling after your long runs at that pace. Were you completely exhausted? It should have felt extremely, extremely difficult to complete that session at marathon pace. Is it possible you lost time in the last 5-6 miles and your average speed was faster up until that?
If you werent really, really tired (after training run) and your speed was consisteant then its possible your endurance was very good for the marathon and your limiting factors were possibly a low lactic threshold and not being able to run at a high enough percentage of your lactate threshold.

Sessions like continuous hard runs bulding up to 50 mins for your lactate threshold, and 2k intervals (2 mins rest) satrting at 3, building up to 7 at the height will teach your body to run at the fast pace.

Another good run is a an hour at 30k pace. These "steady" runs can be used earlier in your buildup to increase your aerobic threshold and prepare your body for the lactic threshold stuff, or sub for a lactate threshold run on an easier week etc.

Its possible that the long runs were too quick. According to McMillan Running Calculator Long run pace for 3.30 marathon should be 8.30-9.30.
That sounds too slow for you, You would have probably managed 8.15 pace comfortable enough which if McmIllans calculators are correct may indicate a much faster marathon likely for you with the right training sessions.