Heart Rate Zones

shotgunmcos

Interested in opinions on this...

I generally used the widely accepted guidelines of 5 zones
Z1 50-60%
Z2 60-70%
Z3 70-80%
Z4 80-90%
Z5 90-max

I've tested both max run and bike heart rates so use those as benchmarks. Its been a long long time since I had AT done in a lab. I generally understood Z1-Z2 as being easy, Z3 being aerobic conditioning, Z4 anaerobic and Z5 VO2max.

Lately a spanner in the works.. Mr Fink got me thinking.

4 zones
Z1 65-74%
Z2 75-85%
Z3 86-89%
Z4 90-95%

He argues that Z3 in this instance is a dead zone or no mans land.. the place of junk miles. Up to 85% is aerobic conditioning and 90+% is anaerobic conditioning (in a nutshell). It seems Z3 is that middle ground where you feel like you are working but its not easy enough for the aerobic benefit and not hard enough for the tempo benefit. It struck me as so many times on this forum we have received advice from coaches and the experienced lads about easy runs being too hard and hard runs being too easy. I take this as doing all of your miles in Z3. Traditionally that would be the 70-80% range?

I'm not up to speed with the running science ie what McMillan, Daniels et al say but just thought I'd throw it out there as it made me think...

What heart rate zones do you use and how?

tunney

Easy
Fast

shels4ever

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Interested in opinions on this...

I generally used the widely accepted guidelines of 5 zones
Z1 50-60%
Z2 60-70%
Z3 70-80%
Z4 80-90%
Z5 90-max

I've tested both max run and bike heart rates so use those as benchmarks. Its been a long long time since I had AT done in a lab. I generally understood Z1-Z2 as being easy, Z3 being aerobic conditioning, Z4 anaerobic and Z5 VO2max.

Lately a spanner in the works.. Mr Fink got me thinking.

4 zones
Z1 65-74%
Z2 75-85%
Z3 86-89%
Z4 90-95%

He argues that Z3 in this instance is a dead zone or no mans land.. the place of junk miles. Up to 85% is aerobic conditioning and 90+% is anaerobic conditioning (in a nutshell). It seems Z3 is that middle ground where you feel like you are working but its not easy enough for the aerobic benefit and not hard enough for the tempo benefit. It struck me as so many times on this forum we have received advice from coaches and the experienced lads about easy runs being too hard and hard runs being too easy. I take this as doing all of your miles in Z3. Traditionally that would be the 70-80% range?

I'm not up to speed with the running science ie what McMillan, Daniels et al say but just thought I'd throw it out there as it made me think...

What heart rate zones do you use and how?

I've only started wearing the HRM in the past few week so would like to see what replies you get from this.

shels4ever

tunney wrote: »

Easy
Fast

Do you go by feel or by HRM?

Gringo78

Going by %HRR, Easy for me is <70%. MP is around 80% for me so I do nothing from 70-80%, thats junk mile territory for me. HM pace is >85% so again, nothing in the range 80-85%, junk mile territory again. Tempo Range is then 85%- 90%, and intervals & faster rep stuff is >90%.

So you could say all my training in non marathon phase is <70% & >85% (70-85 being junk) and in marathon phase, I'll do miles specifically at PMP which would be targetting HR in range 78-82% HRR

shels4ever

Gringo78 wrote: »

Going by %HRR, Easy for me is <70%. MP is around 80% for me so I do nothing from 70-80%, thats junk mile territory for me. HM pace is >85% so again, nothing in the range 80-85%, junk mile territory again. Tempo Range is then 85%- 90%, and intervals & faster rep stuff is >90%.

So you could say all my training in non marathon phase is <70% & >85% (70-85 being junk) and in marathon phase, I'll do miles specifically at PMP which would be targetting HR in range 78-82% HRR

Cool you just proved that marathons are junk
will have to do a bit or reading before I start using the HRM in traiing will just log my rates over the next few weeks.

shotgunmcos

I've been reading a lot about it over the last 2 weeks since I now have my Garmin back and want to train to specific zones over the winter.

I get the easy - fast thing but going on 'feel' may not be correct as you might feel great but still be training in the worng zone for that session. Eg on the RPE 1-20 scale you may feel like you are running at an exertion of 5 when it is actually 7 and you might feel like the rep is a 20 when in fact it is only 17 or 18. Hence the probability of training in between the 'easy' and 'fast' Tunney refers to and not deriving the benefit fully from either end.

Not having a hrm, we are guessing and although we might feel like we have a good session, we may completely misinterpret the recovery required after it. As a result we train too often tired and further race tired. I'm guilty as hell for doing this which is why I want to train smarter this winter.

I only highligted Finks argument abover to get opinions on this 'no mans land'? Is it the middle of Z3 before you hit your sweet spot just below ATHR.

Mark allen suggest for your base training to cap you aerobic threshold without testing. Take 180 subtract your age and add 5 if you train most days. Thats one value. The 220- your age is the general value for max hr. To establish zones you need benchmarks to do them. Most reliably from tests. ie a 5k TT all out will give you your max heart rate and your average will be pretty close to your ATHR (anaerobic threshold), best estimate without heading to the lab

Is it better to create 5 zones based on % of ATHR or % of MAXHR?

Gringo78

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Lately a spanner in the works.. Mr Fink got me thinking.

4 zones
Z1 65-74%
Z2 75-85%
Z3 86-89%
Z4 90-95%

He argues that Z3 in this instance is a dead zone or no mans land

Is that %HRR or %MHR? My junk mile range is 80-88%MHR or 70-85%HRR. I think its more accurate to go by HRR.

shotgunmcos

Gringo78 wrote: »

Is that %HRR or %MHR? My junk mile range is 80-88%MHR or 70-85%HRR. I think its more accurate to go by HRR.

E.G my run benchmarks
MAXHR 190
ATHR 171
HRR 148

so junk miles at 152 -167 range or 103-125 range?! Do you have these confused with each other or did you mean to say you have 2 junk mile zones?

Is HRR supposed to be your aerobic threshold?

Gringo78

shotgunmcos wrote: »

E.G my run benchmarks
MAXHR 190
ATHR 171
HRR 148

so junk miles at 152 -167 range or 103-125 range?! Do you have these confused with each other or did you mean to say you have 2 junk mile zones?

Is HRR supposed to be your aerobic threshold?

By HRR I mean Heart Rate Reserve

HRR = MHR (max HR) - RHR (Resting HR)
%HRR = (HRactual - RHR)/(MHR-RHR)

For me, MHR = 191, RHR = 37. My HR at marathon pace is 160. As %MHR thats 84%. As %HRR its (160-37)/(191-37) = 79%. Need to be careful when talking about %'s.

shotgunmcos

Gringo78 wrote: »

By HRR I mean Heart Rate Reserve

HRR = MHR (max HR) - RHR (Resting HR)
%HRR = (HRactual - RHR)/(MHR-RHR)

For me, MHR = 191, RHR = 37. My HR at marathon pace is 160. As %MHR thats 84%. As %HRR its (160-37)/(191-37) = 79%. Need to be careful when talking about %'s.

Is that the Karvonen calculation?

So how do you create your zones based on %HRR as apposed to %MHR or %ATHR as in what range is Z1,Z2...Z5?

baza1976

Apologies for hijacking this thread but this thread got me thinking.

MHR, RHH, ATHR,RHR, I don't know. I remember when I'd put on my runners and run. I'd run for x amount of miles. Some days I go hard some days I go easy and I really really enjoyed running. I got a Polar heart rate monitor jiggy thingy for Fathers day and I'm not sure I'm enjoying the running as much. It's not about running at X miles for X time but now I have to add in MHR, RHH, ATHR,RHR, and some more abbrevs. Last night there was a run up keeper hill. I took the watch but left the heart monitor strap at home and it was the best run I had in a number of weeks.

See, I know my limitations, I faced up to them few years ago. I have hectic job, A Wife ( a good wife ), 3 kids a dog and a house that needs to be painted :eek: . I feel if I had more time on my hands I could train for a sub 3 marathon, IMHO, anyway, so I'll always be a 3.30 ish runner at best I reckon. But I don't have time for putting in miles required or for analysing heart rate zones or joining up with a club and all that goes with it. So, I believe by not trying to the things I know I can't achieve right now, I am enjoying my running...... more. I hope this makes some sense.

End of hijack

Just let me add, I am in aw of you guys who strive to and achieve this level at a continuous basis and enjoy yer logs etc ..................... some day:cool:

Gringo78

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Is that the Karvonen calculation?

So how do you create your zones based on %HRR as apposed to %MHR or %ATHR as in what range is Z1,Z2...Z5?

I don't know what that formula's called, its just Heart Rate reserve - the "usable" range of your heart rate. I suppose I don't use zones. On easy days I aim to keep below 150. On LSR's I aim to keep below 145. On Tempo session I try to hit a specific pace but I watch my HR and if its too high i.e I'm probably doing 10k effort at what i think is 10m-HM pace, then I need to back off, usually because I'm not rested enough or slightly sick.

I don't like zones - 5% change can be the difference between HM pace and 5 mile race pace for me. Also, the %HRR I race a particular race at is specific to me, it might be less or more for another person, usually more the more trained you are. A 4hr marathon runner might run the marathon at 75% HRR, an elite might run it at 85%HRR so its a bit of trial and error.

For you, training for triathlon specifically, you probably only have enough time for 4-5 runs a week max - do one tempo session, do an intervals session and keep the other runs at <70% HRR so that they do not fatigue you and interfere with other training sessions. My definition of a junk mile is one which takes from the effect of a future training session. If you do not specifically do a tempo(or some call it threshold) run, or an interval session, then there is no such things as a junk mile really because it is not interfering with other training so therefore is stressing you and giving a training effect. But if you run at marathon pace on a monday and then do a tempo run on a tuesday and can't complete it becasue you are fatigued, then effectively you sacrificed a quality mile on tuesday for a junk mile on monday.

Its all about using your time most efficiently. If in the last 10 weeks of training for a marathon then running at MP is a quality session and the tempo run might even be classed as junk miles if it takes away from your marathon paced run. But training for triathlon 5k/10k runs, the tempo run is the quality run and the MP run is the junk miles.

tunney

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Is that the Karvonen calculation?

So how do you create your zones based on %HRR as apposed to %MHR or %ATHR as in what range is Z1,Z2...Z5?

Karvonen is 220 minus your age.

I prefer OBLA (LT2) as the point to work it out.

Or a field test - when converstaion starts to get laboured. Take HR and add 5bpm. This is top of easy. Continue slowly ramping up. When converstaion is no longer possible. Take HR and add 5bpm. This is start of hard. (Or an approximation of OBLA)

TFBubendorfer

tunney wrote: »

Karvonen is 220 minus your age.

No it's not.

Karvonen is a way to calculate your target heart rate using the HRR (heart rate reserve) as a basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate#Karvonen_method

tunney

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

No it's not.

Karvonen is a way to calculate your target heart rate using the HRR (heart rate reserve) as a basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate#Karvonen_method

Every where I have read Karvonen its all started with 220-age and then continues from there.

pgibbo

Last winter/autumn - October 2009 I started using Friels zones for my running and cycling training. I did the tests he suggests in the Training Bible and plugged the values in to a spreadsheet that was available on his blog. If I recall correctly, Friel referes to Zone 3 as the dead zone as there is no benefit to be got from running there. I hit PBs this year in 5k and 8k so I have to say I'm happy with how it works for my running. I'm not sure I'm seeing the same returns on the bike as I find it much harder to hit the target Heart Rates on the bike.

The previous year I was running based on pace using FIRST. The funny thing is that when I switched to Friel I found that my FIRST target paces were actually very similar to the pace I was running at for the equivelant zones. So maybe the faster run times were just down to accumulated training or more consistent training rather than HR training. Hard to know.

A bit of a ramble and I didn't really answer your question but just giving my experience.

shotgunmcos

tunney wrote: »

Karvonen is 220 minus your age.

I prefer OBLA (LT2) as the point to work it out.

Or a field test - when converstaion starts to get laboured. Take HR and add 5bpm. This is top of easy. Continue slowly ramping up. When converstaion is no longer possible. Take HR and add 5bpm. This is start of hard. (Or an approximation of OBLA)

Interesting. Where is OBLA* in relation to LT and what is the LT1 range?

Ex. My Run LT is 171 and bike LT 165, how would I calculate zones with OBLA as a benchmark?



*couple of article links below in case anyone interested
http://www.cycleops.com/expert-articles/150-crossing-the-threshold-to-understanding-thresholds.html
http://coachrobmuller.blogspot.com/2009/12/lower-and-upper-training-thresholds.html

digme

I don't understand how you can call miles junk miles what's that supposed to mean exactly?

asimonov

digme wrote: »

I don't understand how you can call miles junk miles what's that supposed to mean exactly?

I had an LT test done earlier this year. From what I understand, as i ran through the various paces, there where two points where my lactate levels changed - the first, LT1 the first inflection point, occurred at 7:35 mile pace or around 143. The second inflection point LT2 occurred around 6:05 mile pace and was around 170 or so. My max heart rate was 196. In order to get maximum training effect I need to do my running at these points (or at vo2max). A junk mile therefore is a mile that is run between these two paces or heart rate levels. - The exception is race pace running. I don't like the term though - all running is good.

Ryder

baza1976 wrote: »

Apologies for hijacking this thread but this thread got me thinking.

MHR, RHH, ATHR,RHR, I don't know. I remember when I'd put on my runners and run. I'd run for x amount of miles. Some days I go hard some days I go easy and I really really enjoyed running. I got a Polar heart rate monitor jiggy thingy for Fathers day and I'm not sure I'm enjoying the running as much. It's not about running at X miles for X time but now I have to add in MHR, RHH, ATHR,RHR, and some more abbrevs. Last night there was a run up keeper hill. I took the watch but left the heart monitor strap at home and it was the best run I had in a number of weeks.

See, I know my limitations, I faced up to them few years ago. I have hectic job, A Wife ( a good wife ), 3 kids a dog and a house that needs to be painted :eek: . I feel if I had more time on my hands I could train for a sub 3 marathon, IMHO, anyway, so I'll always be a 3.30 ish runner at best I reckon. But I don't have time for putting in miles required or for analysing heart rate zones or joining up with a club and all that goes with it. So, I believe by not trying to the things I know I can't achieve right now, I am enjoying my running...... more. I hope this makes some sense.

End of hijack

Just let me add, I am in aw of you guys who strive to and achieve this level at a continuous basis and enjoy yer logs etc ..................... some day:cool:

interesting.....obviously enjoyment of training is the most important thing but....maybe use of HR zones would make the most use of your time, without any need to be overly scientific and analyse trends etc

Gringo78

digme wrote: »

I don't understand how you can call miles junk miles what's that supposed to mean exactly?

asimonov wrote: »

A junk mile therefore is a mile that is run between these two paces or heart rate levels. - The exception is race pace running. I don't like the term though - all running is good.

All running IS good....a junk mile is one which results in you not getting the most out of a particular training session. You do get a training effect from junk miles, but its bad value for the time you put in.

To illustrate more simply - if you have a 5km race on Tuesday that you want to do well in, you don't go out and run hard on Monday for an hour do you? You would run very easy, if at all, because otherwise you'd be too tired to knock out a PB the next day. Well, the same holds true if you had a tempo session planned for Tuesday - you could f**k it up by running hard on monday when there was no need. Just to be clear, if you run 5 very easy miles the day before a planned hard training session, even though you felt a spring in your step, those easy miles are NOT junk, they are the smartest miles you've run all week. Run hard 2-3 times a week, run easy at other times. If you have a big difference between your fastest training pace and your slowest training pace, you are well on the road to training smart.

fiddy3

Interesting discussion, but I'd like to point out a couple of things. First, don't ever use that 220- age method to calculate max, it's total rubbish. One person could be cruising and chatting at 165 hr and someone else of the same age could be crossing his lactate threshold. Also, it really has to be an ALL-OUT effort to get your maximum HR, otherwise it's not your maximum. Many of the recommendations to find max hr in training are too short, you should basically be on your knees at the end of a long session to find your true max. Also, i'd be very sceptical of any physiologist who says there is NO benefit to running at a certain zone. There is benefit to running at EVERY pace, you're recruiting mitochondria/ improving aerobic system/ improving biomechanics/ strengthening limbs/tendons/bones etc.

littlebug

I've driven myself nuts trying to work out training zones etc but I think it just doesn't work for me and my high max hr (204). I do use HR in training but my own version.... if on a long run I can average 170 ish then I feel ok and I will feel ok the next day. This is obviously harder to manage the further I run. 170 is 83% which according to everything I read puts my long run in the anaerobic or junk mile zone (shrugs). I think I'm classified as a "high beater" so I just don't seem to fit into the accepted zones.

shotgunmcos

asimonov wrote: »

I had an LT test done earlier this year. From what I understand, as i ran through the various paces, there where two points where my lactate levels changed - the first, LT1 the first inflection point, occurred at 7:35 mile pace or around 143. The second inflection point LT2 occurred around 6:05 mile pace and was around 170 or so. My max heart rate was 196. In order to get maximum training effect I need to do my running at these points (or at vo2max). A junk mile therefore is a mile that is run between these two paces or heart rate levels. - The exception is race pace running. I don't like the term though - all running is good.

+ ALL RUNNING IS GOOD. As baza1976 says, there is enjoyment and indeed benefit from just getting out there and running. If you don't care about improving (which I don't buy.. its a natural human trait ) then you don't need a HRM. However if you have goals in mind and want to improve or get the best possible value out of your training time, a HRM is the single best piece of kit you can own. 'listening to your heart' is probably the most fulfilling way to lead your life in any path you face, in any passion you desire

Ok now with that out of the way asinmonov thats interesting. You have your LT1 and OBLA (LT2) points now. There is a significant range between them. So do you cap base miles at LT1 and tempo above OBLA? What kind of training is recommended for the in between range?


@littlebug, its all relative. I used to run 10miles with a mate back in college and we would sprint the last few hundred yards. My hr would by high 180s and his over 220! You can still create your training zones, if you have a greater range between RHR and MAXHR then you may have a greater range per zone too

tunney

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Interesting. Where is OBLA* in relation to LT and what is the LT1 range?

Ex. My Run LT is 171 and bike LT 165, how would I calculate zones with OBLA as a benchmark?



*couple of article links below in case anyone interested
http://www.cycleops.com/expert-articles/150-crossing-the-threshold-to-understanding-thresholds.html
http://coachrobmuller.blogspot.com/2009/12/lower-and-upper-training-thresholds.html

LT1 as said above is first inflection point or 1millmol rise, LT2 is second inflection or 4millmol rise above baseline. OBLA is pretty much LT2.

I think lab testing is great. I've had loads of it done. However field testing which is repeatable, free and relevant is more appropriate I think.

asimonov

shotgunmcos wrote: »

+ ALL RUNNING IS GOOD. As baza1976 says, there is enjoyment and indeed benefit from just getting out there and running. If you don't care about improving (which I don't buy.. its a natural human trait ) then you don't need a HRM. However if you have goals in mind and want to improve or get the best possible value out of your training time, a HRM is the single best piece of kit you can own. 'listening to your heart' is probably the most fulfilling way to lead your life in any path you face, in any passion you desire

Ok now with that out of the way asinmonov thats interesting. You have your LT1 and OBLA (LT2) points now. There is a significant range between them. So do you cap base miles at LT1 and tempo above OBLA? What kind of training is recommended for the in between range?

Hi MCOS, that's bang on - the LT1 point is used to cap my easy-steady runs. I don't know if its the same for everyone but for me there is a pace just a bit faster than this point that feels very comfortable to run in and actually feels like i am working a little (and therefore feels like it should be doing me more good) - i've learned to keep that in check.

My tempo's (around 45') or long intervals (10' - 12' each) are then run around the LT2 (OBLA) point - so some are a little quicker (intervals) and others are on it or a little slower (tempos).

In terms of the paces inbetween, i can only relate what i've done recently and any substantial running between these ranges has been for race specific Half Marathon / Marathon pace training, longer sections of pace running in the middle of my long runs. So a recent half marathon prep long run would be 30' easy, 60' marathon, 15' half marathon, 15' easy.