What do you classify as a hill?

tommycahir

Hi

I am in middle of a Hal Higdon novice 2 training program for a half marathon in wexford on April 27th and wanted to add some hills into the training runs at the weekend but it crossed my mind as to what people would actually classify as a hill for training purposes, obviously I don't want to start running up the side of mount Leinster just yet but took a local route over the weekend with the below profile (from Garmin) and was curious would they be classed as hills?

so in short what sort of elevation gain\loss would you classify as a hill for training?

Micilin Muc

Whatever kind of hills you have near you, use them.

I do hill rep "sprints" (300m with 25 metres of climbing = 8% grade). It's very different from slow jogging up to the top of a mountain though. Both have their benefits.

Depends on your goal race too. Best to simulate your long runs on terrain and gradient as similar as possible to your goal race. In my experience hill training makes you very good on hills, but hard to translate into speed on the flat.

Cabaal

I'd always consider the vast majority of routes I run in Kilkenny as relatively flat for the most part, the elevation you've included in the attachments would be flatter then anything I'd run normally.

At the end of the day, run what hills are available to you

Finnt

Micilin Muc wrote: »

In my experience hill training makes you very good on hills, but hard to translate into speed on the flat.

I always thought that hills were a great way to build flat speed ?

Sauve

I'd classify a hill as whatever burns my calves
As I train more that gets easier, so I pick steeper/longer hills.
Some people would breeze up something that'd kill me, and vice versa.
I think it all depends on where you're at yourself.

Oregano_State

The benefits of hills are two-fold: the gradient forces your cardiovascular system to work harder, benefitting aerobic capacity, and the demand on your leg muscles (particularly hamstrings and glutes) is greater, which improves leg-power.

A hill that is too steep will change your running mechanics (while you run up it) too much for it to optimally translate to improving on the flat. A 10% gradient is usually what I see quoted as being about the optimal.

Micilin Muc

Finnt wrote: »

I always thought that hills were a great way to build flat speed ?

Just hasn't really happened for me, probably because of this:

Oregano_State wrote: »

The benefits of hills are two-fold: the gradient forces your cardiovascular system to work harder, benefitting aerobic capacity, and the demand on your leg muscles (particularly hamstrings and glutes) is greater, which improves leg-power.

A hill that is too steep will change your running mechanics (while you run up it) too much for it to optimally translate to improving on the flat. A 10% gradient is usually what I see quoted as being about the optimal.

Kissy Lips

Kilmashogue.

ecoli

When looking at hills you need to figure out what it is you are looking to get out of these sort of sessions - aerobic power, improved biomechanics and form, leg/ strength are just to name a few and you need to adjust the gradient and length of the hill accordingly

At OP if you are looking to train for a HM and following the HH2 plan I would assume that this is one of your first HMs? You will probably benefit from throwing in a route which has a few inclines (don't get too worried about the gradient just something that slightly boosts the effort) and it will stand to you

tommycahir

Thanks for the responses , general consensus seems to confirm what I thought that I will have to search out more challenging routes... I have 1 local route which I can use with a steep hill than the above for training so will do some longer runs on that..

@ecoli yeah this will be my 3rd hm done previous 2 in 2:12 (May) and 2:02 (sept) with my training for DCM13 halted in August cos of sublaxating (spelling) patella which is still bugging me...

Finnt

ecoli wrote: »

When looking at hills you need to figure out what it is you are looking to get out of these sort of sessions - aerobic power, improved biomechanics and form, leg/ strength are just to name a few and you need to adjust the gradient and length of the hill accordingly

I never thought too much about that, always thought the steeper the better!
What's best for aerobic power ?

ecoli

Finnt wrote: »

I never thought too much about that, always thought the steeper the better!
What's best for aerobic power ?

Sorry my terminology was a little off with regards the description just before anyone comes in to correct me when I say aerobic power I am talking moreso with aerobic capacity. With these I would say looks for long gradual hills as opposed to short sharp ones. The trick is to up the effort levels without going over the top.

Normally I would use as following

Very steep - Form/leg strength
moderately steep - Speed development/ resistance
gradual - aerobic capacity

Also in terms of 5k training etc it is no harm actually having a progression where by the gradient of the hill actually decreases as you come closer to target race in order to be more speed specific