Marathon training based on heart rate

sgal

Hi,
Looking for info please; I've ran dcm in 2016 and 2017. Struggled to get my head round running slow etc. so I ran 9min miles for everything and obviously fell apart during the event itself! 2016 went well considering I had no base behind me. I was going great in 2017 till I got injured with various niggles. I made my way around but it put me off running and I've only just got my interest back in running. I think my lack of pace structuring caused a big part of 2016 slowness and injuries in 2017. I'm currently just getting back running and trying to run off heart rate. A work colleague who is big into running advised slow runs at 135
bpm and tempo stuff at 155 based on max hr of 220 minus my age (40). I'm looking to get a better handle on it so I've been googling and searching here but it's very complicated! Sorry for the long post but can anyone recommend a website with a simple plan. There's lots of differing info on base/working hr/ resting hr etc.
Thanks

skyblue46

It is complicated and there isn't really a way around that. However using the generic 220 - age is the wrong point to start from. My max hr is 13 beats above this notional figure. You need an accurate max hr and rested hr to even think of using hr training. You also should monitor your resting rate as your fitness improves. Garmin have training plans on Connect which are relatively easy to follow so long as you have reasonably precise numbers to work with.

ariana`

Agree with Skyblue, if you plan to train by HR then you need to be sure your Max HR is accurate, i'd recommend professional lactate threshold testing for this. And you also need to be sure the device you use is accurate - a lot of people don't rate wrist based heart rate monitor.

If you can't do lab testing for HR, there are also tests such as this and this you could do yourself.

Another approach of course is to use a training plan in combination with a training pace calculator to work out all your training paces using a recent race time. And then try to stick as close as possible to them even if they feel slow - they are supposed to! It will take a bit to getting used to running easy runs easy but honestly you will feel the benefits so quickly that it won't be hard for long. Let us know how you get on

Keeks

There si some good info here about HR training

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057775431

Baby75

skyblue46 wrote: »

It is complicated and there isn't really a way around that. However using the generic 220 - age is the wrong point to start from. My max hr is 13 beats above this notional figure. You need an accurate max hr and rested hr to even think of using hr training. You also should monitor your resting rate as your fitness improves. Garmin have training plans on Connect which are relatively easy to follow so long as you have reasonably precise numbers to work with.

I had a look at those plans yesterday, I found one that suits me and tried the first work out, but I just followed my watch zones. I kept the zones face open on my watch and kept it in Zone 2. I had to walk a few times to lower my heart rate.
it was was a little frustrating but I am wondering are the zones correct.

estariol

Another option might be running with power using stryd or garmin footpods. I've found it works better for me than hr zones.

rom

Baby75 wrote: »

I had a look at those plans yesterday, I found one that suits me and tried the first work out, but I just followed my watch zones. I kept the zones face open on my watch and kept it in Zone 2. I had to walk a few times to lower my heart rate.
it was was a little frustrating but I am wondering are the zones correct.

When you are not used to running in zone 2 and having to stop to walk sounds exactly right. I was months doing this. Slowing down. I set an alert on my watch so it would beep when I went above a certain HR. Depending on the watch you can set a custom alert per activity. When your starting off its a good way to keep your easy running easy. It is frustrating to stay in a low zone. It may feel like its fast walking even but you will get quicker over time for the same effort level. After 6/8 weeks there is a big jump. Stick with it. Have faith. I did and knocked over 1hr off my marathon time in a year.

Baby75

rom wrote: »

When you are not used to running in zone 2 and having to stop to walk sounds exactly right. I was months doing this. Slowing down. I set an alert on my watch so it would beep when I went above a certain HR. Depending on the watch you can set a custom alert per activity. When your starting off its a good way to keep your easy running easy. It is frustrating to stay in a low zone. It may feel like its fast walking even but you will get quicker over time for the same effort level. After 6/8 weeks there is a big jump. Stick with it. Have faith. I did and knocked over 1hr off my marathon time in a year.

An hour that is brilliant thanks for that it is very reassuring:)

rom

Baby75 wrote: »

An hour that is brilliant thanks for that it is very reassuring:)

If you read the article in this months Irish Runner by Steve Macklin about what easy is. It says very similar. That basically you should find it a bit boring/frustrating.

boydkev

For my last 2 marathons i have done all my training based on Heartrate and found it really helped especially with the recovery.
I use the P&D book Advanced marathoning, And there is very good descriptions in the book as to the heart rates you should be trainign at for the different sessions.
What i have found is my heartrate has stayed the same on a similar run and over time the pace has gone from 8.30min miles down to 8.10. So i have noticed improvement.

Baby75

rom wrote: »

If you read the article in this months Irish Runner by Steve Macklin about what easy is. It says very similar. That basically you should find it a bit boring/frustrating.

Well, I did find it frustrating trying to keep it slow so glad I am doing it right I will have another look at that article again, I am a firm believer slowing down and having easy days

ariana`

Out of interest, what HRM devices do you guys use?

I ask because i really don't see how i could train based on HR with my device (Garmin 235 - wrist based HRM).

Take for example this week so, far:
Monday - REST
Tues - 9.6km @ 6:00 min/km, Avg HR - 151 BPM
Wednesday - REST
Thurs - 9.6 km @ 6:40 min/km, Avg HR - 152 BPM

Tuesday & Thursday routes were the same - the second was 40 sec/km SLOWER and Average HR was slightly higher! I know there are other factors but both runs were preceded by a rest day and i don't think the weather was drastically different. I had company on the first run so maybe i was more relaxed chatted to my friends

I know people don't rate the wrist based HRMs, i generally find the trend is pretty reliable but i don't think i could base my training on it entirely and wonder do people who do base their training on HR have more reliable devices and what these are - is any device with a chest strap better or will there always be some anomalies/fluctuations?

Keeks

ariana` wrote: »

Tuesday & Thursday routes were the same - the second was 40 sec/km SLOWER and Average HR was slightly higher! I know there are other factors but both runs were preceded by a rest day and i don't think the weather was drastically different. I had company on the first run so maybe i was more relaxed chatted to my friends

Why was it slower? was it deliberately slower or did the other factors play a part i.e were you running into a strong headwind?

ariana`

Keeks wrote: »

Why was it slower? was it deliberately slower or did the other factors play a part i.e were you running into a strong headwind?

It was deliberately slower... that's my 'easy' pace. The previous night because i was with a group i ended up running at their pace which is my 'moderate' pace. I don't really remember the weather but i don't think there was any significant wind or extreme heat on either night.

Keeks

Ok....it could be that when in the group you were sheltered from the wind and taking advantage of the the draft.....so thereby running faster with less effort.

Huzzah!

ariana` wrote: »

Out of interest, what HRM devices do you guys use?

I ask because i really don't see how i could train based on HR with my device (Garmin 235 - wrist based HRM).

Take for example this week so, far:
Monday - REST
Tues - 9.6km @ 6:00 min/km, Avg HR - 151 BPM
Wednesday - REST
Thurs - 9.6 km @ 6:40 min/km, Avg HR - 152 BPM

Tuesday & Thursday routes were the same - the second was 40 sec/km SLOWER and Average HR was slightly higher! I know there are other factors but both runs were preceded by a rest day and i don't think the weather was drastically different. I had company on the first run so maybe i was more relaxed chatted to my friends

I know people don't rate the wrist based HRMs, i generally find the trend is pretty reliable but i don't think i could base my training on it entirely and wonder do people who do base their training on HR have more reliable devices and what these are - is any device with a chest strap better or will there always be some anomalies/fluctuations?

I use a chest strap. It's generally reliable (I think) but can act funny when wearing staticy tops. It can also cause unpleasant chafing, so there are definite downsides.

I've seen it recommended when wearing a wrist-based HRM like yours to allow it "lock on" to your HR while sitting down as otherwise it can sometimes lock into your cadence, instead, but that doesn't sound hugely practical and could also be complete phooey.

ariana`

Keeks wrote: »

Ok....it could be that when in the group you were sheltered from the wind and taking advantage of the the draft.....so thereby running faster with less effort.

It wasn't that big of a group but i'll take that as a possibility for sure - thanks! I just find it interesting, i suppose i like the idea of training by HR in theory but not sure about how practical it is when there are many variables but maybe that is even more reason that it is a good approach in that the effort really is 'easy' every time even at very different paces depending on outside factors rather than just running to a certain pace because a calculator tells you it's easy... I'm waffling again

Huzzah! wrote: »

I use a chest strap. It's generally reliable (I think) but can act funny when wearing staticy tops. It can also cause unpleasant chafing, so there are definite downsides.

I've seen it recommended when wearing a wrist-based HRM like yours to allow it "lock on" to your HR while sitting down as otherwise it can sometimes lock into your cadence, instead, but that doesn't sound hugely practical and could also be complete phooey.

What watch do you have Huzzah? I wonder is a chest strap compatible with my garmin 235. Must do some research. My watch is on all the time so i assume it should be permanently locked on to my HR.

Baby75

Ariana I have the Garmin Vivoactive HR it is wrist-based but I did some research and has been found it was very reliable when compared to chest strap heart rate monitor's
it is compatible with one so I might invest in one, what I noticed was the plan we are both using for DCM the paces in it match my heart rate zones

skyblue46

ariana` wrote: »

It wasn't that big of a group but i'll take that as a possibility for sure - thanks! I just find it interesting, i suppose i like the idea of training by HR in theory but not sure about how practical it is when there are many variables but maybe that is even more reason that it is a good approach in that the effort really is 'easy' every time even at very different paces depending on outside factors rather than just running to a certain pace because a calculator tells you it's easy... I'm waffling again



What watch do you have Huzzah? I wonder is a chest strap compatible with my garmin 235. Must do some research. My watch is on all the time so i assume it should be permanently locked on to my HR.

I'm fairly sure the 235 is compatible. As for the locking in on cadence which Huzzah mentioned I'm afraid that happens from time to time on my chest strap too! Have a look at the HR data on my runs from 24-29 April and you'll see what I mean. After that I tightened the strap for the next two runs and it seemed to be ok. Do you keep your wrist strap fairly tight?

Huzzah!

ariana` wrote: »

It wasn't that big of a group but i'll take that as a possibility for sure - thanks! I just find it interesting, i suppose i like the idea of training by HR in theory but not sure about how practical it is when there are many variables but maybe that is even more reason that it is a good approach in that the effort really is 'easy' every time even at very different paces depending on outside factors rather than just running to a certain pace because a calculator tells you it's easy... I'm waffling again



What watch do you have Huzzah? I wonder is a chest strap compatible with my garmin 235. Must do some research. My watch is on all the time so i assume it should be permanently locked on to my HR.

I've a 220 - old skul but it's purple, so I like it

skyblue46 wrote: »

I'm fairly sure the 235 is compatible. As for the locking in on cadence which Huzzah mentioned I'm afraid that happens from time to time on my chest strap too! Have a look at the HR data on my runs from 24-29 April and you'll see what I mean. After that I tightened the strap for the next two runs and it seemed to be ok. Do you keep your wrist strap fairly tight?

Yep, it's not always 100% accurate, I don't think, but usually okay.

rom

skyblue46 wrote: »

I'm fairly sure the 235 is compatible. As for the locking in on cadence which Huzzah mentioned I'm afraid that happens from time to time on my chest strap too! Have a look at the HR data on my runs from 24-29 April and you'll see what I mean. After that I tightened the strap for the next two runs and it seemed to be ok. Do you keep your wrist strap fairly tight?

It doesn't need to be crazy tight but it does need sweat. When I used one I would spit on the contacts before putting it on. Used to take off the sensor and put the strap in warm soapy water and let it dry out every few months also as it would irritate the skin otherwise.

aoboa

Can anyone shed some light on what zones are easy?
I have my watch set up for HRR with Garmins defaults
e.g.
Z1 - 50-60
Z2 - 60-70
Z3 - 70-80
Z4 - 80-90
Z5 - 90-100

My easy runs would be split pretty equally between z2 and z3. Is this correct effort for easy (it's a pretty wide span 60-80% HRR)?
Or is there a better definition of the zones I can use?
Garmin uses:
Blue - easy
Green - aerobic
Orange - threshold

rom

Dr. Phil Maffetone says that max HR - 50 beats is about where easy HR is. Based on lab tests that seemed about right for me.

http://www.fitdigits.com/personalized-heart-rate-zones.html

thehairygrape

sgal wrote: »

Hi,
Looking for info please; I've ran dcm in 2016 and 2017. Struggled to get my head round running slow etc. so I ran 9min miles for everything and obviously fell apart during the event itself! 2016 went well considering I had no base behind me. I was going great in 2017 till I got injured with various niggles. I made my way around but it put me off running and I've only just got my interest back in running. I think my lack of pace structuring caused a big part of 2016 slowness and injuries in 2017. I'm currently just getting back running and trying to run off heart rate. A work colleague who is big into running advised slow runs at 135
bpm and tempo stuff at 155 based on max hr of 220 minus my age (40). I'm looking to get a better handle on it so I've been googling and searching here but it's very complicated! Sorry for the long post but can anyone recommend a website with a simple plan. There's lots of differing info on base/working hr/ resting hr etc.
Thanks

Tried HR training for my last marathon. Very frustrating at the start but now I won’t go back. Run/walk for first eight weeks or so, but improved rapidly after that. Found I was able to sustain 8 min mile pace at Z2 for 20 miles in training. Unfortunately missed marathaon as I fell off my bike, but I’m just back running and will definately use HR. Chest strap, Garmin watch. Wouldn’t get too caught up on accuracy. Seeing an improvement is the main thing. Stick with it.