Heart Rate Training Conundrum

Triathlon Forum
1

Trying to train for a spring marathon, for a 3:30 goal time, or 3:30 to 3:40 area. I have for the last three months been hard core and serious about using a heart rate monitor. In developing a base for running, I’m trying to keep heart rate at 70-75 percent of heart rate reserve in most running. My max is 189 and rest is 51. So, I try to keep heart rate at 140-144 BPMs on easy runs, especially long runs of 14+. I’ve been religious about that, this year.

In long runs of 16 to 18 plus, I have noticed my heart rate drop to 136 or lower, and I’m finding it now, a wierd development to now have to continually fight and claw to sporadically PICK UP THE PACE, and VERY HARD to keep heart rate now at 75 percent without stepping on the gas in long runs, constantly, especially after the first five or six miles. It is a fatiguing ordeal and now I dread long runs because of this shit, because a long run, now is just a long series of pick ups, and it feels worse than mile repeat workouts.

This is also a bit true in 6-8 mile threshhold and one and two mile repeat workouts, which appear to be 6-10 beats slower than normal than what those repeats used to cause, within 10-15 seconds of the same pace.

At any rate, just keeping it at 75 percent the whole way on long runs is just as uncomfortable to me than what used to be when I was running a little below what might be lactate threshold, although I’m not panting or gasping or straining as much. Im getting that same kind of tired feeling in my legs and lack of power feelings to keep it at aerobic threshold, for some reason.

I’m wondering if I’m running too much and am overtraining or whether maybe my legs or muscles or “leg power” just can’t take advantage of aerobic fitness to pick up the pace. (I’m running about 55-65 miles a week) as opposed to 35-45 weekly from years ago).

Can’t figure it. I THOUGHT that after a lot of aerobic threshold training, your 70-75 percent level would just be the same exertion level, and I would just be going faster. I am running faster per mile, but the exertion level, relative to heart rate, feels harder—but in point of fact, it shouldn’t.

I’m wondering if you can get your heart in shape but your legs or neuromuscular strength just can’t take advantage of it.

2

For me, HR declines late in a workout indicates a need for some calories. Usually it perks up after a GU. Not sure if that is what it happening in your case, though.

Jodi

3

If I were you, I would use the 75% upper limit on your easy training and not worry about a lower limit. Run what feels easy and let the heart rate fall where it may. As long as it is below your upper limit, you should be fine.

It took me years to learn to train actually easily on easy days. To have faith that it does work and it does help. The corollary to that is that it is not (practically speaking) possible to run too easily on those days. I would not ever worry about that. It is not as if you suddenly fail to get aerobic benefits if you are below 70% of HRR.

Regarding threshold workouts, however, that is odd. How sure are you about your max rate?

4

have you retested your max HR recently ?

typically well-trained endurance athletes have lower max HRs than untrained individuals… the training produces a larger stronger heart muscle that pumps more volume of blood, but it can’t beat as fast anymore…

it may be useful to lose that old-time HR religion, and go to a pace goal on the long runs instead. Use Daniels’ tables, find a flattish route so there won’t be spikes of effort.

5

I feel your pain dude. I had this exact same issue last season when upping my run training load (I can’t speak for this year as my run training has decreased dramatically). I had a blood lactate test early in the offseason to determine HR zones so I’m confident mine were correct. Couldn’t help but feel a little frustrated…you see & hear people using a HRM to cap their intensity, I needed one to increase my intensity the longer I ran, even for the supposedly “easy” stuff! I’m kinda agreeing with Jodi…I’ve always run a little leaner than most on the nutrition/hydration side of things so I think that could be a factor. What do you consume on a typical long run?

Don’t let it worry you too much. The outcome of all that frustration last year was faster running in training and better performances in races of all distances. Remember its about getting from A to B as fast as possible…there are no extra points for finishing a race with the lowest sense of RPE.

6

“typically well-trained endurance athletes have lower max HRs than untrained individuals”

Are you sure about that? I thought that maintaining a strong base helped you keep your max HR from falling 1-2 BPM each year. This would mean that a person who consistently trained would have a higher max HR than someone who did not. The exertion needed to get to max HR would be higher for a fit person than someone not trained.

7

I think its from poor recovery, and so I think everyone is right here. My problem has always been high heart rate, not low heart rate.

I ran across this discussion between two people, Hadd and a Cabral, on letsrun, and it kind of makes sense because I’ve been doing the harder stuff the day before the easy run:

"Okay, the first few times this happens to runners the coach might be excused for thinking that the runner has suddenly got much fitter. A drop in HR at the same pace is generally taken as a sign that the runner is “working less”, ie: fitter than previously.

Of course that COULD be the case here, but if I also see that the runner is having to work hard to maintain pace, I stop the session. From experience we have learned that when such a situation occurs, (the HR “will not come up”) then it is because the runner has not fully refueled muscle glycogen from a previous training session, or (in some other way) has not fully recovered from previous training.

I often bag the session and send the runner home with instructions to eat more carbos – maybe also just jog easy for a day or two to help refueling/recovery. When we reschedule the same session for 2-3 days later, we often find the HR is higher, but is in the expected HR zone PLUS the runner finds the pace easier to handle.

So, there you are: a low HR is not always a good thing and a higher HR is not always a bad thing.

A lower-than-expected HR is much more likely to be a sign that the runner is under-fuelled, or not fully recovered from previous training. Much the same as a lower-than-usual lactate value at a running pace is not always a sign of increased fitness; it might simply be a sign that the runner is low on muscle glycogen. In both cases (HR and lactate) the runner will often corroborate this by admitting the pace is “harder than usual” on that occasion.

A higher-than-expected HR on a given night is NOT a sign of lack of recovery from previous training. But it can mean the runner is coming down with a cold/infection. It could also mean that he/she did not sleep well enough the previous night. If the runner is otherwise okay, the session might be completed that night, but watch their health for the next few days and get them to make an extra effort to get more sleep."

8

It seems to me that you are giving HR values a level of finality that they should not receive. The point of the HR reserve idea off a max value is to estimate common physiological changes, i.e. lactate threshold. You could be fitter, i.e. run faster at LT, while still having your LT drop a bit in terms of heart rate. I encourage people to establish all their training zones off dynamic physiological markers that can be adjusted as fitness changes.

Or you could just use pace:)

9

I am with Jason. Why not just pick up a Garmin Forerunner and run with pace using the Daniels VDOT stuff using pace instead of HR? You can get a Forerunner for just over $100 these days and the VDOT stuff is great. You wouldn’t have to guess any more.

Mike

10

Note: Some of this is a big fat N/A now that I’ve read the more recent posts in this thread (I drafted this reply offline when there were only a few replies) so take it for what it’s worth, but I didn’t want to just pitch it. Kind of funny that I basically suggested a proxy for Hadd and you went straight to the source. :wink:

Random comments, that don’t really answer your questions but give you some things to chew on:

  1. Unless I’m misreading, there are worse “problems” you could have - things are essentially working the way they are meant to in the grander scheme of things. Rate of Perceived Exertion is a funny thing and this is perhaps a little strange, but it’s not unthinkable.

  2. How long has this been happening? If this has been happening consistently for a while, that’s one thing, but perhaps it’s a relatively short term thing and a sign of some other issue? I suppose that’s one of the issues with pure HR training.

  3. What are you basing your training on (just curious). I’ve seen the rule of thumb to be run at 70-75% of HRMax, not 70-75 of HRR. In your case, to be specific (or perhaps pedantic - because you will still have the same issue with these slightly revised ranges), if your HRMax is 189, running at 70-75% of HRMax would put you between 132-142.

  4. You’re obviously on board with low HR stuff - have you read Hadd stuff (http://www.electricblues.com/Hadd.doc) and/or Maffetone? The zen moment with Hadd for me was the “see how long it takes you to run X without your heart rate going over X” and using that as one ongoing barometer of progress.

  5. You might try posting this same question on the RWOL forums (when they’re working again - they seem to be down):

http://forums.runnersworld.com

in the Marathon Race Training section

and then perhaps posting a pointer to your new thread in this existing (and fairly long) Hadd/Low HR training thread to see if people trying Hadd have any input or similar experiences:

http://forums.runnersworld.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/697106477/m/2991053345/p/2

If you provide some additional details about number of runs, days off, pace examples for long runs, etc. that might help provide a bit more context, too.

  1. Have you read Daniels Running Formula? Not low HR per se, but he is a big advocate of just plain running easy (when he’s not bagging you later in his program, that is), and I think his stuff is great once you’ve established a base.

  2. Some interesting spreadsheets with some good HR information:

A crazy spreadsheet based on Daniels:
http://www.electricblues.com/archive/DanielsTables2-9.zip

Greg Maclin’s HR ranges spreadsheet:
http://www.box.net/shared/dhc7tkor4g

  1. And finally, to sort of answer your question, I suppose anything is possible, but I would be surprised if you are overtraining or that legs are your new bottleneck. You are doing precisely what most would suggest you do - logging lots of long, slow sometimes mind-numbing miles over a long period of time and letting your body adapt and get used to that volume and distance. I’m assuming you ramped the mileage up slowly and didn’t just jump to the new higher mileage, and I assume you’re in the 5/6 runs a week category (and not doing 4 16 milers, for example) and that you’re giving yourself time to rest and fueling appropriately? Doing all that is giving time for both your cardio and your body to adapt, so this is a bit puzzling.

Good luck with the training - report back with what you uncover and how things go!

Craig

11

“typically well-trained endurance athletes have lower max HRs than untrained individuals”

Are you sure about that? I thought that maintaining a strong base helped you keep your max HR from falling 1-2 BPM each year. This would mean that a person who consistently trained would have a higher max HR than someone who did not. The exertion needed to get to max HR would be higher for a fit person than someone not trained.

yes, I’m sure. here’s a reference to start with…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17960504
the ‘related articles’ have more…

12

Yes, thanks to everyone for all the advice.

I do have a Forerunner and use it. I used it a few years ago, too, and I just wanted this year to really really develop a better aerobic base. So many in our running group, its basically, even on the long runs, lets run at our desire race pace and see who gets back to the car first. So, I never really develop a very good base. I think this is a huge problem with heart rate training, which is you pretty much have to divorce yourself from group running.

On Heart rate reserve, sorry about that, I’m referrring to using that Kervonnen method and specifically from John Parker’s heart rate running book. I have never seen my max higher than 189, and that was 2 years ago, doing 440s when it was 95 outside. My running week is usually something like: Monday, 6 miles, easy or hard however I feel. Tuesday, 10 easy. Wed, usually do mile repeats, either one or two mile repeats, of about 4-5, or just a real hard 4-5 mile threshold run on about a 7:30 mile (which is about 10k speed for me). Thursday, 10 miles easy, with hill running, 8-12 seconds on a 7-8 incline, 5-6 of those. Friday, I will run whatever miles necessary to get me to about 35-38 miles. Saturday, I usually take off, but haven’t been lately and may run 4-6 miles on Saturday. Sunday, long run 18+ strictly on heart rate with maybe some progression or speeding up near the end, last 4-5 miles.

So I use pace and Garmin, but I am also watching heart rate in all of this. I think my threshold is at aboutg 164 BPMS, which is about 7:40 - 7:45, (I’m not very fast compared to any of you, I’m 46) I did a half marathon two weeks after starting running again back in October and it was a 1:46 or 1:47, about an 8:11 pace. I’ve run much more after that, and trying to hold an 8 all the way around for marathon.