12 replies to this topic

[bennie]

Hi Everyone,

I'm just back from one of my interval sessions today.

Here's the results:

Warm Up: 17:30 mins @ 6:13 pace for 2.82 kms @ 137 Avg HR

Planned Interval Work : 1km x 4 @ goal 4:32 mins/km pace with 1 minute light/jog or Standing Rest....

Laps____Time______Distance____Pace_____Max HR_____HR Avg
Lap 1___4:30.6____1.00 km_____4:32_____175________167 (86% MaxHR)
Lap 2___5:02.0____1.10 km_____4:34_____176________172 (88% MaxHR)
Lap 3___4:30.0____1.00 km_____4:30_____179________174 (89% MaxHR)
Lap 4___4:31.6____1.00 km_____4:31_____184________177 (91% MaxHR)
Lap 5: I got 1/2 way through the last one and pulled the pin. Sorry :-( I was running past water and simply had to drink ). I was quite exhausted by this stage.

Warm Down: 14:04 mins @ 5:28 pace for 2.57 kms @ 165 Avg HR

Now.... time for the analysis and this is where I get a touch confused due to 'definitions'.

Today's session was defined as "interval work" right. Let's have a look at Daniel's definition for it, my current VDOT score (41.5) and the suggested pace I should run at. The results unfortunately don't match up :-(

Jack Daniel's defines 'Interval training' @ 98%-100% of MaxHR (For me my Max HR is 195 : I know it's this because i've recorded it in a lab at a max aerobic test. Note: I took the test in on the 13th May this year.).

For my current running ability/time's the defined pace was 4:32min kilometres.

So away I went.

The 1st km was pretty easy
the 2nd km was harder
the 3rd km sucked
the 4th km bloody hurt
the 5th km I was too knackered to finish it...

BUT!!! I look at where my HR average is to what it should have been and everything is out. I actually haven't had an 'interval session' at all, even though I was running at the pace that Daniel's said I should have!

So now the big question. Why aren't I getting to the MaxHR values as expected???? What i've noticed over the past few months that it is becoming increasingly more difficult for me to push my HR over 180! The perceived effort is HUGE and I have to run for quite some time and at a ever increasing intensity to get my heart rate up there!!!

The obvious answer (maybe) is that I'm simply getting fitter..... So am I simply running too slow now? During the last 2 laps my heart rate SHOULD have been higher! Perhaps I shouldn't have pulled the pin on the final lap and actually toughed it out as I should have??? :-(

What are people's definitions of an 'interval session'? Should I be running faster? Should instead I run say 8 x 500metres instead @ 4:12 pace (but if I do this this I'm supposedly now doing 'repetition work' according to Daniels. Arrrrrrrggghhhh!!!! I'm confused :-(

Today's run for me was definitely !!! HARD !!!. My work rate was way up, my breathing very fast, legs getting quite numb, I was sweating to no end, and during the 1 minute break it took all my strength to maintain my posture and not bend over and put my hands on my knees. I found a nice tree instead! :-)

So please... help.... any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

I do feel though that the run i've done above has been beneficial for me, but could have it been better! I now ask the question to my lovely CR friends!

Thanks guys/girls.
Bennie

ps. Just thought I'd quickly say that my eventual goal next year is to do a marathon. However I really do enjoy the 10km event! of which i hope the above will help me with overall speed/fitness/etc....

Edited by bennie, 22 December 2009 - 02:20 PM.

[EnduranceMachine]

i am 17 when i was 16 i was able to run 10k races at around 200bpm average now i race mostly 3k's and 5k's at about 186-192bpm so i think it would just be you getting fitter. You Can probaly only max out when you are fresh and tapered for a goal race.

[luckyguy]

G'day Bennie, coincidentally I did my speed session today as well, but earlier before the heat. Speed sessions are tough any time but harder when the heat is pounding down on your scone. Expect your times to be a bit slower and HR a bit more erratic.

Just a couple observations mate. 4.30 + for your 1 k sessions sounds pretty right for you, though I would think that 1 minute rest isn't sufficient. Probably 3 to 4 min. recovery is closer to the mark. So if you're running a 2 x 500 metre laps for your k then the 3rd lap should be your recovery at a pace that allows you to recover before your next interval (how ever long that takes). This should help you to run consistent intervals at your designated pace.

I often juggle the distance of my speed sessions around from week to week. 1k's, slightly faster 500 m and faster again for 250's. A bit of variety is the spice of life (and running).

As for your HR max. you may need to re-calculate this given the massive improvements in fitness that you've made in the past 12 months.

So good effort today old boy. Another 5 X 1 next week in cooler weather (hopefully) and see how that compares.

Anyway a couple ideas for you to get this thread started.

You doing great guns. Merry Xmas, Michael.

[frankie17]

Maybe your HRmax is lower than you think. There are a few different ways to predict it...how do these compare:


http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Heart_rate

[jasegroom]

Bennie - I think your issue here is nothing more than confusion over the definition of interval training. Note that Daniels defines interval work at 95-100% of VO2 Max, not MaxHR (p121, Daniels' Running Formula 2nd Edition). 95-100% VO2 Max is not the same thing as 95-100% Max HR - at 95-100% MaxHR you would most likely be supra-maximal from a VO2 point of view.

Your session sounds very good to me, although the fact that you attempted a fifth interval when your plan was to do 4 suggests you might have got a bit over-excited! If you are doing 10km pace intervals, then your %HR values for those intervals look good. In my opinion, you should not be approaching MaxHR in normal interval training - getting up to 90% is a good enough workout.

[BostonCalling]

Hi Bennie,

I agree with Lucky Guy. Your pace sounds fine, it is your recovery that needs tweaking. You should be recovering for an equal amount or slightly less than the workout time in "I Pace". In your case, I would suggest a 3-4min easy jog between sets. Good luck with it.

[flick]

Hi Bennie,

I too am currently doing 1k intervals at 4:30 ish. Albeit female and with a decade more up my sleeve, I agree with the others 1 min recovery is insufficient.

Flick

[bennie]

Firstly, thanks for the reply's people! much appreciated!

EnduranceMachine, on Dec 22 2009, 03:15 PM, said:

i am 17 when i was 16 i was able to run 10k races at around 200bpm average now i race mostly 3k's and 5k's at about 186-192bpm so i think it would just be you getting fitter. You Can probaly only max out when you are fresh and tapered for a goal race.

Hiya....

As far as i'm aware you're max HR really doesn't move that much mate... I've attached the results of my max aerobic test to this post. As you can see I clocked in at 194... However as suggested by the sports scientist to simplify things simply make it 195... he still thought i had another 10 seconds in me! lol!

So 195 it definitely is for now. Note: Over the past few months i've still been hitting (Melbourne 1/2 marathon) 191/192... and that was only a few months ago....

as said prior, i only hit my max when a few things happen... I run for quite some time, a hot day and EXTREME effort... my effort today was very very hard but not extreme....

I do agree however that i am fitter! <insert big grin here> it just takes a bloody big effort to get there now!

luckyguy, on Dec 22 2009, 04:06 PM, said:

G'day Bennie, coincidentally I did my speed session today as well, but earlier before the heat. Speed sessions are tough any time but harder when the heat is pounding down on your scone. Expect your times to be a bit slower and HR a bit more erratic.

Just a couple observations mate. 4.30 + for your 1 k sessions sounds pretty right for you, though I would think that 1 minute rest isn't sufficient. Probably 3 to 4 min. recovery is closer to the mark. So if you're running a 2 x 500 metre laps for your k then the 3rd lap should be your recovery at a pace that allows you to recover before your next interval (how ever long that takes). This should help you to run consistent intervals at your designated pace.

Hiya buddy! Thanks for the post... The heat was there to be honest, but i was running in the shade for most of it. and to be honest if the heat was a contributing factor at lunch time today then my HR should have been higher.... I'm actually expecting that in the my HR will be even more off the mark for the 'suggested pace'.

re: your observations for pace.. yes.. i agree with you, for me 4:30 is hard work but doable.... and it seems a good pace to train at....

The WHOLE reason for such a short rest time was the purposeful attempt to get my HR up WAY high! It was quite intentional mate. I was recovering ok to be honest.. as the intervals went on obviously i became more tired..

re: consistency.. i actually thought they were quite consistent... accept for the 5th one though... :-)

luckyguy, on Dec 22 2009, 04:06 PM, said:

I often juggle the distance of my speed sessions around from week to week. 1k's, slightly faster 500 m and faster again for 250's. A bit of variety is the spice of life (and running).

As for your HR max. you may need to re-calculate this given the massive improvements in fitness that you've made in the past 12 months.

Indeed... i've definitely got planned some faster 500 metre work next week... Now that is going to be fun and at the moment the fastest i've really ever run before! hehehehehe

re: max heart rate IMHO ( and my own experiences as a student nurse and talking with a friend that's a sports scientist that maxHR doesn't really change that much ( but depending up on the person )... 4 years ago, when I did some running I hit a MaxHR of 201 ( so it's dropped a touch but really not that much )... mind you i tore a calf that day and it stopped me running. oh well. lessons learnt...

And as said... during events, like a 10km run or a 3km time trail, i'll quite easily get close to 192/193 with extreme effort.

luckyguy, on Dec 22 2009, 04:06 PM, said:

So good effort today old boy. Another 5 X 1 next week in cooler weather (hopefully) and see how that compares.

Anyway a couple ideas for you to get this thread started.

You doing great guns. Merry Xmas, Michael.

Thanks for the fine encouragement mate! I'll try it again next week with a same target time of 4:30 and see what happens... As i was telling you on Sunday ( i might have told you???) in the past 5 weeks (of regular consistent 5 days a week training), i've seen my average HR come down on average 8-12 beats per minute for almost every run i've done....

Have a grouse Christmas mate and take care! The girls and I are looking forward to visiting you soon! whhhoaa! :-)

frankie17, on Dec 22 2009, 04:16 PM, said:

Maybe your HRmax is lower than you think. There are a few different ways to predict it...how do these compare:
http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Heart_rate

fraid not mate... read the above comments and have a squis at the attached pdf! :-)

jasegroom, on Dec 22 2009, 04:49 PM, said:

Bennie - I think your issue here is nothing more than confusion over the definition of interval training. Note that Daniels defines interval work at 95-100% of VO2 Max, not MaxHR (p121, Daniels' Running Formula 2nd Edition). 95-100% VO2 Max is not the same thing as 95-100% Max HR - at 95-100% MaxHR you would most likely be supra-maximal from a VO2 point of view.

heya jase.... hmmmmmmmm. I don't think you're right there mate.. if you read page 123 "(Let me state that running a little less than 100 percent V02max can still produce substantial conditioning benefits, this i've identified the 'I zone" as being from 95 to 100 percent V02max (98 to 100 percent maximum heart rate).

See my confusion now mate????

jasegroom, on Dec 22 2009, 04:49 PM, said:

Your session sounds very good to me, although the fact that you attempted a fifth interval when your plan was to do 4 suggests you might have got a bit over-excited! If you are doing 10km pace intervals, then your %HR values for those intervals look good. In my opinion, you should not be approaching MaxHR in normal interval training - getting up to 90% is a good enough workout.

Thanks bud... From my own running, the races i've done and how fit i actually 'feel'. The pace simply felt 'right!'... It was a great HARD work-out without going extreme.

But now from reading Daniels on page 123 can you see how confused i am about the expected results?

To be honest, i'm not really fussed about it, nothing is going to change that my running and the speeds i'm doing it. re: the 5th inverval.. lol! i was hoping to make it!!! But yes, i do get very excited! hehehehehe!

Now the back to big question. The definition of 'Interval Training' can mean so many different things to different people!! arrrgggghhhh!

BostonCalling, on Dec 22 2009, 04:59 PM, said:

Hi Bennie,

I agree with Lucky Guy. Your pace sounds fine, it is your recovery that needs tweaking. You should be recovering for an equal amount or slightly less than the workout time in "I Pace". In your case, I would suggest a 3-4min easy jog between sets. Good luck with it.

Thanks bud.... I'm glad you're happy with my pace. you've seen me run a fair bit!!!! :-)

re: recovery.. i'm more than happy in the future to take a bit more of a time off approach to recovery.. the initial plan was indeed 2 min breaks but after this first rep i stupidily <maybe?> decided to do 1 min breaks.. oh well. lessons learn't!

Perhaps I should just not worry about the HR thing at all? <which is most circumstances I do> but the results above were just so not right with Daniel's predictions.. Or have i simply got my speeds wrong... sighhh......

Thanks for the comments so far everyone.. much appreciated!

cheers.
bennie.

ps. in about 2 weeks i'll be doing a 3km time trial.. now that if anything is going to push my HR through the roof, particularly in the last km... :-)

Attached Files

•  Report__Ben_Fox_MAY_2009.pdf   190.78K   11 downloads

[jasegroom]

bennie, on Dec 22 2009, 05:29 PM, said:

heya jase.... hmmmmmmmm. I don't think you're right there mate.. if you read page 123 "(Let me state that running a little less than 100 percent V02max can still produce substantial conditioning benefits, this i've identified the 'I zone" as being from 95 to 100 percent V02max (98 to 100 percent maximum heart rate).

See my confusion now mate????

I must admit it's been a while since I read Daniels - I quickly looked it up, but obviously didn't get 3 pages into the chapter! I can see entirely where your confusion is coming from. I'll keep my poorly-researched opinions to myself ;-)

I have found the attached spreadsheet very useful for predicting HRs at different paces though - not sure if you've seen it before? You just put in your Max and resting HRs, and a time from a recent race or time trial, and not only do you get predicted times for different distances (they come out fairly close to what you get from MacMillan), but you also get predicted HRs. I have found these to be very accurate for me, although obviously it will vary from individual to individual.

Attached Files

•  DanielsTables2_9f_00.xls   175K   32 downloads

[twosheds]

Hi Bennie,
Just reread your post and trying to make sense of it- couple of points. Sounds like a very good session to me- there are lots of variables in heart rate- including the accuracy of the measuement. I wouldnt worry too much about being out by a few percent. A couple of years ago I bought my husband a HR monitor. He went out and came back and couldnt believe that no matter how hard he ran he could get his heart rate above 99 beats/min. He got very excited about how good he might be if he could just tap into this unused heart rate.... anyway- i took it out he next day only to discover that is was set ato pecent of max. The idiot had been running arpund at close to max HR.

I personally would never do my intervals at nearly 100% effort ( Im into control and pace judgement rather than thrashing myself ( mainly because i am old and have to control my achilles injury). But I find finishing a 5 x 1km session done at just the right pace ( usually 5km race pace - but can be closer to 10km in the heat)feels brilliant- gives me confidence and really seems to help my racing more than maximal efforts.

I noticed your primary goal is a marathon next year- a 95-100% effort workout too regularly is probably not the best preparation- better to work on your aerobic systems more. Thats just my opinion.
Good luck
twosheds

[swaggerer]

Whether you you call it interval or rep it is not that important. I usually figure interval work to be more about the shorter distances such as 400m with little recovery and more intensity. Interval for me is where you run a distance where you are pretty well running flat out and only take short jog to recover. The threshold bounce is where the training effect comes in. The idea is to build up the rubbish that slows you in races, or when close to maximum effort and a bit over race pace..

You can run 400m at closer to max heart rate than 1000m. If you only have short interval to recover, you will gradually build up the rubbish that slows you down and thus adapt accordingly to get it out of your system (over time). This is not that necessary in the build -up stages for a marathon sso I wouldn't get too obsessed with runnig these too hard. It will help to sharpen you for even the marathon race though.

If you really want to get the feel for the difference between a interval and a rep. try this. Run a session of 8x400m with 200m float recovery. This is a true interval session. The last one your heart rate will be getting close to max. By the way, if a distance runner is trainng sensibly, they will only hit max heart rate in races (my opinion).

Okay. You've run it. Next week do the same session. But on the sixth one have a 10 minute jog recovery and then, after a few run throughs, go as hard as you can for the next 400m but then do the last one with the same 200m jog interval as the first six and see how much slower your last one is.

A lot depends on your make up here. For some pure edurance guys there is little differencee but some speedsters can click off a really quick 400m after the long rest. Usually though the follow-on 400m suffers. Regardless, whatever the hard 7th 400m is (the one after long recovery) gives you an idea of a pace where fatigue is the only slowing factor and the last 400m is fatigue and build up of lactate etc that slows you. From this you will work out that your 400m need not be flat out, but just hard as need be- and your interval needs to be such that you can keep within a few seconds of your maximum 400m pace found in the test above & the eight one.

If the difference is heaps then your interval recovery is too short, or you're bludging, or not fully recovered from the day before; if it is minimal your recovery interval is too much. And this is pretty well the difference between a rep and an interval.

I suppose your 1000m session could be called interval. I would suggest that to get the benefit from a 1000m -if you are looking to get your heart rate up high - reps would be better. Give yourself a few minutes to recover between each. You'll run faster longer.

However, consider this. When you pick up a glass of milk your brain adjust to the expected weight and this is the same with distance running. So beside the usual factors, if you know you only have 400m in front of you, you adjust so you will run harder and faster over 400m than if you have 1000m in front of you.

Put simply. An interval session is where you are trying to get your body up close to a maximum effort which you can only sustain for certain time or distance. Usually this is best done over 400m as most athletes need the shorter distance to get into lactate stress for a time. You then have a short recovery before getting into trouble again.

Reps are done over longer distances because you need adequate recovery to sustain the pace for the distance. Reps are also done over shorter distances for the same reason and so the athlete can get a proper leg speed workout without being slowed by build up of lactate and the by-products that slow the runner (especially the sprinters).

The main thing is, as John Landy wrote, to enjoy your session and come away looking forward to your next session.

Cheers,
Swaggererer.

[TrackRunner]

The best way to improve VO2 max is to spend time at VO2max. 400 intervals are not the best way to do this.

It takes about 2 minutes to get upto VO2max so an interval of say 5 minutes will return around 3 minutes of VO2max work. Do 5 of these with a shortish recovery in between and you get around 15 minutes of VO2max work. Not a bad return for your time.

Intervals should be one of the hardest workouts you do, the short recoveries {2-3} minutes means your heart rate doesn't drop to much. They work a treat.
Long Intervals should be done at around 5k race pace.
good luck

[B+]

Unresponsive heart rate at high work loads - - - Possibly overtrained - take afew easy days to freshen up and try again.

Train safe