HADD training plan

12467127

Comments

  • image Great pic! image

    I don't see any swimming pix though! image

    After a sprint tri earlier this year, I have plans to have a go at the Olypmpic distance in 2012, so some time swimming and cycling isn't bad. However, tri is just a bit of fun ... I'm a rubbish swimmer and nothign more than a bike-commuter, so really I need to get back to running asap.

    LS21 wrote (see)
    Indeed! So m advice to Dan is to run really fast for 2 weeks and really, REALLY injure yourself. Then by next Autumn you'll be setting PBs every week! image

    Okay, good advice ... I'm off for a session right now! image

  • Dr.Dan wrote (see)

    image Great pic! image

    I don't see any swimming pix though! image


    This is about as close as I get to swimming these days. Check out the cycling tan!

    https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/312550_10150353632959595_684159594_9599980_8175197_n.jpg

  • I think I need one of those yellow things for my next Tri. image
  • Tough luck Dr D. I assume it was the Abbey Dash you were targeting. Check those legs out Mr P.

    __________________

    Recently started blog  -
    Latest Post

    2010 New Year resolution achieved

  • Great pics Phil!

    That reminds me too - I've not listened to Kraftwerk's 'Tour de France' for a while. Or 'Club Tropicana' by Wham! either....

  • Heard Barbie Girl on the radio the other morningimage

    Anyway that reminds me too - Tenerife on Friday.... yeeeeeeeesss!

  • Enjoy Brian - not jealous at all.....

    Anyway, I've not ran Mon or Tue this week and won't do much for the rest of it, so I did my 2,400m test this morning. More so I have something as a benchmark to measure against. So scores on the doors were:

    Rep 1 - 124bpm avg = 8'23 pace
    Rep 2 - 133bpm avg = 8'03 pace
    Rep 3 - 143bpm avg = 7'27 pace
    Rep 4 - 153bpm avg = 6'56 pace
    Rep 5 - 163bpm avg = 6'11 pace

    Those stats are actually better than I thought they would be, and as I say, something to measure progress against in 6 weeks time.
  • Brian - good stuff.  I'm off to Lanzarote for a long weekend in December for the "work Christmas do".  Apparently it was cheaper for four of us to fly there than 3 of my [Dutch - ed.] colleagues to fly to London.  Fair enough!

    LS21 - Good to set the benchmark.  I should probably do the same when I've got a few miles back in my legs...

    I think the main thing I'll be using this for is the discipline of sticking to lower heart rates than I'm used to (at least initially) as a way of building the legs back into running shape.  I've swapped notes with BR about how my 'easy pace' may not be quite easy enough, as the heart and lungs are strong but the (running) legs possibly lagging behind.  Especially at the moment, my aerobic system is pretty well honed, but my running muscles have been asleep for quite some time.  I know when I tried a tentative 5 mile run a few months ago (which was fine at the time but hip felt niggly the following evening) I averaged 74% maxHR for a pace of around 7:40.  All very well to see a decent HR/pace ratio after such a lay-off, and breathing was fine, but perhaps the legs were trying a little too hard.  I think I'm better off targetting HR around 70% max initially, and accept whatever pace that comes out at.  Then once I've managed a few weeks of niggle-free running and I'm getting back towards the 45 - 50 mpw area I can start pushing it into zones 2,3, etc.  Thoughts/comments? 

  • JohnnyBike wrote (see)
    Tough luck Dr D. I assume it was the Abbey Dash you were targeting.

    Yep, Abbey Dash. Got my sub-40 there last year and was hoping for better this time. Oh well.

    LS21 ... nice Hadd-testing ... what is your maxHR? By the way, is the nickname anything to do with Otley?

  • Phil - sounds like a good plan yes. You've had such a long lay-off from running that a patient comeback will see you reap big rewards I think.

    This next bit may just be personal to me too, but I've really struggled with what some of the numbers have been re my pace. I'm using a Garmin (with HRM built in) and by far the best thing I've done is to set it up with just 3 fields visible - Time, current HR and Average HR. I've also turned 'Auto Lap' off. Having a mile split pop up saying '10'xx' was demoralising! Anything showing pace was very counter-productive for me too. If the Avg Pace was say 9'07 halfway through I'd try and get it to say 8'xx, which is totally not the point of training to time/HR.

    So I now run for 30 mins at the correct HR, turn round and run back. I don't really know how far I've gone or how fast until I get home, by which time it doesn't matter. On the actual run I'm just focussing on HR and nothing else, and it's helped me tremendously.

    As I say, might just be me but I've spent all year being hung up on pacing and it's been hard for me to accept some of the slow speeds I'm currently knocking out.
  • Phil, My thoughts are that 65-70% is ideal for the lower intensity workouts. In your case this will probably be in the region of 8 - 8.30 m/miling, and as such will feel pretty pedestrian. But 4-6weeks of this type of intensity will freshen you up mentally and physically, and leave you champing at the bit for the higher zones. Once you begin to run in this zone, there is little or no impact on the legs and therefore this leaves the door open to run durations of 70mins upwards. So the mileage does build-up to a reasonable level even though you are running slowly.

  • Dan - x-post (sorry, on a Blackberry and takes me ages to type on here!)

    My max HR is about 180bpm I think. The highest I've got it all year (including races) is 178bpm. That's exactly 15bpm lower than Joe's in the Hadd document, so I've just knocked 15bpm off all the stats quoted (hence my Rep 5 being only 165bpm as oppose to 180bpm)

    And re the name - a question often asked! No nowt to do with Leeds. LS are my initials, and back in the day I used to race Moto-Cross. #21 was the race number given to me by the Yorkshire Centre, so it's from there. Not very imaginative I know, but there we are!
  • LS21, X-post. And you've hit the nail on the head.

    I do something similar with my garmin - a watered-down version if you like. The screen I use has current HR, lap avg HR, Time and distance. So if I can be bothered, I use the time and distance to calc my pace.

    We so, so get hung up on pace and miles (I'm as guilty as anyone). It's benchmarking all the time. How does this month compare to last month / this month last year etc?

  • Cheers guys.  Actually, thinking back to when I first started running regularly (way back in, ooh, 2006!) I was very much into HR training, and at the time I was using a lower estimate of max HR (about high 180s based on a hill test, as opposed to 200+ which I've since seen at the end of races.)  So it's not like I haven't run at 135-140 bpm before, as opposed to 145-150 which I later got used to.

    LS21 - Think I'll be doing exactly the same thing with my Garmin.  During previous injury come-backs my tactic has been to leave the Garmin at home completely and run according to PE, but if I'm brutally honest that probably meant running a little slower than when fully fit, but at a slightly higher heart rate than recommended...

    Discipline.  Focus.  Patience.  image

  • Couldn't sleep this morn so been out for a Brian-inspired Zone 1 amble. 45 mins at 122bpm avg. Came out at 10'11 pace, but I actually really enjoyed it. Lovely
  • LS21, It's liberating to rediscover the reason we love to run. Suck it up.

  • I had my usual 60 mins walk into work.  Average pace 15:00m/m.  Didn't measure HR but it probably dropped off a few beats when I stopped to get a pesky stone out of my shoe.  image

    (35 - 40 miles of walking to and from work each week is probably helping with the weight loss as much as the home made soups!)

  • LS21 ... so my maxHR is 178 bpm, which is pretty close to yours. It would be interesting for me to try the Hadd test for comparison - I haven't ever done one despite sticking to the training plan itself. I just never got around to it ... I had planned to run mine at 130, 140, 145, 155 and 165 bpm, based on rounding the %maxHR derived from Joe. Do you have any recent race times to compare with your current stats?

    During marathon training I managed my early morning 20+ mile runs at 123/124 bpm at 9/m and got my subLT 10M sessions at 145 bpm to average 7:15/m. I never got to the stage where I increased the sub-LT HR to 147/148 bpm ... I was just about there but races got in the way..

  • PhilPub wrote (see)

    I had my usual 60 mins walk into work.  Average pace 15:00m/m.  Didn't measure HR but it probably dropped off a few beats when I stopped to get a pesky stone out of my shoe.  image

    (35 - 40 miles of walking to and from work each week is probably helping with the weight loss as much as the home made soups!)
    Talking of weight ... I got a bit of a shock on the scales this morning. 3-4 weeks with only 55 miles of running in total have led to a 9lb increase! I'd better get organised with the cross-training and stop eating as if I was still marathon training! image
  • The regular first thing in the morning mince for me too

    I think I'm going to have to ditch the music for these Zone 1 runs...every time I look at my watch I'm going too fast (or my heart is).  Maybe I just need a slow tracks selection.

    One interesting discovery I have made is that a heart rate of 135 BPM for some reason seems to make me want to poop.  2nd emergency pitstop required in a fortnight.  If there are any military physicist / biologist / boffin types out there this could be the missing link in Brown note research.

  • Dan  - re race times. A couple yes. One was a Half at Warrington - 1'23'2x, which was about 20-30 secs/mile slower than I was in the Spring. I then did the 6 Stage Relay the week after (only 6k) and was again about 20-30 secs/mile slower.

    I then did Amsterdam Mara but didn't 'race' it - but I thought I'd have ran 3'05ish based on the 20-30 secs/mile loss mentioned above if I had raced it (so about 6'55-7'00 pace).

    I then did the Hadd test yesterday. My pace for the 4th rep (which coincides with my Mara HR allowing for a bit of drift) was 6'56/mile. I ran London at 6'27 pace I think, so it seems to be bang on where I am right now - about 20-30 secs down.

    Aim is obviously to try and get that rep4 pace down to where I was in the Spring, and if it gets to 6'17 pace - well that would be lovely (as that equals a 2'44'xx Mara time!!)

  • Interesting LS21 ... even in your current state, you're much faster than me at my best (90 min HM, 40 min 10K). And you are capable of maintaining a much higher maraHR than me (10 bpm higher). In theory my Hadd Test stats should come out much slower than yours. When I start back again, I really must do the test thsi time!

  • Interesting on the Mara HR Dan.

    At VLM I set off having a pop at 2'45. My HR was creeping up after only 4 miles. From 157 to 161 between miles 4 and 8. So at 8 I ditched it before I had a car crash! I then ran the rest purely on feel, which came in at 157ish- I ran well as a result.

    But I was impressed by just how accurate the Hadd test was for me, in terms of the pace/HR relationship he discusses. As I say, it was pretty much bang on to the second on Rep 4 in terms of what I think my current Mara pace is, so that's a key benchmark/measure for me moving forwards.

  • Interesting stuff. I am intrigued by the data so, dug my last test out (29th Sep). So just under 3 weeks before Abingdon, on a treadmill at 1% gradient, with 90s rest between each rep:

    12:35  120  8:26
    11:31  130  7:43
    10:47  140  7:14
    10:04  150  6:45
    9:23    161  6:17
     

    My max was 190 3 years ago, so I calculate on 187 now. I've seen 184 this year, so won't be far off. My marathon HRs are HRav=165, and I set off at 155. I did Abingdon in 2:56 which works out at 6:42 pace. I ran at 6:35 pace up to about 21 miles when I started to cramp, so eased off.

    I think it would make sense for me to do 125-135-145-155-165 in the test, and then the 4th rep should equate almost directly to my marathon pace. Or should I be doing 130-170?

  • Not sure Brian! I had a similar thought/dilemma prior to doing mine. I wasn't sure whether to go 125-165, or 120-160. In the end I did the former.

    Going on my 'vast' experience (err, one test!) I think the 125-165 was right for me, because the 155 reading seems to equate to what my current Marathon fitness is. So following that logic, because your max is 7bpm higher than mine I'd do 130-170, with the 160bpm rep being the one that most closely resembles your current Mara pace. But as I say, I've only done one so not really in a position to advise!

    For info my test was done on the track too, all off 90 secs rest.

  • Phil, That's the great thing about running marathons to HR. It really does help the pacing, especially when conditions are not favourable. If I had a quid for everybody that told me a tail of woe about VLM2011, and how it was too hot!

    My best position (600th'ish I think) in London was gained in 2007 when it was hot.

  • LS21, I think you're probably right. I've shyed away from that one cos 170 is hard!
  • Brian. ... based on the %maxHRs of "Joe" (he tested at 73%, 78%, 82%, 88% and 93%), you should be doing: 137, 146, 153, 165 and174 bpm., so rounding off to 135, 145, 155, 165, 175 .... I reckon you took it a bit too easy! image

    LS21 ... interesting that your maraHR is 157 bpm as my HM PB of 90:06 was run at 157 bpm. Looks like I need to push my lactate threshold back quite a way!

  • Maybe Dan. That Half I did at Warrington was 164bpm avg, but I paced it badly and was on my arse at halfway.
  • LS21 ... What was your mara time/pace when running at 157bpm avHR? You said you were aiming for 2:45 but backed off.
Sign In or Register to comment.