#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

• Very intersting reading,  72.5% it is then?

Im depressed,.  After  my easy 6 miles yesterday my calf is playing up again.   Not sure if I just need to take a month off running and start again in new year!

• spen, I'll let you into a little secret. Physios are generally not worth their salt. Go get a good sports massage, and book in regularly. Then get on the foam roller as many time as you can.

• I re-read some of the original HADD document (which is good to do now and then as it brings us back to what we are trying to achieve) and lots of the questions I have been asking are answered in the document. I use it as a 'guide' and it does me good to go back to it now and then, re-inforcing what I am aiming for. This section covers at least the basic concept for those (like me) who like the stats (remember to adjust for own maxHR) - I highlighted in bold the %of MaxHR which I added into the document;

As a general rule, the best possible HR/pace/effort you can maintain for a full marathon (without crashing, hitting the wall, etc) will not be closer to HRmax than 15-20bpm. Getting within 20bpm of HRmax might be hard enough at first, but with proper training it is possible to get even within 15-20bpm of HRmax. Closer than this (as an average over the whole race) I would not expect you to be capable of.
So, HRmarathon is ~20bpm below HRmax, and easy running HR is another 30bpm (or more) below HRmarathon (therefore 50bpm or more below HRmax). Like this:

If your HRmax is 193 OR HIGHER, then the following applies:
HRmax: 193+ (even if over 200)
Best possible HRmarathon: 175-177 (90%-92%) HRav (note, this is the average taken from mile 5 to mile 25, not the peak. Your HR might peak to 181 (93%) in the final miles as you throw everything onto the fire).
Suggested training HR's: Easy every day running: 145 HR (75%) or lower (If you begin really unused to this form of training, initially you might start at 150 (77%), but as soon as the pace at this HR improves, it is recommended that you reduce your easy running HR to 145 (75%) or lower). This can often feel very slow to begin with, but should improve within 3-6 weeks and continue to improve for months. You may do as much running as you wish at this HR/intensity (always being careful to avoid overuse injury).
Initial LTHR (initial lactate threshold heart rate): As with Joe in the example, begin at 155-160 (80%-83%) and do not let the HR rise on the run. Build up the distance you can run for, over time, to 10 miles. At first, you may have to slow down within the run to maintain HR, but over the weeks and months, you should note that the running speed begins to remain more stable and you do not have to slow down (so much) to stop your HR rising. In time, the running pace at this HR (and all other HR’s above it) will also improve. Only move this HR up when your running pace vs HR is rock steady and you (easily) are able to run 10 miles at this HR without loss of pace or rise in HR. At that point, only move the HR up by 5bpm and begin again. The slower you build up the first time, the better your pace at HRmarathon will be. Remain at each HR as long as you are seeing improvement on the 2400m test and definitely until your pace vs HR is stable. You are trying to reach a state where your predicted/expected marathon pace and your 170 HR (88%) pretty much coincide in the 2400m test. And that this pace per mile can be maintained in training for 10-15 miles at 170-175 HR (88%-90%) without rising effort or rising HR.

• ✭✭✭

• BD2000. Thanks for the reminder. I have just realised why I thought Joes HRs were 10 beats lower than they actually were. I had saved part of the document with some typical weeks in, and I had doctored the HRs for my use. ie. because I thought that my HRmax at the time was 186, I had deducted 10 from all the HRs.

• I know Brain.   I have one problem,  I get physio for free and cannot afford a sports massage!    Dont know what to do now!!!!

Reading that again,   all easy running is done below 75% and initial Sub LT running should be done in the range 80-83%.

70% running is nice though if you are able to run at this speed.

• ✭✭✭

I was out of VLM due to an injury 6 weeks prior Spen. Lots of physio helped but didn't really get to the cause. Addmittedly it was getting better, but after a sports massage I was cured!

BD2 - My 5k HR is 17bpm lower than my max. My Marathon HR is another 12bpm below that. No way I could marathon at MaxHR - 20bpm.

• Going back to the question about time on feet per week:

I am averaging 49miles per week this year, pace 7:57 m/m. That amouts to 6.5 hours per week. In marathon training I peaked at 75miles per week, pace 7:45. This amounts to 9 hours per week.

• ✭✭✭

A busy friday morning. Lots of X-posts going on. Brian, I am curious of what you will make of re-reading the original HADD document above. I am really wondering if we are all running a bit too slowly here!

Talking of which - The alarm went off at 5.30am, but I instantly felt a sore throat so decided to listen to my body (for a change) and rolled over for an extra hours kip.

• Keir, Never say no way.

spen, similar situation to me, I get half my fizz costs back (hospital fund), but at the end of the day if it works..... my case is helped by the fact that I get massages from a mate, and he gives me discounted rates.

I think the bottom line is enjoyment. And if we're injured we're certainly not enjoying it.

• Mmmm part of my last post was lost there!!!!!

I went on to say that running at 75% or lower, and S&C work is the way forward.

(Beware of using the less than symbol, it has strange qualities!!!!!)

• My take on this is.   Run all miles at 70% to you get upto your target mileage so reducing the chance of injury.   Then move it over to 75% and then finally add the sub LT.

• Think this is the relevant part:

The low aerobic pace had to be ~50 bpm lower than his HRmax (70-75% of HRmax). Since Joe'sHRmax was 193, this put his easy mileage at 145 HR (or lower). The second HR was to be a bit higher, but still under LT. This one was set at 155-160. (Note here: the LT at this point was still low, and occurring at a low HR. In time, Joe would be able to run at marathon HR 175 very very comfortably, because the lactate at that effort/HR would be low by race time. Until then, he had to work BELOW this effort and ease the comfort zone up until it reached 175+). This second intensity was set at Marathon HR minus 15-20 bpm (for now, it would be allowed to rise as Joe's fitness improved... as will be explained in the example). As a general guide, and in my experience, this is what I have found works best. Marathon HR will be approx 15-20 beats lower than HRmax (no better). And aerobic conditioning HR needs to be another 30 bpm below THAT (and hence ~50bpm below HRmax) I will qualify this in a more general statement at the end.

• Keir, thanks for the Hadd document - saved for prosperity. Hope the sore throat doesn't turn into the lurgy.

Another thing to remember is that Hadd's subject Joe was an experienced talented runner. That's why he got to 80% and 83% very quickly:

"A little over 5 years ago I coached Joe to two 2.27 marathons. We had expected the second race (some 6 months after the first) to be sub-2.25, but raceday proved to be extremely wild and windy and Joe ran his heart out and yet just broke his earlier 2.27 by a bare 2 seconds."

• Whats the conclusion then?

• ✭✭✭
spen71 wrote (see)

My take on this is.   Run all miles at 70% to you get upto your target mileage so reducing the chance of injury.   Then move it over to 75% and then finally add the sub LT.

...or two.

...and then once your pace with no drift at 83% has plateaued, push it up a little.

But your summary in the box works for me

• Don't think there is a technical conclusion. Everybody's different. One approach may not be right for all runners. That's why i won't give advice until I know someones background/experience etc.

The bottom line is enjoyment. We will enjoy it more if we're not injured. And we will also enjoy it more if we see some improvement. Generally speaking, for less experienced runners a good spate of 70% stuff is a good start. And has spen states, moving up in time to 75% and beyond. I think it's probably not a good idea to set long term plans in concrete, maybe planning the next 6 weeks only.

Any other "conclusions"?

• ✭✭✭
Brian. wrote (see)

Any other "conclusions"?

1. IMHO 65% is too slow for anyone other than absolute beginners or when recovering from injury / a marathon.

2.Despite all my best intentions, I continue to over think my running.

Perhaps I need to paint 'Just 'f...ing do it' on my bedroom ceiling, so it is the first thing I see every morning!

• spen71 wrote (see)

Whats the conclusion then?

Have you plan and stick to it and don't read to many forum post and get confused and think oh S**t !!  am I running too slow/fast ? too much/not enough? WHR/MHR? Hadd/P&D?

I am off for a run.....of some kind

• frustratingly, when I run slowly I feel like i'm plodding the ground more, it feels less natural, less graceful, and harder to maintain good form. but i can plod on like this for hours.

when i run more quickly i feel brighter, lighter, more in control of my form, but i can only continue this for a short time because my legs start to tire and my breathing becomes laboured.

it's so tempting when out for a run to let the slow pace creep upwards because it feels more biomechanically comfortable, but then i guess i'm not optimising the aerobic training benefit.

the holy grail for me is for the form and lightness of the second type of running to feel similar in effort to the first type. i'm blindly trusting that covering lots of slow miles over time will do this.

• No real conclusion Brian - however, being 53 and running marathons when I was in my twenties I was in for a real shock last year when I took up running again 12 months ago (I didn't realise how bad 30 years of couch potato work was for me). So when I started again I knew I had some work to do - little did I realise just how much.

It was very easy to make quick progress and complete 2 HM's in the first 9 months and get a 5% improvement for my 2nd. But at what cost?? Injury was the cost. I didn't realise that my body was so prone to it at this age when all I had to go on was how I felt 30 years ago (which at the time was 'invincible'). So after spending a fair bit of money on physio to get me through my first HM's I decided I needed to reign back a bit and look for a program that would allow me to get what I wanted out of my running - and thats when I found HADD.

Initially I tried HADD before my 2nd HM (June this year) and realised I needed more time to see this through and went back to the old regime of harder training and visits to my sports physio to get a 'quick fix'. Now I'm fully converted and committed to HADD - I may not get as much mileage in as I want but what I am doing I am thoroughly enjoying. I love the stats and want to make improvements and I know even though at first it was 'mega - difficult' keeping that HR where it was supposed to be (down in my boots) I am now 'feeling' the benefits.

And so if I do have any conclusion it is this - almost anyone willing to put the time and effort (and above all patience) into HADD will reap the rewards in the long term. Running at 75% and less HAS had a beneficial effect not only on my aerobic capacity but also my wallet!! I can hardly wait to move up to 80% - but wait I must until that magic 9 -10 miles at constant pace and HR lands in my lap.

Keep the faith

• Think I will take rowing up.  Must be easier , hang on their is the pete plan!

• ✭✭✭
Keir wrote (see)
Brian. wrote (see)

Any other "conclusions"?

1. IMHO 65% is too slow for anyone other than absolute beginners or when recovering from injury / a marathon.

It's all relative ... 2 hours at 65% will be "aerobically better" that 50 min at 75% ... and 2 hours at 75% may be too hard-going if you have a sub-LT planned the next day, in which case 65% may be more appropriate.

Also, the more you run at low HR, the faster the pace at that HR ... so it's actually much more frustrating for beginners to run at 65% than it is for hard-core Haddites.

• BD2000, Thanks for the background. Glad you are enjoying it. Myself, I'm not far your junior at 51. I came to running in my early thirties, after realising that I wasn't enjoying footie anymore. Took up marathons in 1997 (3:06) and then tried in vain for 10 years to go sub-3. I discovered HR training in 2005, and that together with the help of the RW sub-3 thread, did my first sub 3 hours in 2007, and have not gone above 3 hours in the 6 since 2007. I coached football for 7 years. And I now coach cricket and help out at my running club leading groups of beginners. I have also run my own distance running course, and donated the proceeds back to my club. I have set lots of personal marathon schedules in the past, and love all the training talk.

My current goals are: 1. to be UK ranked (at the end of the year) in the top 20 for marathon. 2. Sub-80 HM 3. Sub-60 10M

I am currently training for the Brass Monkey (HM in York Jan 20th), and I then have a bash at a 10miler in Feb (Snake Lane). My long term plans are next marathon in Autumn 2013 (not sure which one yet - hoping Berlin).

DrDan, agree totally.

• ✭✭✭
I was just thinking that anyone actually working and running today is going to log in later and think WTF! I love this this thread...
• I've posted this before but it's quite a while ago. I think it's worth posting again though, given there are quite a few newbies and runners dipping in and out.

Hadd is novel to most runners, new and old. The running to HR and time rather than pace and miles to most is very refreshing. And with this novelty value comes a great deal of enthusiasm. This in itself is fine but the enthusiasm can lead to the runner getting carried away. Because running at lower HRs is less stressful, it feels like there is less necessity for rest/recovery etc and this can in turn lead to over indulgence, more miles and injury. Be careful to get the TLC in as well. By this I mean general maintenance - massage, stretching and strength&conditioning.

Also take care to adhere to the correct recovery procedures where necessary. Next post will include a useful document, the detail may be known to most but will act as a refresher.

• World Class Athlete Recovery – What Mo does after hard training and racing!

The following is a guide to how to recover from our hard training sessions and racing.

Some of it you will be able to do all after every session, some of it will only be possible on a weekend, but the more of it you can incorporate into your training the better.

World class athletes spend many hours a day working just on recovery. It can take up to 48 hours to recover from a hard session or race. If you want to be the best, train like the best...

1.) Re-hydrate – after finishing your race or session rehydrate with sports drink. This needs to be done within 10mins of finishing

2.) Re-fuel – a light snack which contains both carbohydrates and protein to get fuel back in to your muscles. A chocolate milk drink is ideal. If you don’t like chocolate milk, find an alternative. You want something with a carbohydrate-to-protein ratio of 4:1.

3.) Stretch – This should be 10-15mins of stretching and should be done after you have re-hydrated. It can be at the same time as you snack. Stretch all your muscles out – you should find that you are much more flexible than when you started your warm-up!

4.) Ice Bath – are you tough enough? This is a great way of helping muscles recover. You can either sit in a bath of cold water for 10mins or run the cold shower on your legs for 15-20mins. Another method is hot/cold treatment 30 seconds hot shower, 30seconds cold shower continuous for 10-15mins. Try them all out and see what works best for you.

5.) Eat – Within 1-2hours of finishing eat properly. A well balanced meal with carbs, veg and protein.

6.) Sleep – have a power nap or at the very least put your feet up and relax for an hour.

7.) Bath – About an hour before bed have a hot bath with muscle soak in it.

8.) Stretch – again!

9.) Sleep – Have a good night’s sleep.

• I must confess to not being able to man-up to the ice bath!

• ✭✭✭

I'd be interested to know, now that he has baby twins, if Mo manages to get in stages 6 - 9 after every session!

• Dr Dan -

Also, the more you run at low HR, the faster the pace at that HR ... so it's actually much more frustrating for beginners to run at 65% than it is for hard-core Haddites.

I couldn't agree more - it was hard enough in the beginning to get below 75% let alone 65%. I can't get below 70% yet, so 65 is still a way off.