Moraghan Training - Stevie G

1117111721174117611771915

Comments

  • The BusThe Bus ✭✭✭

    Simon - warned you what would happen if you mentioned the 80's! Multiple pictures of short shorts to follow image. Surely Mr K knows who I am, I took a CR off him last year - doesn't he know who he is messing with image (one he had no doubt jogged while I took it eyeballs out!)

    CC - sounds unfortunate. You've gotta round up though, even if Strava rounds everything down - even 5.99 becomes 5.9, not 6!

    My Edge 200 gets a signal really quickly most of the time, but the 310xt can take an age.

  • Bus - My memories of the 80's running is through doing the 'fun runs' when my Dad was doing the main race. EVERYBODY wore Brooks trainers and had one of those paper jackets image.

    My Dad's first race was the Ferndown fun run in 84 (just north of Bournemouth). Funny that the winner that day is now his Drinking/SW coast path walking partner! (when my dad was still smoking at the time and probably finished 40 mins behind him at least..)

  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭

    Yeah, the 80's were great.  Hideous short shorts made of that shiny material, loosely hanging there in a way that flattered no human, ever.  Facial hair on a large proportion of the men, and when they finished their races they had spit hanging in it.  Vests where the straps were like bits of string.

    They might have been fast, but they looked an absolute state.

  • Reg WandReg Wand ✭✭✭

    The only non school races I did in the 80's were the Sunday Times Fun runs in Hyde park.

    My Dad had organised an inter company competition and all his workmates were competing against each other and a squeaky 11 year old turned up and won it image

  • The BusThe Bus ✭✭✭

    Enough already image

    Double hily xc today - 7.5M early doors and then a very pleasant 5.6M evening run over Coombe Hill and Beacon Hill, behind Chequers - steep little bugger that one!

    Consolation prize for missing my 5k pb by 1 sec on Monday is that it's my highest ever age grade at 81.41%. Pete's for the same race is an absolutely superb 86% - hat's off Pete!

  • PeteMPeteM ✭✭✭

    The benefits of being an old git Bus; 86% is easily my best too but I note Dachs had an even better age grade pb of almost 86.5% in the same race; now that really is impressive as he doesn't get bumped up by being old to any significant extent!

    By the way, Run Britain really didn't rate our Battersea runs; only my 17th best this year apparently and ranked well below 3 recent run of the mill pr's done in about 19. Who knows how their algorithms work, but logic looks a bit awry!

     

  • DachsDachs ✭✭✭

    Run Britain doesn't like fast courses. I always get big scores from bog standard efforts on hilly courses, and then less for a massive PB effort on a fast course.

  • The BusThe Bus ✭✭✭
    It's because tbey base the "difficulty" on peoples relative personal performances for the same distance, which they assume is down to factors such as wind, course profile etc. As most people use bp as a target race specifically to get a fast one though, the mass number of better than average results skews the difficulty down even more than it just being a fast course in good conditions.



    Missed Dachs age grading - that is impressive for such a youngsterimage
  • PeteMPeteM ✭✭✭

    They're not even consistent across the same distance races on the same course; Of the 3 BP 5K's I did in June, July and August the course was identical and the weather almost perfect each time yet their system ranks June 0.6, July 1.0 and August 0.0 on the SSS (basically course and conditions difficulty) scale.

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    Ah, I remember the old "difficultings" of courses. One of those RB nonsenses.

    Finally got this 235. Had my first run with it. Not sure how much actual use I'll get out of the HR facility, as I'll have to understand a new world of that, having steadfastly refused to for years.

    It seems to have set a Max and resting Heart rate, so I guess a mixture of that, and conditions, like heat can affect readings a little, as well as the variances of how tight it's on, and it being on the exact best part of the wrist.

    For instance, I saw a reading as high as 153 for a supposedly "easy" run at lunch, which pushed me into the pre set "threshold" zone!

    Looking on the net, there seems to be easy, aerobic  threshold, then your rep type intensities.

    Easy seems to be what I'd class as recovery, ie 70% of max, which is pretty low, aerobic is probably more the "easy" zone i'd have used, and threshold, well, anywhere from steady up to HMP?

    Throw in the max and resting HR being predictions one run in, the warm run dehydration can apparently also ramp the HR up), the fact I probably have got into a bad habit of doing the "easy" runs too fast anyway, and not having 100% worked out the exact ideal place, then erm...plenty to consider!

    HR can seem to wander a bit before it settles at rest. I believe my resting one would be in the 50s, from the heart appointments I'd had, but it did slip into the mid 40s as well as for a moment early doors being 130!

    So, much to learn I think!

  • Reg WandReg Wand ✭✭✭

    I ran the Dinton 10k tonight in the end. I knew it wasn't a fast course but it's a good tune up for my half ironman tri in just over a week.

    I started a few rows back which was a mistake, someone cut across me so I proffered my arm to prevent a leg tangle and he got all arsey. I had to elucidate him as to the error of his ways and was surprised to elicit an apology from him.

    Anyway it was time to move on and make up some ground. Dach's mate was there and had bolted off as usual. I was kind of in no mans land, especially after the chap I was chasing down was only doing the 5k.

    Went through halfway in 17:50ish so definitely not PB territory. I closed in on another chap and we raced to the end and I lost out. I blame the little hamstring tear which I have just been massaging but I think I may just be a bit soft these days. Unwilling to really go all in.

    Slowed a bit in the second loop and finished in 36:15, although my watch had 36:09!

    One benefit of being old is I picked up the v40 prize. A gleaming solid gold trophy now adorns my bookshelf.

    Not overjoyed at the time but it didn't feel like a particularly painful race, I bit of spadework and I think a PB in the autumn should be a doable. 

  • Reg WandReg Wand ✭✭✭

    speedwork may also help, not sure gardening is the answer.

  • CC82CC82 ✭✭✭

    Nice one Reg.  I'd love that to be my next 10k time image

    Second of the post virus sessions for me this morning.  2 miles easy; 1 steady; 1 easy; 2 threshold; 1 easy.

    Felt like it was going to be a bit of a struggle, which in hindsight was probably just how bloody early it was.  I used to run at that sort of time all the time, but this was my earliest run since the new baby arrived I think.  Pre 6:30am.  Meant the first easy mile was just shy of 8 minutes, but that served as a decent warm up and the easy pace was naturally a lot quicker in the second mile.  Steady mile in just under 6:30, then the threshold miles in about 6:19 and 6:13 which felt reassuringly comfortable.  Happy with that.  Going out for a good 10 miler tomorrow including up and down the local massive hill. image

    Half day today - off to the works BBQ.  image

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    Nice one Reggy, sounds decent especially if not pb fare.

    CC, are you a HR man by the way? Do you select Threshold off  HR or time?

    If i went on HR Threshold, i'd be using 7min miling the start of the zone, which wouldn't be a very impressive workout image

    When i get over this hip niggle, i look forward to testing what readings I can get the HR up to, maybe 185 isn't my highest, and thus 150 isn't 80% of max, and thus "Threshold"

    Any inputs from the floor on HR gratefully received!

  • Reg WandReg Wand ✭✭✭

    These are a few of  my experiences from the marathon training, using HR.

    The trouble is to get a max reading you need to put in max effort. Given your slightly cautious approach at the moment you may want to avoid doing a Max HR test. If I were to run a flat out 5k with a sprint finish I'd expect to get within 5 beats or so of the max. I'd add a few beats on if I felt I had more to give.

    Ultimately your zones are a range anyway so it doesn't have to be exact. You need to take into account HR drift as well. My LT would start around 155 bpm and top out around 179 average. I'd be running the last few miles of an HM up in the high 180's but the average would be around 179 due to the first few miles being in the 150/'160's. Pace being consistent.

    I'd therefore advocate varying the HR% depending on the LT distance. If I was doing 3 miles at LT I'd go straight into the high 170's whereas 7 miles of it I'd be working my way up maybe 5 beats a mile finishing at 180ish.

    This would mean the 3 miler being run around 5:45 and the 7 miler at maybe 6:10. The Daniels spreadsheet has recommended paces for varying length runs.

    I guess it's trial and error to start off.

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    Nice one, that's interesting to read.

     

    I read there's a couple of stock ways to do Max HR, one the max effort testing approach, and the other a sheepish one size fits all 220- age. So that would have yours as 180.
    If your last HM miles are 180, would we be saying your max is 180, and thus equal to you running a flat out spring effort, or is it the cumulative factor that can also give a max reading? Or are we just saying your max might be 190-200 or something?

    It's a little of a shame I didn't have this device on the go in the heydey, doing some tough tempos and races quite regularly, but things change, so we're where we are.

    It's probably my perception, but I "think" i'm ok for reps as fast as I can do them, or 5ks, but i wouldn't fancy attempting to race a half marathon again. That's where I reckon the HR could swell to uncomfy levels.
    But we'll see...day by day, and getting back to some reps without an ache is step 1!!

     

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    I had a 'Polar HRM in 1990 so I reckon on knowing a few aspects about this subject.

    First thing. Only way your HR gets faster and faster in a race is because your warm up was nigh on non existent. If that was correct (warm up) the highest rate would be near the start.

    Also. As you get tired (duff legs) the rate gets lower and lower. That's not helpful. A higher rate is better. Hit the wall in a marathon and see the HR drop off a cliff.

    All the same, they are interesting gadgets. But I wouldn't rely on the things to give me numbers on which to pin training. Too many variables:

    Temperature, time of day, previous sessions, dehydration, surface, stress, lack of sleep...   Take your pick. Those are just a few items which mangle the numbers.

    End of the day. A MRM measures your HR. That's all it's doing.

    Needless to say I don't bother with them anymore.

     

     

     

     

     

    🙂

  • ML84ML84 ✭✭✭
    I haven't really bothered with mine for a while now but if I'm doing a tempo on a flat route I like to gauge the HR to the pace. Even so much as look at a hill and it rockets.

    Loads of variables like others have mentioned but a useful tool. I ran my marathon PB to HR. I had no intention of doing up until a week or two before when I contacted the fella who did my LT test. I told him my threshold zone and he told me what HR I should run for 1-6, 6-half, half-20 then the kitchen sink for the last 10k.

    I really think I benefitted from it as otherwise I'd have gone out at 5.40s and ended up with a 2.45 I bet.



    I also agree with what Ric says about the warm up. When I had my test I was advised that I should get my HR up into the threshold zone for a few mins constantly. I must be honest and say I don't really do it as Im scared ill be using up energy needed for the race. I do the plod and a few strides. Ha.



    Well done on the 10k AG. In amongst the prizes is not to be sniffed at.



    Well I threw myself in the deep end at one of the sale sizzlers (5k). Just thought I'd go and throw the kitchen sink at it and see where I was at. I actually thought a sub 16 was well within reach even though I've prob done a handful of speed sessions in the last 18 months.

    I did a 2 mile tempo at about 5.25 pace on Monday the 6 x 60secs and felt bloody great! I even stopped myself carrying on the tempo thinking that I might as well save it for Thursday. Just ran a couple of single runs tues and weds and felt pretty good even though I'd been up and down step ladders constantly from mon - thurs.



    Warmed up and strides were effortless and about 4.30 pace so that should've set alarm bells ringing! Must admit I was sweating like a dog though even though it was overcast and bloody windy in parts.

    First mile in 5.04/5 and only really started feeling tired when I hit mile 2 when we hit a bit of a headwind. I was in no mans land like always and my pace had dropped to 5.15s but put that down to the wind. I actually managed to catch somebody towards the end of mile 2 but I was really suffering by now.

    Couldn't quite bridge the gap to 2 lads in front, (one in a Belgrave vest I think) and despite mile 3 being about 5.25 pace I still never got overtaken by anybody during the race. Seems like a regular feature when I bloody race - set off steady, overtake a load, get stranded, don't overtake anyone and nobody overtakes me.

    When I hit the track for the last 160 or so I knew sub 16 had gone so didnt bother with a sprint and ended up with 16.20.

    Can't really be disappointed. Bad habits (as I sit here with a beer), the wind, lack of doing anything remotely hard work in training all pretty much sum up the time. Saying that I'm going to have another run round the 3 peaks tomorrow. Toying with the idea doing an ultra in a few weeks for the laugh before getting my head down.



    I'm actually pretty positive about things because if I can run 16.20 of what I have been doing then IF I knuckle down things can only get better.
  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    Tidy enough Matt, and I hope the northern measuring board have started actually measuring stuff properly now? You clearly have tonnes of ability left in the bank, but 5k seems to be a distance that you can store it I find.... hence running a very similar parkrun course effort after a year of pissing about, compared to peak!

    Ric, nice piece, of course the other possible way your HR increases is illness, or heart issues image

     

    Anyone see the Women's 10,000m? Just read up on it!

    In 92 Wang Junxia, set an incredible time, that no one has got anywhere near to in 24 years.

    She apparently trained to such an incredibly relentless schedule that she gets headaches and fatigue to this day, but has always had massive waves of drugs suspicions due to both who her coach was, and the incredible time itself. There were calls to cancel the time out of the records, as it was seen as impossible to break by a woman..

    Anyway, some woman just smashed it by 14secs, cruising the last lap, and finishing as if she'd just strolled 5metres to her gate.

    4 of the top 5 performances in the history of this event, all set in this one race.

    This is why it's hard to trust top level athletics.

    Unless you believe that the planets lined up, the biggest super stars ever were in one place at the right time, and pushed each other on, how can you possibly believe that's a legitimate turn out, and not the product of a Kenyan/Ethiopian drugs party? image

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    SG, I think I'd place more trust on pace zones with adjustments for conditions.

    With the HRM's I've had different readings for the same effort and for the same effort, different readings. Fun all the same.

    Though I don't use the HRM for training, I have used it to aid a proper warm up.

    When fit, it takes quite a lot of running about to get the HR to reach racing speeds. Which is really a must.

     If you don't, you'll spend the first parts of the race fighting an oxygen debt as the still accelerating HR can't shift the blood around fast enough to avoid accumulating lactate.

    Think how easy those races felt, when in danger of missing the start, you had to run flat out from the dumped transport, only making the start with two minutes to go.

    Basically, the fitter you are, the more intensive the warm up. 15 minutes acceleration plus a couple of 300m intervals is about right.

    I might mention that from a 1990's racing HR of mid 190's bpm, I've now been reduced to a maximum sustainable 173bpm.

    Any higher and I'm a few seconds to within blowing up.

    Ah, for the days of cruising effortlessly at 180 bpm.

     

     

    🙂

  • The BusThe Bus ✭✭✭

    Easy to be cynical about the women's 10,000. If it had been an American or European who had come out of nowhere and broken the world record, would we be suspicious or just genuinely amazed and pleased? Who knows, and that is the real shame of what doping can do - we can no longer believe in what may (or, sadly, most probably isn't) a genuinely outstanding performance.

    Matt - you have so much potential, but I get the feeling you are somewhat  in limbo. Without doubt you can aim for a distance and do bloody well on the road - at a whole range of distances, but, from what I've seen you could genuinely excel on the fells with a real bit of focus. The impression I get is that the whole ethos of fell-running is closest to your running heart and while you can do both to a large extent, you'll never really explore your limits by spreading yourself too thin. It really all comes down to what you want out of running at the end of the day and how far you are prepared to commit...

    That said, it may be you just want to do as best you can across the whole spectrum of running disciplines - in which case, more power to your elbow and crack on - either way your times will be far, far better than most of us will ever achieve!

  • Quick read back but no comments as I don't want to pop in and out quickly other than to mention that the 80s were good for really short, really tight, nylon running shorts. There are rumours that such impacts on your fertility but my 4 kids are counter evidence to that.

    Week 1 of the August training plan done: week in very rural France. Stayed at a house which in the style bus is used to: remote control opens twin gates to keep the public out: sweeping drive up to a massive house (we didn't even use one of the lounges or two of the verandahs) with a heated pool. The area round was a mix of fields and woods but the most notable thing from a running aspect was that the tracks were really well maintained: the tracks were there as access to fields and woods and were used regularly and so had to be in good condition and not the overgrown and rutted things I am used to in the UK.

    Week 2 coming up: urban France so a week in Lyon.

  • Some of those stats for the women's 10000 were nuts! Just sitting here yawning after going to bed at 3.15 after the heptathalon, Mo had me worried for a while there too.



    Good 10k there Reg, swift 5k too ML84 with virtually no speed work, sub 16 not far away.



    So the experiment of the 3000 in flats and training the night before didn't work, ended up with 9.05, which is par for the course at the moment. It was the Rosenheim final down at Tooting Bec last Wednesday night. Basically it was the usual story, not feeling brilliant but keeping it at 72's. So when it comes to the bell at 7.47 there's not much left in the tank and the time slips badly.



    Anyway, so I thought sod it, I'm off work from now so no running until yesterday's mile race at Shapwick. Went to watch the missus run Poole Parkrun, yet again saw someone I know down on holiday. It was won in 15.11 by one of the Mohammed boys from Soton AC. Steve Way did a swift 15.38 too, grabbed a quick word as he was in the Elite race later on.



    So onto Shapwick- this is a great event, mile races starting from the Village green for all ages etc..GB's first athletics medalist, Charles Bennett was from the village. Our elite race was 4pm and felt great in the warm up, and went off strong and felt good. Hit the 1/4 mile at 70, half at 2.16, 3/4 at 3.30. (Think that might be a bit long). So my PB is 4.40 and at that point I was a bit deflated, anyway managed to increase the pace a little and came in at 4.30. It's a proper course so well chuffed with that, I just want to feel that good at a 1500m. James Thie stormed it, he was holidaying nearby and fancied a run!
  • The BusThe Bus ✭✭✭

    Nice one Simon - that's very quick!

    Bonjour Phillipe image 

    LSR today. 14M hilly XC and after multiple slow versions of late, I felt like pushing the pace a bit today. Whilst by no means speedy, it was back to a reasonable average and nearly 18 mins faster than when I ran the same route 3 weeks ago!!!

    Good to feel like the legs are coming back a bit.

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    cripes Bus, 18mins faster!

    Phil, enjoy. How the other half live eh image

    Standard monster stuff Simon, casually effortless as always, almost like that women's 10,000m winner!

     

    Still taking it "easier" to see off the tightnesses, so decided 10 would be enough today. Ended up as an 11, at 6.59.

    Having some fun with the new watch. Though I need to get used to the slow first mile report, 7.17 (behave!), and how keen it is to show slower times. Might need to move to av pace, rather than current, think I had the 405 on that.

    Didn't feel too easy today breathing wise, one of the worst for weeks, think it's still a bit clammy out there. 9-10hours later, I feel quite "warm" handed. Roll on normal weather again.

    Interesting bit on the watch is the race time predictor. 5k/10k/HM/M.

    Goodness knows how they work that out, as on the one hand, it reckons I'm spending a lot of the run deep in "Threshold" territory, yet after a week of easy only runs, with a 6.35 mile the quickest so far, it suggests a 16.47 5k, quicker than even my vintage stuff, and a 10k only 20secs slower than very fit days of 34.30 pb.

    It must use some sort of formula of runs recorded versus percentage of max HR.

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    couple of 6s today. Was meant to be my standard 6&4, but getting lost in the Slough ghetto, otherwise known as Chalvey had me slightly worried, lost and no idea where i was image

    6.48 and 6.50 jobs. Lunch one fairly hot, and hit a high of 164 on the HR.

    Watch now reckons a 16.33 5k is doable/ along with what i've achieved at other distances already.

    Calm it down watch! We undersell in these parts, not hype it!

  • CC82CC82 ✭✭✭

    Quick read back as well.  I don't train to HR.  I occasionally do easy/recovery stuff to HR especially after injury/illness to keep a lid on things, which is where this latest bout of looking at HR came from.

    I was interested in setting up some more sessions based on HR but to be honest, I've gotten bored of it already - I'm glad I didn't shell out on another HRM...!

    6x 3 minutes "hard" off 3:00 recoveries for me today.  Wasn't really sure what to go for - initially when I planned that session I was thinking about just hitting them really hard as in close to flat out, then realised that 6 of them would be ridiculous, so then I started thinking about 3k pace, given there's full 3 minute recoveries.  In my head, I thought that might equate to about 5:30/mile pace.  When I checked it though, PB pace is 5:24/mile and something like short term target pace would be akin to about 5:20/mile.  Hmmm, decided to have a crack at 5:20/mile and see how I got on.

    I think 5:30/mile would have been a better target!!  Came out at 5:26 / 5:26 / 5:36 / 5:30 / 5:52 / 6:03.

    I'm blaming a car for the last two.  I was going at 5:30 pace on the 5th one and feeling okay and then had to slam the brakes on to go round a car coming out of a side road - totally ruined my momentum and I was going uphill at this point and a million pedestrians appeared out of nowhere.  I started the final rep uphill and just couldn't seem to get the legs going.  I'm blaming the momentum being knocked out of me on rep 5 for that one tooimage

    Decent workout though.  DOMS in the quads hanging around from bloody space hopper race and sack races at a works BBQ on Friday...!!  I also went for a 10 miler at the weekend up and down Mormond Hill which I'm sure helped the quads enormously.

  • *delurk*

    The race predictor stuff is way off for me and everyone I know Stevie. It's driven by the Vo2Max value and based on Daniel's tables I think which are quite possibly pulled from high level college level athletes with very good efficiency working on tracks. Also the Vo2Max depends on you having put an accurate max heart rate in, as do the subsequent zone breakdowns.

    I do recall both you and I have ran 17.3x parkruns recently but I see your 'rampaging round town' marathon pace zone is down around 6 min/mile while my 'recces round the reservoir' at that pace come out around 6.30 min/mile. My threshold zone is round about 6.05 min/mile pace though - fairly confident I've got a decent max heart rate measurement too and it definitely feels like threshold effort.

    Happy to post up/pm some pb effort 5k/10k/half heart rate traces so you can at least see where my zones lie with respect to each other. They do also shift around a little bit as aerobic fitness waxes and wanes - in particular lactate threshold drops down a few bpm.

    *back to lurking*

  • Reg WandReg Wand ✭✭✭

    Just checked my race predictor 16:06 / 33:26 / 1:13:49 / 2:34:28

    Can I just change my PB's to these to save the trouble of doing them? Surely that's valid.

    Rapid miling, SC. Bus unusual for you to do a 14 mile run off road?

    SG - I find my HR is a fair bit higher in the heat.

    Going back to the HR, I don't think you can avoid cardiac drift by doing a warm up. That's not going to prevent dehydration, rise in core body temperature or whatever the cause is.

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    Muds, please post as much stuff as poss. Am interested to read up on all of this a bit more.

    I wonder if your MP zone is "actual" pace, whereas mine was only ever "theoretical" job, based off HMP pb. In fact all my zones are still set on pbs years ago, but for reps, they all come out spot on still, so i've not seen any reason to change them. I suppose they'd get more tested by the harder tempos, but i've parked those for the forseeable.

    Having said that, i fancy something light on the legs, but tough on the mind after so long, just say a 3mile MP track job tomorrow. See how the supposed HR comes out. I won't look at it during, as I don't want to be influenced, just will time each lap.

    The parkruns were pleasing, that I could just knock out 2 around 17.30 after so long off racing, especially with a 17.24 my top effort there. Hard to tell with the Wycombe course though, grass, inclines and a ridiculous steps section don't help it along. In time i'll have to get a Dulwich one in, and make sure there's no insane first half mile. See how that sits. That's such a fast course i crumbled massively post insane start, and still logged a 16.53!

    Looks a fun but demanding one CC. You get the chance to really put some beans in, but know you've got a good period to recover. Ifear the 3min recovery stuff, as you know it's ferocious intensity to justify it!

Sign In or Register to comment.