1mmol easy runs

lexel wrote:

on topic wrote:

But yes, recovery runs "count" towards weekly mileage.

It's a semantic distinction you're making - some runs "count" and are stressful on the body, and other runs "don't count" and do not stress the body (only recover it). That's not how the body works. Every run is stressful to some extent, even recovery runs.

If you are very fit, then a recovery run might not count to milage. It can be even junk miles.

If you are unfit, every run or even a walk can count. It depends on your individual fitness level and intensity.

That there is a minimum intensity needed to improve cardirespiratory fitness is really super easy to understand, outerwise sitting in a chair, using the elevator would be a training.

ugh

Lexel. If you want to do, let's say, on Tuesday 400m race pace repetition runs and on Thursday 800m race pace repetition runs, then you are good advised to run on Wednesday a long time at recovery pace. If you would avoid these "junk" miles and do nothing on Wednesday, then you would loose endurance and strength. If you would run faster on Wednesday to train your aerobic system, then you would not recover properly for your workout on Thursday. Of course, different situations for different goals. However, you cannot skip recovery when training sustainably.

Newbi wrote:

Lexel. If you want to do, let's say, on Tuesday 400m race pace repetition runs and on Thursday 800m race pace repetition runs, then you are good advised to run on Wednesday a long time at recovery pace. If you would avoid these "junk" miles and do nothing on Wednesday, then you would loose endurance and strength. If you would run faster on Wednesday to train your aerobic system, then you would not recover properly for your workout on Thursday. Of course, different situations for different goals. However, you cannot skip recovery when training sustainably.

The question was, does a recovery run count to the weekly milage.

It depends how you/we define the recovery run. Maybe you are above 50%Vo2max (>60%HRmax) at your recovery runs without realising? When we define recovey runs from 45 to 55%HRR (around 60-65%HRmax), we have both a recovery run plus a training effect. Thats exaclty what user Truth Speaker also mentioned (true also for 65-70%HRmax).

Your training example is a bad one, because if you have a training in that way that you need a recovery run, better we call it relaxation run, in the middle of 2 hard sessions then the second hard session comes too early or the first one was to hard. This is just bad training.

In a good training plan there is no need for a relaxation/recovery run below 50%VO2max, which does not count for the weekly milage.

The most important thing is that your easy days are very light... they should literally feel like a jog. Daniels doesn't just emphasize numbers in his training philosophy, but how you perceive the effort, too. The problem is that a lot of runners lie to themselves about what feels like a jog on any given day.

Keep in mind runners like Mantz and Seidel are doing most of their volume slower than 7:15/mi. Kipchoge has said his "recovery" days are 5:00/km. They are jogging based on what feels very relaxed, that's all.

1mmol is pretty much what you are going to find at rest.

https://health.ucdavis.edu/sportsmedicine/resources/lactate.html#:~:text=The%20concentration%20of%20blood%20lactate,as%20fatigue%20within%20exercising%20muscle

.

This ties with my experience in doing a pretty substantial number of lactate threshold/VO2max testing.

I run easy days below aerobic thresold - 145 HR(73%). It is below 1mmol and around 6.30-6.50 per mile.

Is it even possible to run at 50-55% of max HR?

It seems you got an answer on your question 8 month ago how to break 20 min in 5k. Congrats for reading such a lot that you can teach now good and bad training. Keep on reading.

Here is a little bit on lactate.

https://www.lactate.com/threshold.html

There is the lactate baseline. For good endurance athlete this baseline is around 1mmol +-.

1mmol was mentioned to the highest pace still before or at the point were lactate is rising from the baseline. This is typically between 65-70%HRmax, some say 65-72%HRmax.

My theory why they do this is, because they activate mostly only the slow twitch fibers that way.

The fast twitch fibers, which contribute lactate to the system, can relax.

lexel wrote:

Here is a little bit on lactate.

https://www.lactate.com/threshold.html

There is the lactate baseline. For good endurance athlete this baseline is around 1mmol +-.

1mmol was mentioned to the highest pace still before or at the point were lactate is rising from the baseline. This is typically between 65-70%HRmax, some say 65-72%HRmax.

My theory why they do this is, because they activate mostly only the slow twitch fibers that way.

The fast twitch fibers, which contribute lactate to the system, can relax.

Dude you're using a lot of physiology mumbo jumbo to justify your conclusion that you should train really slow. Resting lactate levels, the pace where lactate rises above baseline, the percentage of HRmax/VO2max where this typically occurs - they all vary from person to person. Why invoke complex physiology that cannot be directly measured in a reliable way, when the apparent point of the thread is to train really slow?

We know that many elites train very easy, whether that is at/below 1 mmol or below 65%/70% of HR max.

We also know that most non elites find it a challenge to train at such low intensity, because their pace has to become so slow, and they have to walk up the hills etc. Their training pace also becomes so far removed from their race pace.

The question then becomes, is it realistic for non elites to try and train so low, simply because elites do so? If so, what is the best method for developing the lower end of the aerobic system? Is it to persevere with the very low intensity, or will that eventually come from conventional training (e.g. 70-75 % of HR max etc)?

Weak one wrote:

We know that many elites train very easy, whether that is at/below 1 mmol or below 65%/70% of HR max.

We also know that most non elites find it a challenge to train at such low intensity, because their pace has to become so slow, and they have to walk up the hills etc. Their training pace also becomes so far removed from their race pace.

The question then becomes, is it realistic for non elites to try and train so low, simply because elites do so? If so, what is the best method for developing the lower end of the aerobic system? Is it to persevere with the very low intensity, or will that eventually come from conventional training (e.g. 70-75 % of HR max etc)?

Exactly, and that brings this thread back to the beginning.

Running that slow is possible for non Elite but you need to have a bit of fitness. Its impossible for a beginner or unfit person.

Maybe the training effect in the very easy zone (60-72HRmax, Norwegian Zone 1), is almost the same as in the often used harder but still easy Zone 2 (72-82HRmax), then i think doing the easy running in zone 1 is better, because you can achieve the same training effect by using a lower intensity. And you are fresher and more recovered for the quality workouts.

I do not know the answer, but so far and out of the gut and any prove, my guess is that 'going very easy' is also good for non-elite runners.

1mmol meaning "lactate levels?" whoever bothers with this on easy runs should be imprisoned forever in a deep dark pit. Just go run easy, whatever you feel like doing.

When talking about minimum % of HRR do you look at average HR of the run or you should stay above that all the time?

lexel wrote:

Newbi wrote:

I differentiate for continous runs 3 easy zones: recovery, easy and development.

Above the easy zones: sub-tempo and tempo.

Recovery runs are for tired legs. Easy runs should not accumulate fatigue if done daily. Development runs will accumulate fatigue if done on successive days.

For me 'recovery' means, that it does not count/add to the weekly mileage.

Karvonen was the first one who came up with a minimum intensity needed to trigger a training effect. Because i am neither professional nor young, before i would do a recovery run i would completely rest. In recent science this lower limit is about 50% VO2max or 45%VO2R (VO2 reserve) which is equivalent to 45%HRR.

HRR (Heart rate reserve) = (HRmax - HRrest)*0,45 + HRrest. This is about 60% HRmax.

The cluelessness has no bounds

scientific approach wrote:

When talking about minimum % of HRR do you look at average HR of the run or you should stay above that all the time?

Stay above all time.

But most likely there is no sharp limit but a transition zone. Therefore i use 50%HRR (i leave a small distance to 45HRR) as lowest heart rate which counts as training, which is for me >=62% HRmax. (>=60% HRmax as a general recommendation seems to be also fine)

Bad Wigins wrote:

1mmol meaning "lactate levels?" whoever bothers with this on easy runs should be imprisoned forever in a deep dark pit. Just go run easy, whatever you feel like doing.

Yes lactate. I know not so common in US. :)

J. Ingebrigsten and Blummenfelt, both olympic Gold medal winners, use it. Good enough to think about it. You guys are missing the train.

If you go on the street, and tell 100 people to run easy, i bet with you they all mean something different and run different intensities. So that hint is just bla bla, bla bla bla. For the fishes.

First you have to learn what pace easy means. And second easy maybe not easy enough as discussed here.

Bad Wigins wrote:

1mmol meaning "lactate levels?" whoever bothers with this on easy runs should be imprisoned forever in a deep dark pit. Just go run easy, whatever you feel like doing.

Well, those who run all their "easy" runs at tempo pace and believe that they are running easy, should be bothered.

I have to crosslink that:

http://www.mariusbakken.com/the-norwegian-model.html?fbclid=IwAR1fYnCFHO0UzpZe3hIwwlWeZVnWNwrnOqWTL2xQJ59-YCzksX-oJvx2UD8

One information is not to underestimate and fits perfectly to this post:

Keep the easy training easy.

In terms of lactate, we are below 1.0 mml/l, heart rate below 70 % of max for the easy runs

lexel wrote:

In terms of lactate, we are below 1.0 mml/l, heart rate below 70 % of max for the easy runs

who is "we"? The people you coach?