This paper is a good example that going by feel during a run is very tricky as RPE changes! That means it is not very well suited to adjust the pace during a session.
However, it might be possible to guide the pace for the next session, based on RPE (at the end) of the last session. Assuming it is the same kind of session.
And going by pace remains the method of choice.
The fact that RPE changes during a run makes it a more reliable measure of fatigue, don't you think?
If you've read any of my previous replies, you'll see where I mention that running by feel is what I recommended this athlete does. I coach many athletes across various distances who have achieved success while their programs are based on "efforts".
However, often times when you feel good, you run a bit too hard than the effort you should be putting in. This is why the world's best athletes use lactate testing. It's not to make sure you're trying enough. It's to dot your I's and cross your T's. When you're running high mileage, it's easy to fall into a state of fatigue. If you could take a sample and find out in 30 seconds if you're hitting the zone correctly. Why wouldn't you?
I hope your perfect splits and common sense led to some pretty decent results.
Yes, my results were very good. I disagree with your point that running high mileage makes the hard sessions less specific. I found that it protected me from running at too high an intensity. And I never did hard morning sessions for this reason.
the #1 training mistake most high-level striving athletes make is running their easy workouts too hard and too rigidly. This is what you are doing.
"easy" pace is going to depend on your training load, the weather, etc... it is not a mathematical number. It is a feeling. You want your easy days to feel truly relaxed and not wear you out at all. It truly doesn't matter how fast you run your easy days, pay less attention to pace and much more to how you feel.
Many mathematically inclined runners see training as a numerical formula you need to solve. Training just doesn't work that way. Numbers matter of course, but training is about combining your intuition with the "right" numbers. It's about balance.
Wejo's 2006 training article "why I sucked in college" describes this tension the best. I still reference it.
"The goal of every interval or every workout is not to run as fast as you can. Let me repeat that, THE GOAL OF EVERY INTERVAL OR EVERY WORKOUT IS NOT TO RUN AS FAST AS YOU CAN. Actually, on most intervals and most workouts you don’t want to be running anywhere near as hard or as fast as you can. Paraphrasing Arthur Lydiard the key to running fast is to relax. And if you are running “hard” on all your intervals and on each workout, you’ll never accomplish this. And this applies both to mid distance and long distance."
I always "suffered" with a high bpm while running, 150/155 on "easy runs", the problem is that they dont match with my race paces, how can my easy run be like 4:45/km when i race 5k in 3:05/km?
Another thing is the lactate, i bought one lactate meter and after doing my first threshold session on it i realized that 3:25/km (threshold pace by calculators) isn't so easy after all, because the meter was like 5.5 mmol, i can run on 3.4mmol at 3:40/km pace which is "real threshold zone".
How can i correct this gap between my aerobic and anaerobic fitness? I think im gonna improve a lot just by doing that.
Lactate levels are not transferable from athlete to athlete. So there is no general lactate zone.
Lactate measurment is sensitive to: hydration level, carb level, time of day, ...
Calculators are for the mass, they can't provide an individual solution. If you are lucky it works.
Lactate levels are dependent on intensity and duration. So there is no information provided what units you have done. So overall i have the feeling you do not know what you are doing.
A little birdie told me they spotted you here : )
Maybe, instead of insulting them, inform them. Like suggesting they perform a step test to establish a relationship between intensity and lactate levels, with the caveat that the duration of the stage will play a role in the lactate reading, particularly when beyond LT1. So, consider that going forward if they are going to check their lactate levels at certain points in a workout.
Funny how you have that feeling just because of a question.
Funny how i went from 38 to 32 on 10km in 2 years without knowing what im doing..
This is just a question to know how can i improve this gap, if you want to know how/when i measured it, the workout was 4x2k at threshold (3 to 4 mmol) with 1' rest.
I you do perform a step test, given what you have described about your perceived gap, it would be interesting to see if when you cross LT1, you hover or even drop for a few steps, before seeing a continued increase until your final repeat. This has been discussed elsewhere but something I don't think is commonly seen, but none the less curious. Especially for someone with as strong of performances as yourself
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
Maybe, instead of insulting them, inform them. Like suggesting they perform a step test to establish a relationship between intensity and lactate levels, with the caveat that the duration of the stage will play a role in the lactate reading, particularly when beyond LT1. So, consider that going forward if they are going to check their lactate levels at certain points in a workout.
Good to see you post again and thank for all the contribution to the epic singles threa. But you are too kind to idiot lexel. Last time you interact with him he call you and others liars are we should be grateful he educates us. His ego is bigger than his limited knowledge. It funny he still post if I him I would retire or change username. As ever he will make discussion about CV/CS. Guy is predictable as sunrise.
Im progressing my lactate levels, but right now i'm on my best vo2 level ever, i think its due to my low aerobic development.. trying to correct it because it doesn't seem right according to my anaerobic level (i believe i'll improve again after correcting this)
What you suggest for the test? I saw many different ways, maybe run 5min steps while increasing the pace like 10 seconds per km?
Example:
5min at 4:50/km -> MEASURE LACTATE
5min at 4:40/km -> MEASURE LACTATE
?
If you are on a treadmill, yes I'd say 5 min repeats are fine. After a warm-up, I'd start at 12 kph and increase by 1 kph. You'll probably stop at 19 kph, given your 5km fitness.
Str8 Facts provided some really good information. My understanding is you're primarily concerned with a gap in your aerobic fitness, so narrowing the spread between your LT1 and LT2 seems your focus? That's where the lactate test can help and give you a range to focus on.
Given your recent 3 x 1600m workout (I'm not sure if you were doing that to identify LT2?), looks like 3:30 per km is a reasonable boundary for LT2.
Also, just as a note for comparison going forward, you mentioned you are using the Lactate Pro 2. I've been told by a very knowledgeable individual that they read ~0.5 mmol/l higher than the Lactate Plus. So, not an issue for you individually per se, but for people making broad comparisons or if you were to switch meters at some point down the road, can be good to know.
This post was edited 13 minutes after it was posted.
Yes i need to narrow that gap so i can focus again on fast paces and vo2 stuff.
That workout wasn't to identify LT2, it was a short lt workout measuring lactate.
Didnt know that about lactatepro2.. i thought it was one of the best in the market
The thread 'Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage'.
That the Lactate Pro 2 measures different to the Lactate Plus does not mean its a bad device. Remark: the LP2 works very well for me and showed the same lactate level as a lab measured with another measurement system. Forgot the name of the system they used.
You mentioned the gap between LT1 and LT2. You found your LT2, but where is your LT1?? (test question, take care)
Need to find it! One day i warmed up a little faster like 4:20/km and the mmols were 2.0mmol so i think thats around there, which is low.. but i need to test it again
i experience the same as you, but am much slower my easy feel, suggested easy pace and suggested easy hr almost never match i also have a huge dropoff in times despite threshhold training and more miles last season was like 52/1:57/4:07/9:16/16:15/35:06/1:21.... i used to train for midd and still do but nowadays i often blocks of more long distance orientated blocks if i want to do a local road race my slowest easy pace should be around 4:40/k but in reality easy feels more like 500 to 515 my hr spikes up really fast to around 160-165 (80%max) but muscles and breathing still feels relatively easy. To stay 65% maxhr i would need to go 530-6min/k... if it helps you im only going by feel now, so over 500 for easy run and around 400 for tempo and i improve slowly now. Going by pace was always to fast and left me very fatigued after some weeks and going by hr i felt running too slowly I think some people like us just have more power in upper hr zones compared to the lower ones
What's your training like outside of these intervals and lactate tests? Is there an opportunity to possibly add more easy volume? If I am reading this right, your LT1 is underdeveloped and dragging the "lactate curve" to the left causing you to be more reliant on anaerobic energy production at slower speeds. Best way to push this up is to run right below LT1. For most, this might be 2.0 mmol but I think the accepted value is 1 mmol above whatever YOUR individual baseline is.
Personally, I've run 14:20's for 5k and 2:18 in the marathon. In recent years, my marathon performance has tanked while my 5k has been about the same. After doing some lactate measuring, my LT1 was around 6 min/mile which is way slower than it should be for a 2:18 marathon. So to fix this and "push it up" I need to spend more time just below that.
In my experience, threshold interval training is great for improving LT2, but your LT1 may suffer unless you're coupling it with sufficient easy volume.