Why am I troll for having an opinion on this matter? Its just silly. If you dont like other opinions than your own, maybe do something else with your time?
Oops accidentally hit send: You made up a hypothetical of an extreme outlier that likely does not exist. “18-minute 5K runner that runs 8min/km at 70%” I haven’t seen anyone post anything that extreme. Then everyone told you on principle why that would be okay (if it were real). Your defense was essentially “nah, I don’t like that answer”
i actually would agree with some of your implied points that if someone has no clue what their maxHR is they obviously shouldn’t be using that to set their easy pace. No one has addressed that because…no duh, should we also confirm That their using a GPS and not just guessing their pace? Similarly there’s enough margin of error on maxHR and the simplification of the 70% rule that if you could run 6min/k at 73% of what you think your max HR vs 8min/k at 69%. I would actually agree that that’s probably okay. But again ridiculous hypothetical that likely doesn’t help anyone.
It's not hypothetical. This whole discussion started because a 19min 5k guy has been running his easy runs at 7min/km, reduced his total volume and probably running the ST sessions too slow and wondering why he got slower after 7 months of this (page 611).
And people are saying he should be running at 7min/km if that means keeping his HR under 70%. I know critical thinking is not allowed in cults, but this is wild.
Well, maybe the slow ST sessions had something to do about it?
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
It's not hypothetical. This whole discussion started because a 19min 5k guy has been running his easy runs at 7min/km, reduced his total volume and probably running the ST sessions too slow and wondering why he got slower after 7 months of this (page 611).
And people are saying he should be running at 7min/km if that means keeping his HR under 70%. I know critical thinking is not allowed in cults, but this is wild.
I'm a hairs width under 20 mins for a 5k. My easy days are often slower than 6:00/km and sometimes closer to 7:00/km if it's warm and rolling hills. This gets me to 68-70% max heart rate. I could probably slow down more. I'm still improving, having started this method as a slow 53 year old with a pb of 21:22 and running easy days more like 5:30/km. Slowing down the easy days to keep me really fresh for the workouts seems to have done the trick for me 🤷♂️ Case study of #1 but there's no way I could run faster than that on my easy days and maintain 3 workouts a week. Personally, I don't care if people think my easy days are silly, as long as I am improving!
Why am I troll for having an opinion on this matter? Its just silly. If you dont like other opinions than your own, maybe do something else with your time?
You are a troll because you ignore half of the replies to you, and are flaking between "x persons easy runs should be y min/km" and "maybe they just have their mhr wrong". Are you really Jan?
Two arguments I can see for running easy over 70%:
1) Your form sucks if you go to slow. Probably not much of an issue for fast runners but if your <70% pace is 6:30/km or slower, you might start shuffling a bit too much. I know I would.
2) Your HR is weird. Wife (not a LT1.5 lady, thankfully) pretty much has the same HR whether she is running at 6:15/km or 7:15/km. She also gets negative decoupling of a few percent on almost every run. I've heard/read this from a few women -- not sure whether that's a female or an age thing or just coincidence. But running by HR probably isn't all that helpful in that case.
If i want people to run faster? No, not really. I would argue that true easy pace is easy enough, and thats it. If its 6:00 min/km thats fine, but I dont think you should slow down to 8 min/km just so that you see 69% of HR Max.
I dont really get why I get downvoted for that. :)
Your other argument is just weird. Ofc its gets more easy if you slow down more and more. But the point of easy running is not to run as slow as you possible can. You are supposed to run easy, thats it.
70% max HR is just a guideline. The real, hard rule is: You *must* run slowly enough on easy days that you recover in time for the next workout. With 3 workouts and an easy-pace long run every week forever, it's surprisingly easy to mess things up. What seems easy after 3 weeks, turns out to be too intense after 3 months. Or you hit a plateau because you're wasting too much intensity on easy runs instead of using it to progress workouts.
So, no worries. Let everyone figure out their own physiology. If you can run your easy days a bit faster than predicted and still recover in time, go for it! We won't stop you.
But we've heard over and over again from people who have started off running easy days too fast and then had to slow down. I've had to do it twice over myself. A year ago when I thought I was doing it right, I was around 4:50/km on easy days (and I was around 18:30 for 5K). Now I've realized that 5:25/km is a lot closer to the pace I have to run if I'm going to be ready for tomorrow's workout.
The 70% MHR guideline is a pretty good ballpark figure for a lot of people. Don't knock it until you're ~6 months in to NSM.
Yeah, And have not argue against that. But its a vast difference running at 5:25 min/km for a sub 19 runner compared to running at 7 min/km just to get below 70%.
Thats all Im saying.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Sure I have, but Reddit gets kind of messy fast with messages. Some people use 220 minus age. I guess most people just use the max their watch have noted once.
I dont think this is an ego thing about strava at all. I think people are trying to follow the method and the 70% rule. A rule that is based on that you actually know your heart rate.
For a real fast runner it does not matter that much. If they follow 70% rule its going to be slow enough, and its Not going to be near walking paces. But for the midpack of runners it can get too slow if their maxHR is set maybe 20 beats wrong. Wouldn you agree to that?
Who is setting their max HR 20 beats wrong? As long as they have run a few 5k all out in their lives, gasping as they cross the line and have a decent HR monitor they will likely have been within 5 beats of max at some point, probably closer. Maybe a totally new runner who doesn't have a clue. But there's no way a totally new runner is going to do this method, they are just going out to run with no structure.
Sure I have, but Reddit gets kind of messy fast with messages. Some people use 220 minus age. I guess most people just use the max their watch have noted once.
I dont think this is an ego thing about strava at all. I think people are trying to follow the method and the 70% rule. A rule that is based on that you actually know your heart rate.
For a real fast runner it does not matter that much. If they follow 70% rule its going to be slow enough, and its Not going to be near walking paces. But for the midpack of runners it can get too slow if their maxHR is set maybe 20 beats wrong. Wouldn you agree to that?
Who is setting their max HR 20 beats wrong? As long as they have run a few 5k all out in their lives, gasping as they cross the line and have a decent HR monitor they will likely have been within 5 beats of max at some point, probably closer. Maybe a totally new runner who doesn't have a clue. But there's no way a totally new runner is going to do this method, they are just going out to run with no structure.
Two arguments I can see for running easy over 70%:
1) Your form sucks if you go to slow. Probably not much of an issue for fast runners but if your <70% pace is 6:30/km or slower, you might start shuffling a bit too much. I know I would.
2) Your HR is weird. Wife (not a LT1.5 lady, thankfully) pretty much has the same HR whether she is running at 6:15/km or 7:15/km. She also gets negative decoupling of a few percent on almost every run. I've heard/read this from a few women -- not sure whether that's a female or an age thing or just coincidence. But running by HR probably isn't all that helpful in that case.
Btw this is a completely different point, but I do wonder if shuffling benefits sirpoc? I've often wondered how he can run 4:50/km at like 62% MHR when you see elites running the same runs even sometimes, nearer 65-70%. Obviously in a race they are then significantly faster than him.
But I wonder if shuffling around at a cadence of 200 at that pace is some kind of hack that doesn't waste as much energy.
I think running styles are also why there is clearly such a huge spread between easy paces versus race intensity across individuals, perhaps?
Yeah, And have not argue against that. But its a vast difference running at 5:25 min/km for a sub 19 runner compared to running at 7 min/km just to get below 70%.
Thats all Im saying.
Who are you racing since your easy run paces matter so much?
Btw this is a completely different point, but I do wonder if shuffling benefits sirpoc? I've often wondered how he can run 4:50/km at like 62% MHR when you see elites running the same runs even sometimes, nearer 65-70%. Obviously in a race they are then significantly faster than him.
But I wonder if shuffling around at a cadence of 200 at that pace is some kind of hack that doesn't waste as much energy.
I think running styles are also why there is clearly such a huge spread between easy paces versus race intensity across individuals, perhaps?
So you are saying we should all do the sirpoopy shuffle?
Maybe there is something to this. Hopefully the troll doesn't come for me, I'm a 18 min flat guy and do my essay runs around 5:40-6:20/km and that is just what i need to recover between workouts.
Once I did try to "shuffle" a really high cadence rather than my bounding, slow cadence and slow running. It actually felt a lot more efficient and easier, but I did feel like I was more likely to trip over lol so I abandoned it. But it felt significantly less impact, just a little awkward.
By the way, I'm NOT suggesting people change their running styles, I was just curious as to what that kind of cadence felt like, as sirpoc once did a 7:15/km run the day before a race and his cadence was still over 190 lol).
Am I the only one who enjoys the fact that I can run really easy now? I've made huge age graded gains training like this but now 75% of my running is at a much slower, enjoyable, relaxed pace where i can just enjoy the terrain and my surroundings.
I think it's about protecting the workout days as much as possible. I never imagined you could run this easy and still improve.
Some people call it boring. Seems to get thrown around a lot. But I've been enjoying running more lately than ever in my life.
Why does the pace on the watch matter? Usually its for hitting a time in a race, or its a tool used with feeling and HR to hit the correct pace on a workout.
I dont understand why you would have set paces for easy runs, and concern yourself with what should be a maximum allowed pace.
In fact, why even have it displayed on your watch. I think its to easy to be tied up in paces, and especially on easy runs.
If your easy run is subjectively easy (feel), objectively easy (hr), why look at pace and change anything? Whats stopping you next time around to stick to that pace, even though you are a bit more tired and things doesn't feel as good?
Yes your mhr should be set about right.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Two arguments I can see for running easy over 70%:
1) Your form sucks if you go to slow. Probably not much of an issue for fast runners but if your <70% pace is 6:30/km or slower, you might start shuffling a bit too much. I know I would.
2) Your HR is weird. Wife (not a LT1.5 lady, thankfully) pretty much has the same HR whether she is running at 6:15/km or 7:15/km. She also gets negative decoupling of a few percent on almost every run. I've heard/read this from a few women -- not sure whether that's a female or an age thing or just coincidence. But running by HR probably isn't all that helpful in that case.
Btw this is a completely different point, but I do wonder if shuffling benefits sirpoc? I've often wondered how he can run 4:50/km at like 62% MHR when you see elites running the same runs even sometimes, nearer 65-70%. Obviously in a race they are then significantly faster than him.
But I wonder if shuffling around at a cadence of 200 at that pace is some kind of hack that doesn't waste as much energy.
I think running styles are also why there is clearly such a huge spread between easy paces versus race intensity across individuals, perhaps?
Yeah, it must be the shuffling that is giving him higher efficiency than the elites.
I hope he has time to write a book about how to increase cadence and achieve this superior efficiency.
I don't look at my pace as well when I do my easy runs. Only HR. My goal with easy runs is to keep them easy enough to manage all the workouts. But I see no point going slower than that if it happens to be that my watch displayed 71% of maxHR. For myself, 70% rule works okey, but 65% feels more about right.
It's funny, we are back to 2023 in this thread. People claiming how it's impossible for anyone to improve running easy this easy. Or running super easy is just silly and embarrassing. Yet most people who stuck their ego aside and ran really easy, improved.
My experience of this is that whatever pace you think is easy, take another minute per kilometer from that and even then that might still be faster than you need to go between workout days.
I don't look at my pace as well when I do my easy runs. Only HR. My goal with easy runs is to keep them easy enough to manage all the workouts. But I see no point going slower than that if it happens to be that my watch displayed 71% of maxHR. For myself, 70% rule works okey, but 65% feels more about right.
If you are usually at 65% of max for an effort and one day it's displaying 71%, this is exactly why the safe option is just to slow down. You might be getting ill, recovering slower than normal or just the body is crying out for an easier day.
This is exactly the argument for having a hard cap in place and the 70% boundary is probably as good a one as we have without knowing our unique phisiology inside out. We are hobby joggers, very few of us carry that information. Those that do, likely don't need NSM in the first place.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.