CoachB - is there any reason why you wouldn't use heart rate?
Seems to be a pretty good approach that automatically adjusts with weather, terrain, etc.
CoachB - is there any reason why you wouldn't use heart rate?
Seems to be a pretty good approach that automatically adjusts with weather, terrain, etc.
curiousjay wrote:
CoachB - is there any reason why you wouldn't use heart rate?
Seems to be a pretty good approach that automatically adjusts with weather, terrain, etc.
I coach high school kids in an area where over 50% qualify for free and reduced lunch. Getting 70 heart rate monitors on kids is a non starter. We've definitely got affluent kids who buy fit bits and what not, but nobody has yet taken the plunge and purchased a full on chest strap, HR monitor system.
I think using an HRM is a great strategy for small groups or for individuals, but I've got to manage a herd, so the pace charts get us pretty close. My kids know that if we're on the cross country course, or if its a hot day, times are going to be a bit slower.
I totally understand. Would you consider it if availability was an option?
Yes, with small groups, absolutely.
Even better would be to do lactate testing a la Marius Bakken or the Ingebretsons (sp?).
Those lactate readers are damned expensive though right? LRP put up accurate information from what I have read but CoachB knows his stuff.
I would go with Billat since I think the science and data behind her methods are far more solid and have undergone peer review.
Also, based on using several, Billat "feels" about right.
Hmmmmm 6 min TT---I wonder where that comes from?
Answer: Billat.
curiousjay wrote:
CoachB - is there any reason why you wouldn't use heart rate?
Seems to be a pretty good approach that automatically adjusts with weather, terrain, etc.
Heart rate can be affected by lots of things. I think at best it is a tertiary measure. Heck I would use RPE before HR (although combining the two is pretty good).
Could be a cost issue.
CoachB wrote:
Yes, with small groups, absolutely.
Even better would be to do lactate testing a la Marius Bakken or the Ingebretsons (sp?).
Not necessarily. For one thing taking the blood sample requires some skill. Also, if you have a large group that becomes a management nightmare plus disposing of biohazard and such. Don't over think it. Use RPE---a still great tool and totally free!
Luv2Run wrote:
curiousjay wrote:
CoachB - is there any reason why you wouldn't use heart rate?
Seems to be a pretty good approach that automatically adjusts with weather, terrain, etc.
Heart rate can be affected by lots of things. I think at best it is a tertiary measure. Heck I would use RPE before HR (although combining the two is pretty good).
Could be a cost issue.
It could be affected by a lot of things but I also think that is beneficial for most all situations - far better to use HR in hot and uneven conditions when the alternative is adjusting using sole calculator.
I think most everyone’s predisposition is too run workouts a bit too fast if we’re being honest with ourselves and HR is a pretty good measure if lactate is not available. Even most systems that use lactate calibrate it with HR for use most of the time.
Luv2Run wrote:
CoachB wrote:
Yes, with small groups, absolutely.
Even better would be to do lactate testing a la Marius Bakken or the Ingebretsons (sp?).
Not necessarily. For one thing taking the blood sample requires some skill. Also, if you have a large group that becomes a management nightmare plus disposing of biohazard and such. Don't over think it. Use RPE---a still great tool and totally free!
I do agree - but I do think HR can be a good tool to calibrate RPE as most everyone is running most workout types a bit too hot.
Reading back over previous posts about HR here - a lot of coaches will do a two mile time trial telling kids to have enough to hammer the last 800 to get to max HR - but then they add a few beats knowing there probably is a bit more there you truly cannot create.
to cheesewiz:
Uh, the OP is saying the definition of vVO2 max varies from researcher to researcher. So if you use Billat's definition (average tlim at vVO2 max = 6 minutes) then how are you gonna run 5 to 6 x one mile at that pace?
What definition of vVO2 max are you using?
secret workouts wrote:
Billat: 4-9 minutes
Schwartz: 7 minutes
Daniels: 11 or 15 minutes
The best guess for the maximum time (tlimVO2max) at vVO2max would be? Getting to hrMx and holding it as long as physically and mentally possible is not an easy task for anyone that has tried to test their own tlimVO2max. What other ideas of our limits besides the coach/researchers mentioned above are there? Others have said your best 1 mile up to your best 5km is in the ballpark to use when designing a workout to improve your v-VO2max. Thoughts?
Wouldn’t seeing your heart rate at a very high stable, unable to raise it and wanting to stop be a strong individual benchmark for your max? Do you really need to completely max out in a workout to get the gains of this particular workout?
Bob schul country wrote:
I love vVo2 workouts like Billets 30-30.
I always liked 30-30 and 60-60s, but I found the longer stuff to be too brutual. Running 3+mins at faster than 3k was just too hard. I wonder if anyone has sustained success doin that.
What you all forget about when speaking about maxVO2 / maxO2 is that it`s a total concept of the cardio-vascular system formed by essentially the three most important factors , the maxVO2 pace, the LT pace and the most effective LSD pace ( aerobic power pace).Nowadays we know the value of maximum oxygen uptake is important but not entirely decisive for running results.
Daniels told that when he compared training at vVO2max and VO2max pace he found out that
the difference in what they respectively gave was negligible and therefore the VO2max pace at 5 k race pace was to be preferred and enough to achieve desired best result.( only a need for vVO2 max pace and faster when training for middle distances)
The Wizard JS wrote:
What you all forget about when speaking about maxVO2 / maxO2 is that it`s a total concept of the cardio-vascular system formed by essentially the three most important factors , the maxVO2 pace, the LT pace and the most effective LSD pace ( aerobic power pace).Nowadays we know the value of maximum oxygen uptake is important but not entirely decisive for running results.
Daniels told that when he compared training at vVO2max and VO2max pace he found out that
the difference in what they respectively gave was negligible and therefore the VO2max pace at 5 k race pace was to be preferred and enough to achieve desired best result.( only a need for vVO2 max pace and faster when training for middle distances)
As CoachB pointed out for us HS coaches Billat's protocol is simpler and more effective. Of course in the US we train for middle distance in HS.
secret workouts wrote:
Billat: 4-9 minutes
Schwartz: 7 minutes
Daniels: 11 or 15 minutes
The best guess for the maximum time (tlimVO2max) at vVO2max would be? Getting to hrMx and holding it as long as physically and mentally possible is not an easy task for anyone that has tried to test their own tlimVO2max. What other ideas of our limits besides the coach/researchers mentioned above are there? Others have said your best 1 mile up to your best 5km is in the ballpark to use when designing a workout to improve your v-VO2max. Thoughts?
You didn't mention Cooper's 12 min, or the 3km. The 12 min was a basis for high schoolers using a 2-mile time trial.
CoachB wrote:
I think using an HRM is a great strategy for small groups or for individuals, but I've got to manage a herd, so the pace charts get us pretty close.
Ever used/seen Coach Pollard's Pace Wheel?
hgsddg wrote:
Bob schul country wrote:
I love vVo2 workouts like Billets 30-30.
I always liked 30-30 and 60-60s, but I found the longer stuff to be too brutual. Running 3+mins at faster than 3k was just too hard. I wonder if anyone has sustained success doin that.
The thing is that there is no need for running 3+ mins at faster than 3k or even 5 k race pace.( The only exception may be when preparing with repetitions at competitive speed or faster before middle distance races)