Running easy at 80% HR vs running at 65% HR

If you’re not doing workouts, maybe but chances are you will start to pay for it sooner or later.

Lotus Note wrote:

That's the main question.

If I run easy at 65% HR with the watch, I am well above the prescribed "easy pace", and the feeling is awkward, not even breaking a sweat.

If I run at 80%, I am still very easy and the body is not taking any pounding at all and I finish all the runs extremely fresh.

Is there really any benefit in running at 65% of HR for people who are not fat and have no need to burn a belly?

For me, at 73% of HR feels like my upper limit for recovery. At 83% I move from comfortable moderate running and into tempo/threshold land and this is approx the Aerob threshold. At 80% I enter the moderate pace. For me the muscular work at this pace is comfortable, but I do more running so the efforts are higher and this pace is absolutely not recovery.

If you recover enough in general and feel energized at 80% I would just run at that pace as long as you are fresh for the faster work. I see no big difference in adaptations from 75% to 80%, but 65% is something I never do unless I just jog some minutes after a hard workout.

There is no good reason to run harder than necessary for the purpose of the run.

The question for me, is can you still get aerobic development at 65%?

Workouts should alternate between hard days and easy days. For me and just me, 80% is at the borderline of too hard for an easy day. The upper limit for me seems to be around 75% and 65%-70% is more realistic.

HR is a great way to measure recovery, at least for older runners. With age, I've noticed that my easy pace would result in a HR of 135 after a hard day, but if I did a 2nd easy day, my HR would drop to 127-130 for the same easy effort. That tells me I need an extra day to recover... but keep in mind that I'm 73 so that's not what you will likely experience.

Hard and easy are going to vary from runner to runner. It's probably best for individuals to monitor their HR and pace to make sure that they are getting sufficient recovery between hard and easy days. You might be able to run 80% HR on easy days, but my hard days are so hard (to me) that I typically take a day off or do an easy trail run the next day.

Alfie wrote:

There is no good reason to run harder than necessary for the purpose of the run.

The question for me, is can you still get aerobic development at 65%?

Define Aerobic development?

I think 80% is pretty safe for a lot of people. 65% is not possible for me. ~120 bpm? I am at that as soon as I start a light jog.

I pretty much go right to 130s. If i'm fit, i can maintain that quite awhile, otherwise, im into the 140s really quickly. i assume my max is somewhere low to mid 180s.

Firstly, are you using a HR strap? Using your wrist watch will give nonsense readings.

Secondly, 80% seems far too high to be genuinely easy. You may find this interesting -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MALsI0mJ09I

- most elite endurance athletes do the vast majority of their training at 50-60% HR max and it doesn't seem to do them much harm.

Question.. wrote:

Alfie wrote:

There is no good reason to run harder than necessary for the purpose of the run.

The question for me, is can you still get aerobic development at 65%?

Define Aerobic development?

I mean, contribute to improving endurance.

HR strap wrote:

most elite endurance athletes do the vast majority of their training at 50-60% HR max and it doesn't seem to do them much harm.

Where did you get that from?

Is it truly the "same effort" if your HR is so much lower? Question: What is your lowest sleeping HR before each of these easy days? Does a significant difference there (and possibly in combination with evaluation of Garmin's Body Battery, i.e., a HR Variability metric)) suggest the possibility of assessing daily HR Reserve instead of absolute HR when categorizing actual intensity of efforts?

What do your hard days typically consist of, in terms of reps, duration, avg HR of reps, and max HR...AND their EPOC Training Load?

The fact that you can run easy pace at 80% of your MHR probably tells us that you're aerobically underdeveloped.

That's about 7-8 beats below my MP when I'm fit, so it's that steady-moderate effort zone, it feels good because little lactate is accumulated, but you're burning through glycogen stores faster, so it's not sustainable long term if you're running decent mileage. It's actually a great zone for getting back into fitness as long as you're not straining to run it every single day.

high school xc coach wrote:

I think 80% is pretty safe for a lot of people. 65% is not possible for me. ~120 bpm? I am at that as soon as I start a light jog.

Popular training schools of thought are that 65-75% HRmax is aerobic metabolism, and above that starts to entail some amount of anaerobic metabolism. The lower end of aerobic metabolism (i.e., toward 65% HRmax) burns more fat as a fuel source, with greater degree of glycogen burn toward the higher end.

high school xc coach wrote:i assume my max is somewhere low to mid 180s.

What do you mean "assume"? You've done some self-assessment, hopefully.

Alfie wrote:

Question.. wrote:

Define Aerobic development?

I mean, contribute to improving endurance.

80% max HR is below marathon intensity so a well trained distance runner should be able to do a lot of running at that level. It would be about 50% carbohydrate use and 50% fats.

Yes 65% is helpful because if you are slow at that level then you need a lot more training.

Elite distance runners are about 7 min mile pace at that intensity. So for a 3 hour marathon runner 10 minute miling might be applicable.

You should still be able to use eccentric muscle contractions at low intensities. As an experiment, you can try walking fast whilst trying to utilise eccentric muscle contractions such that you feel you have a spring in your stride. The same should happen when running slowly.

HR strap wrote:

...most elite endurance athletes do the vast majority of their training at 50-60% HR max and it doesn't seem to do them much harm.

Where did you come up with 50-60% HR max?? Those values were not stated in that video. 65% HRmax was.

Question.. wrote:

80% max HR is below marathon intensity so a well trained distance runner should be able to do a lot of running at that level. It would be about 50% carbohydrate use and 50% fats.

80%??? Are you just pulling numbers out of the air? You will be challenged to cite any source for this. I previously stated the commonly accepted value of the top end of aerobic metabolism, which is 70-75%.

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Question.. wrote:

80% max HR is below marathon intensity so a well trained distance runner should be able to do a lot of running at that level. It would be about 50% carbohydrate use and 50% fats.

80%??? Are you just pulling numbers out of the air? You will be challenged to cite any source for this. I previously stated the commonly accepted value of the top end of aerobic metabolism, which is 70-75%.

He seems right

Aerobic Zone Heart Rates

There is a narrower and a broader range of heart rates given for the aerobic exercise zone. A wider definition of the aerobic zone is from 40% to 85% of maximum heart rate. Within this wide range, you are using aerobic metabolism during exercise and the body doesn't have to switch to anaerobic metabolism.

A narrower and more commonly used definition involves the five heart rate zones. In this definition, the aerobic zone is a heart rate between 70% to 80% of your maximum heart rate. You are exercising at moderate to vigorous intensity. In this range, 50% of your calories burned in this zone are fats, 1% are proteins, and 50% are carbohydrates.

What is the source of your quote?

Darby wrote:

The fact that you can run easy pace at 80% of your MHR probably tells us that you're aerobically underdeveloped.

That's about 7-8 beats below my MP when I'm fit, so it's that steady-moderate effort zone, it feels good because little lactate is accumulated, but you're burning through glycogen stores faster, so it's not sustainable long term if you're running decent mileage. It's actually a great zone for getting back into fitness as long as you're not straining to run it every single day.

I have found that my HR (watch only) jump quickly to 140 unless I force myself to run extremely slowly, completely above the "easy" pace that the Jack daniels table is giving.

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

What is the source of your quote?