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

Lotus Note wrote:

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

What is the source of your quote?

https://www.verywellfit.com/what-is-the-aerobic-zone-3436575

Fake news.

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%.

It's fairly common knowledge. You're a beginner right?

I'm not.

Question.. wrote:

It's fairly common knowledge.

I'm not (a beginner).

No, it is not. You're not a beginner, and yet you read and cite training inaccuracies.

Here is a real coach (not the typical poser on LRC), steeped in USATF coaching principles. He discusses aerobic metabolism in the first part of the video.

Hubris much?

You've got a lot of learning to do. Stop posting gibberish and get on with it.

I struggle to run as low as 65%. I would have to take walk breaks to stay this low. I have always believed it is because I am more Fast Twitch, and less efficient at the low intensities.

I actually would like to train this low. Would perseverance with run/walk work, or would this be de-training?

Hah. Your reply is typical of the guys not choosing to learn.

Aerobic metabolism byproducts are CO2 and water. Anaerobic metabolism waste involves lactate. Here is another source indicating lactate rises above 2mmol at 80% HRmax (Table on page 1)

https://www.ncsf.org/pdf/ceu/relationship_between_percent_hr_max_and_percent_vo2_max.pdf

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.

I apologize for my misinterpretation, as you were actually not stating 80% HR max is ALL aerobic.

Come on dude, you can troll better than this surely?

'Lactate Threshold training' is a rather fascinating topic. Typically, that is considered training around the second lactate threshold point (where lactate rapidly rises above 4mmol). But the aerobic threshold is where anaerobic metabolism starts, which is 1/10th as efficient as aerobic metabolism at burning glucose.

Anaerobic metabolism is not as efficient as aerobic metabolism. A molecule of glucose can only produce three ATP molecules under anaerobic metabolism, while it produces 39 with aerobic metabolism. ATP is what fuels the muscles.

https://www.verywellfit.com/anaerobic-metabolism-3432629#:~:text=The%20only%20byproducts%20of%20the,to%20remove%20from%20the%20body

.

Disciple wrote:

I struggle to run as low as 65%. I would have to take walk breaks to stay this low. I have always believed it is because I am more Fast Twitch, and less efficient at the low intensities.

I actually would like to train this low. Would perseverance with run/walk work, or would this be de-training?

Yes, run/walk is excellent training for a beginner. And do little pitter/patter steps to keep the HR down there, if you want to.

I'm not a beginner, have been running for decades.

My concern is that I could spend 6 months doing this and still not get there, because of my muscle fibre type. After 6 months, I may be less aerobically fit than I am now, because of de-training?

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Hah. Your reply is typical of the guys not choosing to learn.

Aerobic metabolism byproducts are CO2 and water. Anaerobic metabolism waste involves lactate. Here is another source indicating lactate rises above 2mmol at 80% HRmax (Table on page 1)

https://www.ncsf.org/pdf/ceu/relationship_between_percent_hr_max_and_percent_vo2_max.pdf

It is more complex than that.

Lactate is not a waste product, but is actually a fuel source that is re-converted into energy. Lactate is also produced during aerobic exercise and at rest.

Viewing aerobic/anaerobic from lactate production is only one way of looking at things.

Aerobic/anaerobic can also be viewed as fat or glucose burning. This where it gets complicated because individuals are so different. Some may burn primarily glucose when exercising aerobically (i.e. under 2 mmol). Others may be so well fat adapted that they can burn primarily fat when exercising anaerobically (i.e, well above 2mmol).

Alfie wrote:

Lactate is also produced during aerobic exercise and at rest.

Lactate production is an anaerobic ("without oxygen")process, agreed?

Alfie wrote:Others may be so well fat adapted that they can burn primarily fat when exercising anaerobically (i.e, well above 2mmol).

But they are burning that fat through 'aerobic metabolism', agreed?

Disciple wrote:

I'm not a beginner, have been running for decades.

My concern is that I could spend 6 months doing this and still not get there, because of my muscle fibre type. After 6 months, I may be less aerobically fit than I am now, because of de-training?

Well, now you are getting into specifics, like what is meant by 'detraining' specific to you. When you say, "still not get there", what do you mean? Not get to the point where you can cover ground at 65% HRmax? That is silly. Of course you can, even if you have to race/walk to do it.

Also, of course, run/walk is not just for beginners; one form of run/walk is repetition training with some walking during the recoveries.

If training for running fitness and competition, I don't recommend a period in the year of just only running at 65% HRmax, unless doing an awful lot of it. You might want to look into evaluating the EPOC training loads of your various types of training sessions, for further insights on training effects.

i have not studied this, so im just spewing bs, but i am of the belief that most people are probably not of the ability to ever run at something like 65% hr for several miles.

at least not without running an insane amount of mileage--which would take forever at the speeds necessary.

just look at the times of your average road 5k runner. imagine how slow these people would have to be to run at 65%.

I am around 70-72% at 3.5 minutes slower than 5k pace. that is when i am really fit.

Jack Daniels Calculator wrote:

Well, now you are getting into specifics, like what is meant by 'detraining' specific to you. When you say, "still not get there", what do you mean? Not get to the point where you can cover ground at 65% HRmax? That is silly. Of course you can, even if you have to race/walk to do it.

Also, of course, run/walk is not just for beginners; one form of run/walk is repetition training with some walking during the recoveries.

If training for running fitness and competition, I don't recommend a period in the year of just only running at 65% HRmax, unless doing an awful lot of it. You might want to look into evaluating the EPOC training loads of your various types of training sessions, for further insights on training effects.

I have spent 30 years running my easy runs too fast, I know that now. I suspect that it would be easier to transition to this if I was a beginner.

65% is 110bpm, and no matter how slow I run, I reach this after about 1/2 mile. After this it is constant run/walk, and each session becomes much longer, so actually feels more tiring than running faster. I think my hr is too unstable for this low intensity?

I read an interesting post by Charlie, over on the 50+ Masters thread, that he posted today, regarding base building with A LOT of walking that he did back in the day. Food for thought.

Thanks, I'll have a read.

65% will produce almost no aerobic stimulus. It’s much better to run at at least 73% of max HR, and usually 75-76% is a standard easy pace that should be comfortable.