How do you know if you're running aerobically in workouts?

If you can converse easily while running you are safely aerobic.

If you do not like wearing a HRM all the time you could use it for testing purposes to determine your aerobic pace then develop the ability to use perceived effort as the HR surrogate. This may take some time but is well worth it. I used a HRM for many years but never really paid attention to it, just kinda wearing it and then writing my avg HR in my training log. Couple years ago I started paying closer attention to effort and correspoding HR and played a game of trying to guess my HR at effort. After a while I was able to come very close, within 2-3 beats. Of course your HR is subject to many variables and I am talking about HR in "steady state" ie not overly rested or overly tired, not extreme heat or cold, not super hilly course etc etc etc.

What I haven't mastered yet is guessing my per mile pace at a given effort but am getting there.

It's very unlikely your LT is that close to max. One or the other is off. World class athletes LT is 90-95% of (~180-190 of ~200) max. How old are you?

active wrote:

I know one way is to run with a HR monitor, but I don't like doing that because I find myself micro-managing my HR and looking at the watch every 30 seconds.

How do I know if I'm running aerobically for my runs (usually 1 hour in the mornings, then a long 1.5 hour run during the weekend)?

I've heard people say that if you run in between your AeT (aeroic threshold) and your LT, you're running in a 'gray' zone and you're not going to get any significat aerobic benefits.

The thing is, my LTHR is really close to my maxHR (198 LT and 203 max), and my AeT is around 170 I guess. If I run at say 180, am I not going to get any aerobic benefits?

Thanks

Adam

Wrong. You get some of the best aerobic benefits when running in between the aerobic and lactate threshold.

As long as your pace or intensity is under the lactate threshold you are fine. Just make sure to know when to run slow and when to hit the LT-AeT.

Talk Test. Sounds crazy, but try and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. If you can recite it with no hitches you are truly running aerobically.

Who told you you don't get aerobic benefits after you cross the aerobic threshold? That is ludicrous. If anything, you get more benefits than if you were under it-with one caveat-that is, if you can sustain that pace for a significant amount of time. Some people can't. Others, like Pat Porter, have very high lactate thresholds and can run hard for a long time.

Adam,

I guaran-damn-tee that you are mistaken when you write: (my LTHR is really close to my maxHR (198 LT and 203 max)).

Billy Bob Billy wrote:

[quote]active wrote:

As long as your pace or intensity is under the lactate threshold you are fine. Just make sure to know when to run slow and when to hit the LT-AeT.

Interesting. I tend to use a HRM for LT runs as well, but a few years ago I worked with a British coach who refused to train runners using HRMs. He asked me: "Why do you use that thing?" My answer: "It ensures I'm working hard enough on my LT runs to be above AT without breaking LT." His response: "No. It ensures you're not working hard enough to raise your LT racing velocity."

He believed, as some do, that HRMs inhibit the athlete from fully reaching his/her VO2 Max capacity. For example, many athletes think they're Max HR is a certain #, say 195, based on a VO2 Max test or some other less precise estimation, and they train to that as if it were a hard ceiling. But with the right type of training, the muscles can be made to sustain a faster pace than the previous Max HR would suggest. The heart is along for the ride and will work harder if the muscles don't fatigue as quickly.

I think Owen Anderson has written on this and how he was able to raise the Max HR of a 55 year old man and experienced lifetime runner.

Just a thought.

Interesting stuff. A couple of questions: Who was the coach and do you think the heartrate monitor is still of value on easy days?

I've been training ala the "Hadd" method (lots of easy running @135-145bpm & 2 days @ 155-160bpm) using a heartrate monitor and sometimes wonder if I'm becoming too much of a slave to it.

The coach is Joe Welsh (St. Ives in Cambridgeshire) who coaches, or at least used to coach, Neil Speaight.

I do think it's of some value for long slow runs and I still use it. But again, we have the same problem if a) we really don't know what our Max HR is and b) whatever our current Max HR is is not what it can be with the right type of training. I think you'd have to do a VO2 Max test three times a year to really train on heartrate accurately. I don't know what my Max HR is anymore. I'm 40 years old and my HR hit 187 on a tough tempo run in the blistering heat of the United Arab Emirates last summer, so I think my max HR is somewhere between 190-194.

What I don't do anymore on long runs is limit myself to 65%-75% of HR Max. I'll use the HRM to keep it easy on the first half, but then I'll pick it up to Marathon pace for most of the 2nd half of the run and not worry about being in "zone 2" or any of that stuff.

I must admit I bought into heart rate training hook, line and sinker a few years ago. The problem is, there's so much contradictory science (and in some cases pseudo-science) flying around out there that's it impossible for someone with a medical background to sort through it all nevermind a layman like me.

I just try to keep it simple and ensure I work at least speed, LT, endurance, and strength once a week.

I think you might be on to something by mixing it up like that. I can't say for sure what exactly works for me and what doesn't since I'm coming off a very long lay off, but I feel as if I'm making no progress with all of this easy running.

There is no possible way you can run for an hour anaerobically

That's an easy one. You know you're not running anerobically if you are not barfing.

I don't know if I'm on to anything or not. I'm sure there are people on this message board who would make an impassioned case for training on HR.

But I do think it's far more important to set up a periodization program around a few big races and focus on strength, expanding VO2 Max, developing LT, etc...