How fast do you all do your easy runs and long runs? (in terms of heart rate & race pace)

Easy runs=feels easy. Ignore your watch when running. If you feel good pick up the pace, if not take it easy. Long runs I have two categories of long runs, long runs where I'm just on my feet for 90+ minutes(which I often do several days a week, don't even really think of these as long runs) and long runs where I run steady(like easy runs, steady runs are a feel. which usually ends up being around a little slower than marathon pace.)

I run all my long and easy by HR.

The pace varies. When I’m peaking the relative effort is less for the given HR, and I’m quicker. But the HR is the same. If the watch fits right and you know your body then it’s a great way to keep from overdoing it.

Follow the HR and ignore the pace. My easy is 70%, and long I work up to 75%.

Interesting question wrote:

I run all my long and easy by HR.

The pace varies. When I’m peaking the relative effort is less for the given HR, and I’m quicker. But the HR is the same. If the watch fits right and you know your body then it’s a great way to keep from overdoing it.

Follow the HR and ignore the pace. My easy is 70%, and long I work up to 75%.

This is the more helpful response for me so far mainly because I'm just trying to figure out if I'm over-extending a bit and if that's something that I'm missing in training. I guess I read that article a little wrong, it says most people should be in the 130-40 range on easy days but I'd actually be right around 150ish based on my max HR. I have been going by feel and generally do what the first poster wrote. I'm just wondering if there is less of a return on an easy day where I'm running 7:15ish for 10 miles but drop down to the 6:30s or so the second half of the run & see my HR slide into the 160s.

It also makes sense if the paces get quicker while you're tapering. I've heard people like Meb talk about how their HR for long tempos is lower by the end of a build-up.

A good way to approach this is to wear your HRM every run, and learn what heart rate ranges correlate to what you're feeling.

For example, I know that if my legs are baked from a fast workout, then my HR is going to be lower than usual because my legs want to go more slowly. So I don't worry about staying in whatever zone Runners World prescribes this month and just shuffle along.

heart rate monitor wrote:

A good way to approach this is to wear your HRM every run, and learn what heart rate ranges correlate to what you're feeling.

For example, I know that if my legs are baked from a fast workout, then my HR is going to be lower than usual because my legs want to go more slowly. So I don't worry about staying in whatever zone Runners World prescribes this month and just shuffle along.

Yep, this is what I've done the last week. I'm still just concerned that my HR should be lower on those runs & that I'm doing a touch too much with them. It looks like a 150ish HR for me comes out to 7:15ish pace would be my easy run target. There are days where I hit it a little harder because I'm feeling good and it feels easy. I'm still just wondering if this is poor training and that I would improve a little more without the number of miles I do a week in the 6:30-7:00 pace.

heart rate monitor wrote:

A good way to approach this is to wear your HRM every run, and learn what heart rate ranges correlate to what you're feeling.

A much better way is to not wear a watch or HRM on any run.

If you are worried at all about your easy and long runs being run to fast then slow down. When I was in my best shape (the year I turned 40) I ran a 2:41 marathon, 33:48 10k, 16:14 5k, 4:38 mile. I rarely ran faster than 7:30 pace on my easy or long run days unless I was running with other people who thought it made them tough to run 6:45 pace for their long run.

6:50s +/- about 10 seconds

Garmin HR without the strap is wildly inaccurate.

moanswers wrote:

Garmin HR without the strap is wildly inaccurate.

No, it isn't.

For the fellow hobby joggers:

Goal Marathon Time: 3:59:59

Long runs: 10:30-10:45/mile 140ish HR

Easy runs: 9:45-10:15/mile 155-160ish HR

Half Marathon Race Pace runs: 9:15/mile 170ish HR

Tempo runs: 8:45/mile 180ish HR

Recovery runs: ~12:00/mile (with some walking on hills) 120ish HR

Was this off McMillan?

To break 4 that seems legit and reasonable.

Most first-time non-elite 'thoners have 4 as a start goal; same with breaking 2 in the half.

Where did you get this? wrote:

Was this off McMillan?

To break 4 that seems legit and reasonable.

Most first-time non-elite 'thoners have 4 as a start goal; same with breaking 2 in the half.

The training times? My own plan. I ran my first half in February 2018 on a Hal Higdon Novice 1 program, and it sucked. Ran my second half in late April 2018 just adding miles, and it was great.

Ran my first full marathon in December 2018 on the Hal Higdon Intermediate program, and it sucked. Ran the first 13.1 miles at a 9:15 pace and finished the full marathon with a 5+ hour time.

So now I'm just building miles (currently at 30 after a few weeks off and shooting for 55) using those training times and slowly increasing them as I can. Probably keep the long runs at that pace but build on the tempo and race pace runs. Race is Chicago in October, so I've got time.

consider this wrote:

moanswers wrote:

Garmin HR without the strap is wildly inaccurate.

No, it isn't.

Maybe the newer garmins are more accurate but I've been running with a HRM since they came out in the early 90s and i know what my HR should be at a given pace.

My garmin 235 without a strap is around 30+beats higher than with the strap and it is not accurate.

moanswers wrote:

consider this wrote:

No, it isn't.

Maybe the newer garmins are more accurate but I've been running with a HRM since they came out in the early 90s and i know what my HR should be at a given pace.

My garmin 235 without a strap is around 30+beats higher than with the strap and it is not accurate.

Seems like a few people have the perfect skin or blood vessel placement for the on wrist monitors to work, for me it has always been hot garbage. Recommendations such as, wear it halfway up your forearm, or tighten it so much it leaves marks for an hour after you take it off it only prove it is crap.

If you can't use a product as intended and have it function properly it simply doesn't work.

moanswers wrote:

consider this wrote:

No, it isn't.

Maybe the newer garmins are more accurate but I've been running with a HRM since they came out in the early 90s and i know what my HR should be at a given pace.

My garmin 235 without a strap is around 30+beats higher than with the strap and it is not accurate.

My 235 is spot on with a chest strap. Depends on your wrists!

It’s down to the person wrote:

My 235 is spot on with a chest strap. Depends on your wrists!

Yes. mine is too. Too bad about the wrists. I'd rather not use the strap.

I like to do my long runs faster. I used to do Galloway training (seriously, before the walk break 2.0 Galloway) and he'd have you running long runs super slow. I never made much progress. I smashed my PR by doing long runs faster so I stick with race pace plus 45 seconds for some of them. Never MP + 1:30, that's way too slow.

Easy runs can be as slow as MP plus 3 minutes if I'm really tired.

The first thing you should do is sell you stupid GPS watch with heart rate monitor and get out there and learn to run wihthout a stupid gadget telling you what to do.