Heart Rate or Pace?

Effort.

You don't have to choose. The best option to try all of them and understand how they are all related (and internalized so that your body can feel them).

I dedicate some sessions for controlling constant pace (and observe the HR as outcome), other sessions for controlling constant HR (and observe the pace as outcome), and yet another to control the feel/effort without gadget (and observe HR & pace later on as outcome).

You can also do these variations in different blocks (say 2k or so) within a run. Do them at different levels/intensity of pace, HR or effort. I like the game where the autolap is on, say every 400m, 800m or 1k or whatever, and then you try to target certain level (either HR or pace, usually both according the relationship you currently have) without looking at the watch, except only at the point where autolap beeps and then you repeat again for the next block (adjusting as necessary). You'll be surprised how you can internalize them (you can even guess pretty closely when the autolap is going to beep, i.e. feel of distance not just HR/pace).

Suppose you mastered this, then the question is what's considered "easy", or "threshold" or "fast"? The feedback should come from longer term fatigue, changes in HR/pace tradeoffs and race performances. Be patient, these understanding need several seasons of training and racing, at least (and a lifetime to get a sharp judgement).

Do both or either one, you're not going to miss anything training-wise. Easy pace has a wide range of variation (from just faster than recovery to maximum steady-state below MP). Threshold pace may be more critical. But then your body will tell you if you overshoot, and you don't need to ask.

The problem with pace is that you might not be recovered from the previous day, due to any number of factors, and as a result, do your easy run too fast.

The problem with HR is that most people don't know their real zones. They base them on their watches or simple formulas. Even when you know your Max HR to calculate the zones, they are still approximations.

If you do the Joe Friel method (google Joel Friel Heart Rate), you'll probably find that your zones are pretty close to your current HR training pace.

In my opinion, HRMs are best used to peg your upper level of the zone when doing tempo runs and to prevent overtraining on easy days by staying at/below your recovery zone. HRMs are also a good way to track fitness improvements without an all-out effort. I routinely do a trail run and track my time and average HR. Three months ago, I might have run 37:00 at a HR average of 133, but last week, I ran it at the same pace in 128... an improvement in fitness.

Hey

Thanks! I recently did a run that was similar to the Joel Friel test and extrapolated the data and is pretty much spot on with what I’m running at right now. I use my Garmin heart rate zones but I know the zones can be wildly inaccurate as there’s too much room for error with such large heart rate zones. So I’ve been sticking to certain limits within the heart rate zones to ensure better results and the heart rates I’ve been sticking to are almost exact with the Joel Friel zones so I’ll stick to my current way of training

Thanks for the insight!