BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General training questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Unread 04-26-2012, 01:39 PM
tehmackdaddy tehmackdaddy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Sure View Post
The quoted suggestion has a lot of problems; the first two that come to mind are:
  1. maximum heart rate has lots of individual variance
  2. a particular individual's heart rate during activity has a lot of variance
Basing a program on heart rate is a poor idea.

You wanna run 10K or shorter races, find a 10K racer's program. Something like FIRST from Furman or something from CoolRunnings. Strip it of the junk miles and effluvia and run the quality workouts, there'll be only 2-4 of those a week in any running program. Then use the other 1-3 days a week to intelligently program some strength training in order to maintain your current muscle base (if you want to).

Something like (maybe not exactly like) Tues/Fri/Sat for running workouts (long run on Saturday) and Mon/Thu for strength workouts (two different full-body splits). Or expand it to a rolling EOD schedule like this:

Strength (alternate workouts A/B)
Day off
Running (alternate workout types A/B/C)
Day off

Use hill work sparingly. Consider treadmill repeats of 400m on inclines instead of traditional hill sprints.
What you posted is absolutely correct regarding individualized HR, but *I* take the main point of heart rate monitoring to be aware of an indicator as opposed to not being aware of it. I think most would agree that HR is a good indicator of physical stress on the body, so being cognizant of it during training shouldn't be detrimental if the trainee is willing to be flexible with regards to moving around the HR zones based upon performance and recovery feedback (i.e. personalization).

To provide a little depth to what I am saying I'll elaborate with my situation. I went from not running, at all, from the time I got out of the Marine Corps until about a year ago (~10 years). My wife, an avid runner, wanted to run a race with me so I picked it up. As expected with a newbie runner, I was 1) very bad at running, and 2) improved quickly, though not to a "decent" level as determined by me and previous experience with running both in T&F and in the Marines. I ran a few races and then stopped running again for a period of about 6 months.

So I started running again in January to prepare for a race in April, though this time armed with a heart rate monitor. Lo and behold, one of the reasons I think running was so not-fun for me, even when I was younger and in T&F, was discovered: my heart rate tends to get very high. Jogging at a slow pace (6.0mph) would shoot my heart rate into the 180's. Over the last few months this improved some, but I still am unable to run at what I would call a "decent" pace for an extended period- I don't feel like I'm stretching my legs and running at a pace that feels biomechanically ideal, which for me feels like 7.5 - 8.0 mph. I feel as thought my heart rate is holding me back more than my lungs and my muscles, if that makes sense.

Since HR is tied to stress on the body, especially the CNS, it seemed critical to me to ensure that the non-lifting workouts were planned and executed accordingly so as not to overtax my body which would lead to reduced recovery and possibly over-training (over-reaching) and injury. (I lift 3-4 days per week depending on my macro-cycle, though your 2/week is noted for a cycle geared towards improving running.) Just the way I am hard-wired I seek out the most efficient and effective way to implement training and nutrition strategies with the thought that if I'm going to spend valuable resources on this, I want to maximize results. (This might be where someone would link Lyle's article on over-thinking details. It may appear that way, but with how I have my weight lifting and nutrition dialed in, it seems counter-intuitive to not approach aerobic & anaerobic conditioning in the same fashion.) This desire to optimize is likely why I found Lyle's site, now that I think about it.

Again, I don't know for sure and it may just take trial and error on my part, and even then knowing for sure what is optimal and what is sub-optimal for me may not be possible. I do see the logic in monitoring heart rate in order to train my body's aerobic system and minimize CNS stress. Ultimately, you may indeed be correct and I should not worry so much about heart rate given I am not attempting to set any race records and my running capacity is considered very "beginner." I have considered that I am just in very terrible cardiovascular shape (what you may be thinking ), but I am able to cycle and use the elliptical machine without the same HR issue. Something about running or just the process of moving my body through space seems to be extra-taxing on me for some reason.

Thanks for your response.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 04-26-2012, 02:31 PM
Not Sure Not Sure is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 756
Default

IMO you'd be better served using something like RPE, or breathing rate, as an indicator when running, than HR. Especially if the goal is to autoregulate intensity. Just my opinion.

IDK about you, but I can tell by my breathing rate versus foot pace pretty well how fatigued I am during a run, example
  • shallow every fifth footfall
  • shallow every fourth footfall (every other left foot)
  • deep every other left foot
  • deep every single left foot
These are very different paces for me if I have to breathe at them at point X in a run, or if I'm doing a race pace trial, I will hit these different breathing points at the same pace but at different points in the run, i.e. I'm more than halfway finished when I'm breathing deep every other left foot.

FWIW the pace of leg movement I need on an elliptical or cycle to get the same fatigue in the same time as running is much faster. There's less work being done per cycle of the legs than in running, so my experience is roughly the same as yours, running is more taxing. But I prefer running.

FIRST and McMillian and Daniels all make their training paces for runs based on some known or estimated race time. If you base your training off of one of their plans, you might not have the excessive HR issue, as using a completed race time will generate a plan commensurate with your fitness level.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 04-26-2012, 02:37 PM
jesse jesse is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 569
Default

Squats, DL's, press, row.

I am sure being strong in relation to body weight may have some indirect benefit to running.

Many will disagree but when I ran a lot (marathons), when I implemented strength training into my routine, I noted I was injured a lot less.

I realize this topic is always a debate, especially amongst runners who typically hate being in the weight room to begin with.

A good book on this that I recommend is Explosive running by Dr. Michael Yessis.

Just a note on Brad Hudson- he is a tool. His entire book is based on thread posted on letsrun.com message board by the infamous Coach Renato Canova. Since Renato's english is poor- Hudson's interpretation is flawed out the wazoo, at best. He makes absolutely no sense at all with his "funnel" philosophy. He took what Renato found based on science (he tests his athlets lactait levels etc..) and butchered it into some generic American watered down version and his athletes suck as a result of it.

Last edited by jesse : 04-26-2012 at 02:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 04-26-2012, 03:25 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

As I recall, all Yessis ever did with his book was make runners slower.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 04-26-2012, 03:51 PM
Not Sure Not Sure is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jesse View Post
Many will disagree but when I ran a lot (marathons), when I implemented strength training into my routine, I noted I was injured a lot less.
I don't disagree with the premise, but you might find disagreement with the main reason why I think integrating strength training into marathon training reduces injuries.

Basically it forces the runner to cut out some of the junk miles by taking a day or two of weights and recovery from weights out of their over-worked schedules. Then the runner will focus more on quality runs and not get so many overuse injuries.

Yeah, there's a component of strength benefit to injury prevention, but IMO it's minor compared to the benefit of interrupting "Joe Average" and his 3-hour+ marathon time from running 12 sessions in 7 days by taking time out to train strength (and recover from training strength).
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 04-26-2012, 04:46 PM
jesse jesse is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Sure View Post
I don't disagree with the premise, but you might find disagreement with the main reason why I think integrating strength training into marathon training reduces injuries.

Basically it forces the runner to cut out some of the junk miles by taking a day or two of weights and recovery from weights out of their over-worked schedules. Then the runner will focus more on quality runs and not get so many overuse injuries.

Yeah, there's a component of strength benefit to injury prevention, but IMO it's minor compared to the benefit of interrupting "Joe Average" and his 3-hour+ marathon time from running 12 sessions in 7 days by taking time out to train strength (and recover from training strength).

Actually, I ran more despite of weight training.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 04-26-2012, 04:49 PM
jesse jesse is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
As I recall, all Yessis ever did with his book was make runners slower.

Did you read Yessis book? I would think there is some stuff in there you can appreciate.

Granted much of it is geared toward middle distance runners but he has some insight on distance runners and strength training. I don't think he coached runners directly (but I could be wrong).

You would likely find Hudsons book hilarious, especially if you followed the source (a 400 somthing page thread that evolved over a few years on a messge board).
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Unread 04-26-2012, 11:24 PM
Zé Apelido Zé Apelido is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 401
Default

Things that will improve running time in order of importance. Just my opinion.

1. Pushing yourself in your training. Obvious yes, but if you gotta feel some pain to make progress. Pick the durations that work best for you, in terms of amount of time you have and what you like. If you aren't overweight and can't run a 5K under 20 min, your training can definitely improve.

2. Lose weight

3. Drugs

4. Improve running mechanics.

5. Plyometrics. A little bit can help your "bounce" and improve efficiency. Not too much as it's a lot of impact.

6. Standard weight training....mainly to reduce injury.

Basically, most people just have to learn to train their endurance harder & smarter. Once you've hit diminishing returns on that, focus on the others more.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 04-27-2012, 08:21 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Re 1: Distance running performance is invariably correlated with the volume of lower intensity running. Not 'going hard'.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 04-27-2012, 10:06 AM
tehmackdaddy tehmackdaddy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zé Apelido View Post
Basically, most people just have to learn to train their endurance harder & smarter.
The problem I'm finding out is that those two strategies, "harder" and "smarter," are sometimes opposites. Like you, instinct is telling me to push through and my body will adapt. What I've researched says that isn't necessarily the best thing considering the entirety of my training.

Regardless, Lyle sets a good and safe standard recommendation in this article, ensuring no more than 4 days of heavy workload on the body:

Quote:
So let’s say we have an individual using a 4 day/week upper/lower split routine who wants to do 2 days of intervals and 2 days of aerobic training. Here’s how I would suggest sequencing it.

Monday AM: Intervals PM: Lower body weights
Tuesday AM: Aerobics PM: Upper body weights
Wednesday: Off (brisk walking would be allowed for active recovery)
Thursday: AM: Intervals PM: Lower body weights
Friday: AM: Aerobics PM: Upper body weights
Saturday Off (brisk walking would be allowed for active recovery)
Sunday: Completely off (everyone should take at least one day off per week).
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.