- This topic has 36 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by Anonymous.
- September 15, 2004 at 5:01 pm #1850ccbrian4Participant
I ran my first half-marathon this past weekend, fnishing in 1:24:28. I was a few minutes off my goal, but looking back that goal was a little overly ambitious. I went out a little fast (5:44 first mile) then settled into a 6:05 or so pace for the next few miles. About halfway through the race, though, my pace slowed to around 6:45 per mile, and that’s where it stayed for the rest of the race. I was most disappointed that I wasn’t concentrating on the task at hand like I should have been, and I think that contributed to my slower-than-hoped-for time. Does anyone have any tips or tricks I can use to stay on task? This seems to happen ofen when I race, it just seemed most obvious in the half.
- September 15, 2004 at 5:48 pm #15774Anonymousccbrian4 wrote:Does anyone have any tips or tricks I can use to stay on task?
Sounds like more of a problem with pacing than mental toughness. If your goal was in the 1:23-1:24 range, I assume your 5k times are around 18-flat. That means you ran your first mile of a half marathon at 5k pace. Then you continued at about 10k pace for the next few miles. It’s pretty to “hang on” in a half marathon after that early pacing.
- September 15, 2004 at 6:04 pm #15775
Guest is right. A half marathon is typically paced right about exactly at your lactate threshold. Because the race is relatively long it is tough to climb out of an LT hole if you dig a big one.
If you had a goal time and used a pace calculator to figure out the pace you needed to run, the half marathon is not a race you can bank time in but it must be run with perfect splits or start slower.
Leading up to the next HM, knowing what your goal pace is, it might be wise to run a few training miles at exactly the same pace to try and get a feel for it. It can be difficult with all the adrenaline and excitement on race day to relax and hit pace the first mile or two but that is something that comes with racing more.
I am pacing Woody through a half marathon on Sunday where he is going for a PR. The first two miles will be his most important miles to hit dead nuts on. Go too fast and he may sink his chances. Then he will watch his heart rate after about 4 miles and he will run right at what we know is his LT. We know exactly his LT pace because we have been able to guage it through many tests and months of work with a heart rate monitor. The beauty of this method is that the heart rate monitor never lies.
If only Paula Radcliffe had used a heart rate monitor in the olympics she would have known she was pushing the pace too hard early on…oh well.
Good luck. Dan
- September 15, 2004 at 7:34 pm #15776ZekeParticipantdanm wrote:Guest is right.
Thanks Dan. That was me, I forgot to log in.
- September 15, 2004 at 8:12 pm #15777danm wrote:If only Paula Radcliffe had used a heart rate monitor in the olympics she would have known she was pushing the pace too hard early on…oh well.
Please tell me you’re kidding…I suppose Takahashi completely lucked out actually winning the marathon without a HRM. Maybe she won because nobody else in the field had the supreme insight to wear one? Radcliffe simply had a bad day and made the tactical error of taking and holding the lead much too early. With or without a HRM, she was not going to get any medal on that day on that course in those conditions.
- September 15, 2004 at 9:10 pm #15778
Oops, I think you meant Mizuki Noguchi. Takahashi won Sydney.
Mizuki did run with an HRM. You could see her checking it religiously. Deena also had one on. Did you watch the same race?
But running by HR would have told Paula something was up early and to adjust the pace. Heart rates do not lie.
I think she might have had a chance had she the foresight.
- September 15, 2004 at 9:33 pm #15779danm wrote:Oops, I think you meant Mizuki Noguchi. Takahashi won Sydney.
Yes, I meant Noguchi.danm wrote:Mizuki did run with an HRM. You could see her checking it religiously. Deena also had one on.
I saw both of them running with watches and I saw them occasionally glance at them. I don’t know if I’d call it checking them religiously. I saw and heard no evidence that they had HRMs. Do you have something that shows they were wearing HRMs and not watches? I just looked up some pics on the IAAF website and I see no evidence of such. Just for kicks, I checked the pics of the men also and saw no evidence of any of them wearing HRMs either.danm wrote:But running by HR would have told Paula something was up early and to adjust the pace.
And I’m sure listening to her body also would have. However, she was there for a medal and nothing less. She surely felt the signals from her body well before simply stopping but she took a medal or bust approach and we all know what the results were.
- September 15, 2004 at 9:49 pm #15780
Heat will have specific effects on people in different ways. Some adapt well, others don’t. Even some days you may adapt OK. But the HR never lies. If she knew precisely her pace she wanted to run and knew exactly what HR that occured at she would have known within 5 miles what the scoop was as her HR would’ve indicated the need for a slower pace due to the heat.
That is not to say she wouldn’t have melted anyway. But those times being 5 minutes slow for all the competitors is a good indication that nobody ran better than usual.
By feel is OK but more often than not you will “feel” OK through early stages of a race and then pay the piper later. Having an HRM to tell this info early is the key.
- September 15, 2004 at 10:36 pm #15781danm wrote:By feel is OK but more often than not you will “feel” OK through early stages of a race and then pay the piper later. Having an HRM to tell this info early is the key.
People who do not understand how to run by feel may “feel” OK through the early stages of a race and then pay the piper later. Those who know how to run by feel will know what signals to pay attention to. Knowing how to run by feel is the key and the most effective way to race.
- September 16, 2004 at 3:48 am #15782PeppoMilesParticipantRyan wrote:People who do not understand how to run by feel may “feel” OK through the early stages of a race and then pay the piper later. Those who know how to run by feel will know what signals to pay attention to. Knowing how to run by feel is the key and the most effective way to race.
Couldn’t agree more with this. People who are not capable of feeling and understanding what a certain effort is erroneously believe it is not possible. Been there. I guess what made me change idea most is the fact that in the last couple of years I have never trained on any measured course but I did achieve pretty good, for me, race results.
Please do not screw up the names of the many Japanese olympic marathon champion 🙂 !
- September 16, 2004 at 3:16 pm #15783
One of the things that a heart rate monitor trains you to do is “feel” paces at all the different heart rate ranges. When running laps on a track you can feel the pace within a beat or two of a HR range.
But more importantly it teaches what paces you can hold for what distances. I know, for example, that my HR goal for Chicago is going to be in the 162-168 range after about the 5th mile. Having run numerous MP type runs leading up to it, I now know that this pace is going to be about 6:10-15. I will get the best indication of this when I pace Woody thru his HM on Sunday.
But more than that, after numerous months of training and racing with the HRM I am able to know where my LT is. Knowing my current LT and my current HR max allows me to plan my training paces for a marathon precisely. No guess work involved.
Who wouldn’t want to know this going into a marathon? Seems like any other method is a crap shoot. You can’t tell me that your one marathon could not have been run any better than it was. If you would have trained using an HRM and known precisely what HR you were capable of, you would have known on that windy day that a slower pace earlier would have reaped a bigger reward.
I have run almost my entire career by “feel.” But now I have a tool that allows me to know what I am capable within 2-3 minutes. None of this, “Gee, I hope I am within 15 minutes of what Pski predicts.”
Why don’t you know precisely what yo will run? Better yet, why don’t you tell us, precisely what you will run. I think hiding that is building in an excuse for not really having a clue because you know that going by “feel” anything is possible.
I’ll tell you right now that I am going to run 2:45 + or – 2 minutes at chicago barring no unforseen freak weather or illness. I may know more precisely after Sunday.
Now you tell me……
- September 16, 2004 at 4:09 pm #15784danm wrote:One of the things that a heart rate monitor trains you to do is “feel” paces at all the different heart rate ranges. When running laps on a track you can feel the pace within a beat or two of a HR range.
So can learning your body’s signals.danm wrote:But more importantly it teaches what paces you can hold for what distances.
And knowing your body’s signals teaches you what efforts you can hold for what distances, regardless of pace.danm wrote:But more than that, after numerous months of training and racing with the HRM I am able to know where my LT is. Knowing my current LT and my current HR max allows me to plan my training paces for a marathon precisely. No guess work involved.
It’s amazing how knowing your body’s signals allows you to plan your training efforts precisely. You don’t need to worry about what happens to your pace when you go up a big hill or down a long, gradual hill because you simply know what effort level you should be running at the whole time.danm wrote:Seems like any other method is a crap shoot.
Seems to me like it has been quite effective for nearly every elite in the world.danm wrote:You can’t tell me that your one marathon could not have been run any better than it was. If you would have trained using an HRM and known precisely what HR you were capable of, you would have known on that windy day that a slower pace earlier would have reaped a bigger reward.
Sure it could have been run better. Not because I didn’t train without a HRM but because, no matter whether you use one or not, the chances of getting everything perfect are virtually nil. As for race day, if I would have started at a slower pace, I can all but guarantee I would have run worse. If I was wearing a HRM and relying solely on it, I most likely would have started slower. Then, I would have been in no man’s land battling the wind with no help. Instead, I went out a bit “too fast” and had help dealing with the wind for 22+ miles.danm wrote:I have run almost my entire career by “feel.” But now I have a tool that allows me to know what I am capable within 2-3 minutes. None of this, “Gee, I hope I am within 15 minutes of what Pski predicts.”
I know what I am capable of within a very narrow window. I also know that many variables that can’t be measured by a HRM could change that window. I also know the words of a former coach of mine:Coach Conway wrote:My first marathon was 258 and my 10th was 223.But I never made any predictions or if I did it was “under 3 hours”danm wrote:Why don’t you know precisely what yo will run? Better yet, why don’t you tell us, precisely what you will run. I think hiding that is building in an excuse for not really having a clue because you know that going by “feel” anything is possible.
I do know within a very close window what I will most likely run. I also know that, by running by feel, I will run up to my body’s full capability, whatever that is. I’m not telling precisely what I believe I am capable of running because I learned from Coach Conway that making predictions is a useless waste of energy and the performance is what counts.
The whole thing here is that you seem to think that using a HRM is the only way for one to perform at one’s best. This is a false assumption that has been proven to be false countless times by countless runners.
BTW: I looked at several pictures from the Olympic marathons yesterday evening and asked several people who watched the women’s race. I guess you were watching a different race than all of us because you are the only person I have heard from who spotted a HRM on any of the marathon competitors.
- September 16, 2004 at 5:04 pm #15785
The reason many poeple feel that they lose focus isn’t a menatl thing….it is physical. A lot of people try to predict mary and .5 mary times by using shorter races. This may not always work. I ran a 1:08 20k 3 weeks before a mary, thought I was ready for a sub 2:35…..and blew up on the day and ran 2:41, and it sucked.Simply put, I wasn’t prepared for the distance. When that happens, nothing works right…your body, mind, they are all out of whack. My best advice is to be FULLY prepared for the distance, the rest will fall inot place.
As for the HRM debate (man, I am getting sick of it, too)….mine is currently gathering dust. Don’t get me wrong, I like it, but I am pretty sure I know my body well enough not to need it when I run. Most elites may use them occasionally when they train, but I can not recall the last time I saw an elite 10k-Mary runner use one in a race.
Its all personal preference…….do what you like.
Ryan……don’t sweat predicting your time….just go out and see what happens, I doubt a HRM will save the day anyway. Sometimes you just have to RUN!! Listen to your body and RUN!
….my thoughts aren’t finished, but my time on line is…..I’ll finish this later.
- September 16, 2004 at 6:00 pm #15786
I’m not quite sure a HRM would help Ryan predict his time to within a minute or two. The HRM WILL tel him how hard he is working on certain runs. Using Threshold as an example, your HREM will tell you it is about 70-80% of your max….whereas a “feel” runner uses their current .5 mary pace, or 10k pace plus 30 sec (these are not exact, just using numers for argument sake). Either formula you use, you still get to that pace. One may be a tad more precise, but you are still getting in the work. THAT is what will help you determine your projected time. HRMs have their pitfalls (cardiac drift, heat, fatigue) and so does “feel” (heat, fatigue…all that)…hmm…..funny I listed the same things at pitfalls! maybe not so funny, just true!!!
As for a marathon, I don’t think a HRM is needed if you are well enough prepared…..as for a longer race, say an Ironman…absolutely, because it will help you stay at a constant level throughout the 3 disciplines.
btw…..don’t try to call someone out to make their goals public….thats sucks. Let him do what he needs to do to perform his best. If he needs to keep quiet, respect it, if he needs to blab, let him blab.
- September 16, 2004 at 6:38 pm #15787
A HRM would help Ryan or anyone else predict his or her marathon assuming they were trained on how to use it. The reasons are just as you explained about how to take into considerations such as (cardiac drift, heat, fatigue). It is a more precise science than “Feel.” But it isn’t for everyone, and that I have no problem with. But please don’t pander to the idea that by “feel” is the best way. There are many ways.
For the same reason as you stated that a triathlete uses it so should a marathoner. There would be a benefit to using it for a half marathon as well but I would not use it for anything below that other than a way to collect data.
An even better way might be to run a bunch of your workday sessions accompanied by a coach who could take LT blood test readings throughout the workout. We know that is not realistic for the average Joe/Jane. So an HRM is a good way to know LT levels.
Look, I think 99% of the advice Ryan dispenses is decent stuff, but when I see a novice athlete looking for guidance, rather than leaving so much to chance come marathon race day (ESPECIALLY THE FIRST ONE), why wouldn’t you want to use a tool to help guage your fitness up to and including the big race? It is so common for everyone to blow up on their first marathon it is almost silly.
Just because you don’t know about something does not make it wrong. Learn about it first, come back with an informed decision. (and I don’t mean dabble in it for a few months. I mean find a coach versed in the method, spend a year or two then decide.) If you feel that HRM training isn’t for you OK. No problemo.
- September 16, 2004 at 7:17 pm #15788danm wrote:Just because you don’t know about something does not make it wrong. Learn about it first, come back with an informed decision. (and I don’t mean dabble in it for a few months. I mean find a coach versed in the method, spend a year or two then decide.) If you feel that HRM training isn’t for you OK. No problemo.
Who says anyone disagreeing with your viewpoint doesn’t know about HRMs? You’re making a dangerous leap of faith there and, for the one person I can speak for, you are simply wrong.
The bottom line is HRMs have their pitfalls, just as running by feel does. One is not necessarily better than the other. One thing I do know, though, is that running by feel truly doesn’t lie if you truly know how to listen to your body. The HRM, contrary to your statements otherwise, can lie due to several factors but most significantly cardiac drift.
- September 16, 2004 at 7:25 pm #15789
Ryan, look this is getting silly. You are contradicting yourself saying either way is not wrong, BUT….
“The bottom line is HRMs have their pitfalls, just as running by feel does. One is not necessarily better than the other. One thing I do know, though, is that running by feel truly doesn’t lie if you truly know how to listen to your body. The HRM, contrary to your statements otherwise, can lie due to several factors but most significantly cardiac drift.”
Proof you don’t know what you are saying because you don’t know about HRM’s.
This is exactly why you need to learn more about HRM’s. If you were trained correctly using an HRM you would know that you can almost completely eliminate cardiac drift. This can be done in training. You will still incur some in a race but you will learn how to factor the drift in.
If you wish to post a reply to this that is fine but I can take no more!!! I know this is your website but for the sake of some of the more novice runners have a more open mind, express many viewpoints, not just your own blinding beliefs.
- September 16, 2004 at 9:44 pm #15790danm wrote:You are contradicting yourself saying either way is not wrong…
I have never stated HRM training is wrong. If you don’t believe me, feel free to find where I did and bring that to my attention. I stated it is wrong to think that HRM training is the only way to reach one’s potential.danm wrote:This is exactly why you need to learn more about HRM’s. If you were trained correctly using an HRM you would know that you can almost completely eliminate cardiac drift. This can be done in training. You will still incur some in a race but you will learn how to factor the drift in.
I have learned about and used HRMs quite extensively in the past. There is no way to eliminate cardiac drift and “factoring drift in” is an estimation at best. No better than factoring in fatigue to how you feel late in a race or hard workout.
- September 17, 2004 at 1:41 pm #15791
Actually, when “new” runners ask me for advice….I tell them to start with a HRM.
…hey, Ryan, this reminds me of that weightlifting debate we had 2 years ago. Six in one, half dozen in the other.
- September 17, 2004 at 2:18 pm #15792
OK, let’s at least get something contructive from this post.
And I will start by saying a little bit about cardiac drift and how to minimize it. As we stated above running by feel you should still be able to sense things that are occuring to you but adding an HRM on top of that is like seeing the evidence as well as “feeling” it.
The HRM, contrary to your statements otherwise, can lie due to several factors but most significantly cardiac drift.
Now HRM’s do not lie about cardiac drift, they report it. But why does cardiac drift occur? It occurs whether you are wearing an HRM or not. But that’s the life of a runner.
In a Lydiard-type training program, the base phase, if done properly, should train a runner’s slow twitch (ST) fiber system through creating more mitochondria, increasing capillery density, and using fat as a fuel source way more efficiently.
In essence, your ST fibers become super efficient at clearing lactate.
In this phase you can get to a point where a 90 minute plus run will produce no cardiac drift. Your ST fibers clear the lactate continously.
So cardiac drift must occur when the ST fibers can no longer keep up with clearing lactate. Why? Because as you fatique you need to start calling on more Fast Twitch (FT) fibers which fatique faster and faster and require glycogen. Pretty soon you start building lactate and your heart beats more rapidly in an attempt to clear the lactate.
Wow, you say to yourself, I “feel” like I’m dying here and then glance at your HRM and see why. Wow, my HR went from a steady 162 to 175!! Ease back old boy and see if we can’t steady her in the 160’s.
Hope that helps. Let’s try to make this contructive.
- September 17, 2004 at 3:12 pm #15793
agreed, and well put. BUT you can also “feel” you are dying, so simply slow down. BUT you may have to wait until your next mile mark to see if you did and how you feel, whereas a HRM will tell you immediately when you get back to that 160 range. BUT sometimes you have to push.
Heh—I’m arguing both points now!
- September 17, 2004 at 3:28 pm #15794
The example that the orginal poster stated about going out too fast in the first few miles of the half marathon is a prime example of your body’s ability to NOT recover from incurring too much lactate.
This is why a half marathon is a great race and a dangerous one to boot. Because it should be run right about at 100% of your LT pace. It is like walking a tight rope, lean one way too much and you stray off course.
But because he could not clear lactate any more, after plunging way to far into above LT range, he found himself accumulating more and more lactate. Even slowing his pace a little didn’t help. The damage was done.
With a HRM he would have seen this as eveidence but certainly didn’t need it to know that.
When learning to use the HRM he would’ve known that the first few miles of the half are soooooo important to stay on pace. But his HRM would not have climbed to the zone where he wanted to be until about the 4th mile.
But by 4 or even 5 he might have seen a HR way above the target and may have been able to stave off a little bit of the fading per mile paces. By 4 or 5 he might not have felt like all was lost yet. This can come with running more half marathons and or other races.
- September 17, 2004 at 4:10 pm #15795ferris wrote:agreed, and well put. BUT you can also “feel” you are dying, so simply slow down. BUT you may have to wait until your next mile mark to see if you did and how you feel, whereas a HRM will tell you immediately when you get back to that 160 range. BUT sometimes you have to push.
Exactly. You feel you are dying, so simply ease up a bit. If you’re truly running by feel, you don’t need to wait for the next mile marker to see if you did and you never have to wait for any specific point to know how you feel.
As for cardiac drift, it happens for multiple reasons including increased lactate levels, glycoen depletion, dehydration, and overheating. Virtually nothing related to physiology is as simple as one factor causing one result. The amazing thing is you can detect all of these things with or without a HRM if you know what you are doing and you can get mixed signals with or without a HRM if you do not know what you are doing.
Once again, all I am trying to point out is that the idea that a HRM is in some way required to detect these things and/or to run your best is false. All of these things can be done without a HRM so trying to state or insinuate that a HRM is required to do these things is misleading at best.
- September 17, 2004 at 4:14 pm #15796
Couple more thoughts on this. (Can’t stand arguing if it can’t be backed up)
So what can a runner do to improve this ability? He/or she can start by making sure that the goal of their base building phase is to get to where they can run for a certain amount of time (90 minutes at least) where they incur no cardiac drift at about 70-75% of maximum HR.
But the problem most novice, uninformed, uncoached (and I used to count myself in this group) individuals have is no means to measure this fact with out the aid of a tool. (And I know you will say you will know when you are there by feel, but I disagree) You cannot measure cardiac drift by feel.
This base building phase can be different lengths for different types of runners and paces can be a varied as well and you must take into consideration what type of a runner they are. Fast twitch or slow twitch.
more in a bit…..
- September 17, 2004 at 4:54 pm #15797
its almost easier to give a novice a HRM and say “run for 45 minutes in range x-y” than it is to answer all the questions like “how fast do I go? “what if I get tired” and all that crap.
BUT (:)) with a novice…they don’t care about drift….because their HR will be all over the place anyway, and they are so new, they don’t care or know what it is.
Sometimes we can be a bit high tech, and other times not enough.
Personally, heres my take on HRM’s……I like them for longer runs, mainly in a base phase. I like them on the bike because I can see how hard/easy I am working, because I am not experienced enough on the bike to do it by “feel”
Tempo runs with a HRM may be a good idea, just to keep me honest or to slow me down a bit. BUT….when it is time to get nasty (ie-VO2 work and speed)…I like to go by feel, just run raw. Every now and then, you have to make it hurt, go beyond that comfort zone, push push push. As for races…..I don’t think I’ll ever use one in a race, unless it was a 50 miler…but no thanks.
- September 17, 2004 at 5:03 pm #15798
I agree about the really fast stuff both in training and in racing.
I like to wear it for all races and always for the important workday efforts just as a device that allows me to record information. It is like adding one more level of information to what I already know and feel.
However, in one such instance that I know of, Woody was wearing his HRM for either a half or a ten miler and we knew what his BPM should be to achieve his goal time. Mid-way through the run he saw he was a few beats below this although felt as though he was right on pace. Now as stated above, having to wait for the mile marker to tell you this may be too far to have to wait when that information may be crucial right then and there.
Woody was able to pick it up a tad, get to the right BPM and finish with a PR and feel like the race was run perfectly.
- September 17, 2004 at 5:57 pm #15799ferris wrote:Tempo runs with a HRM may be a good idea, just to keep me honest or to slow me down a bit.
This may be a good use if you believe the best way to improve LT is to run right at your LT pace. However, there is evidence that training at paces both slightly above and slightly below your LT pace is actually more effective than training right at your LT. The working theory I have seen is that training slightly above specifically targets the lactate clearing mechanisms much more than training right at LT and training slightly below trains the muscles to work harder while not producing great amounts of lactate just as effectively, if not more, as training right at your LT. Since both lactate production and lactate clearing are the key components that determine your lactate threshold, focusing on them this way would result in greater gains.
- September 17, 2004 at 6:11 pm #15800
I agree with that in terms of what phase you are in. In the pure basebuilding phase it is better to stay below the LT until you can stabilize the HR for a long run.
One of the benefits of the HRM in this case is assuming you know approximately where your LT falls, as Ferris stated, you can use it to slow down or speed up. Any given day your HR may be slightly different and we know this to be caused by many factors such as we have described like heat, dehydration, low glycogen (not enough recovery from a previous hard day), illness, etc. Where a HRM shines is letting you know this information. You must adjust accordingly if you are trying to run a workout just under or just above your LT (A la Daniels)
Rather than pound away at my 5 mile tempo at 5:45 pace because that is what I ran it at last week, I might see my HR reading low for the day and rather than try super hard to push it up into the zone (and end up running 5:30’s), I would know to go by pace. I would effectively be no longer running just below or just above my LT but considerably faster.
Now were getting some good stuff going here and hopefully we aren’t the only three saps reading this.
- September 17, 2004 at 7:35 pm #15801
Of course, once again, the same can be done if you know how to listen to your body. When I was using a HRM, I constantly noticed how the HRM never told me anything I didn’t already know. If the HRM told me that I was tired/dehydrated/overheating/whatever and needed to back off on a workout, I already knew it from dead legs or the extra effort required to maintain a pace. If the HRM told me that I was taking it too easy, I already knew it because I felt like I was coasting. Actually, I could feel those things even before the HRM told me those things. That is why now I don’t even know where my HRM is: I knew everything it was going to tell me even before it told me simply by paying attention to my body’s signals. The only thing the HRM offered me was the ability to ignore my body’s signals, which I found to be counterproductive for injury prevention (developed a lot of nagging stuff during that time) and race preparation and I also found my runs to be much less satisfying. I guess part of the enjoyment of running for me is being in tune to my body and the HRM helped me tune out and lose that part of the enjoyment.
- September 17, 2004 at 7:46 pm #15802
Boy, I thought we were getting somewhere. Despensing some interesting thought provoking information. Then I read your post above and realized we are back at square one.
Looks to me like you made up your mind before you used an HRM that it wasn’t going to work for you. That you knew best.
You, unfortunately, are an uncoachable runner and are doing a disservice to those who might want to learn.
Perhaps all 6 posters on this site want to be informed of the “Ryan method. The only way known to man to train. Run a 120 miles a week like me and you too can run a 35 minute 10k.”
- September 17, 2004 at 8:41 pm #15803
Ryan, I’ll admit that you are a bit bent on having to be right on this, but, danm, you hit below the belt.
- September 17, 2004 at 9:19 pm #15804danm wrote:Looks to me like you made up your mind before you used an HRM that it wasn’t going to work for you. That you knew best.
You have no idea what I was thinking when I gave HRMs a shot. I knew nothing about them before starting and, at the time, seriously believed they would help me take my training to the next level. I gave it an honest shot with expert guidance and ended up not listening to my body and experiencing several nagging injuries. Then, as I realized I needed to listen to my body to avoid those nagging injuries, I noticed that the HRM was telling me exactly what I already knew by listening to my body.danm wrote:You, unfortunately, are an uncoachable runner and are doing a disservice to those who might want to learn.
You have no basis for that statement. None of my coaches in the past have stated that I am uncoachable. In fact, all of them considered me very coachable and held me up as an example to my teammates. I still look to them for advice at times, such as Coach Conway’s advice that I posted earlier which he gave me two years ago when I was preparing for my first attempt at Lakefront, and hold their opinions in very high regard. If I commit to running under someone’s philosophy, I commit 100% and do exactly what they want me to do. If I have any questions or concerns about the training plan, I sit down with my coach for a face to face conversation about my questions or concerns and we come to a mutual conclusion. At least one of my coaches in the past held this way of addressing concerns up as an example of what he wanted all of his athletes to do.danm wrote:Perhaps all 6 posters on this site want to be informed of the “Ryan method. The only way known to man to train. Run a 120 miles a week like me and you too can run a 35 minute 10k.”
Perhaps you want to open up your mind to more than one idea at a time. I remember having similar debates with you in the past about mileage. You insisted that one didn’t need a good mileage base and that, when I stated a mileage base is the cornerstone of training for distance racing, I wasn’t open to other ideas. All of a sudden, this year, you seem to decide that a good mileage base is crucial, which is what I had been telling you all along. At the same time, you decide the only effective way to train is with a HRM. How long until the HRM is out as the flavor of the day and you’re on to the next thing?
- September 18, 2004 at 2:23 pm #15805pskiParticipant
I have been reading these posts and have to tend to agree more with ferris and danm ryan. I still use a hrm to give me feedback on where I’m at physically. Now I use it less because I’m reaching for level, I’m familiar with and have been at before. Ferris hit a good one, it’s great for long run training and LT training or tempos to keep you honest and not let you get trucking too fast, but yeah, you have to push slightly above at times to improve that’s a given. I have trained the speedwork with and without the hrm and I have to say I like it, up to the last few repeats where I generally take it off because the result is obvious if I’m hitting my goal , I’m maxing out and dying and moving it, but it’s short lived pain and agony. Racing I don’t use it simply because I’m usually pretty close because of the training feedback. It is what it is. Now, going out too fast is always going to kill a race, but sometimes you go out looking for a breakthrough and push the envelope. I try this in lead-ups at times to a marathon. But the volume of training or base usually gives me damage control. There are times that hrm is a great tool, especially in workouts. If I’m maxing on the first interval, I need to adjust ASAP or the whole workout tanks. Base I’d argue gives you more room for error, i.e. dan, Boston 2002. I went out ahead of you and DD, Stefanovic all the way to the 5k, but knew at 5 mi I had to adjust to MP to the hills. I did wobble that last mile, and I’ll alwasy wonder if a more conservative start gets me the last mile faster or by getting me there a tad slower, to I only start the wobble sooner. It’s like the lie detector test, it’s a tool, but at the end of the day you still need the confession to go with it. Thats’ how I see training with the hrm and racing, FWIW. Good post thread PSKI
- September 18, 2004 at 6:10 pm #15806
Pski, from what I can see, it seems that you and Ferris agree with me more than Dan actually. Nowhere in this thread have I stated that HRMs should not be used. The only thing I take objection to is Dan’s claim or at least strong insinuation that you need to use a HRM to perform at your best. This has been proven to be false countless times by countless runners. While some may find a HRM to be useful in some ways, others will find it useless or detrimental in some ways. While some may find that they run better when using one, others will find that they run worse when using one. This is my whole point. It is ridiculous to say Paula even could have won the Olympic marathon if she had used one when it was obvious she didn’t have what it took on that day, on that couse, in those conditions; it is irresponsible to tell people that Noguchi and Kastor used ones in the Olympics without evidence; and it is closed minded to claim that one can’t run as well without one as with one.
- September 21, 2004 at 2:29 pm #15807Ed 1Participant
One of the main problems I’ve seen is that people see certain statements and become blind to the remainder of a person’s post. (I include myself in this). Better netiquette should be practiced by all here. Reading the entire post and getting a flavor for the intent of the post and not just certain words or phrases could save a lot of grief and hard feelings. Making statements like Dan did “Perhaps all 6 posters on this site want to be informed of the “Ryan method. The only way known to man to train. Run a 120 miles a week like me and you too can run a 35 minute 10k.” should have been embarrasing to Dan. That type of statement is demeaning, rude and uncalled for. (I have done things like this too). Like I said – we all need better netiquette. Ed
- September 22, 2004 at 7:39 pm #15808Anonymous
I just read through the posts and am Interested in The “Feel” vs. HR thing . Have you noticed it to be more difficult to run faster or feel in your training
- September 23, 2004 at 12:05 am #15809Anonymous
Good question. I’m also interested in Dan’s bib number for Chicago, it’ll be inspiring to track his performance I’m sure.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.