- May 21, 2004 at 2:31 pm #1536
…on Alan Culpepper.
- May 21, 2004 at 4:14 pm #14737
damn that boy is skinny. he needs to move to wisconsin to get some beer & brats in him!!! 😆
- May 21, 2004 at 5:24 pm #14738
One picture of him with a HRM on. I can show you dozens of pictures sans-HRM. Heck, I know there are a couple of pictures floating around out there showing one of those strapped around my chest. Does that mean I use them on a regular basis and base my training on them? I can’t say what Culpepper thinks of them after trying them out but I just found them to be a fun toy for a while, then become nothing but a cumbersome contraption that did nothing to help my running. Of course, that doesn’t mean that the pictures of me wearing one don’t exist.
I also wonder if there was another reason for him wearing it. A lot of runners who never use HRMs in their training will strap them on for a study but never pay attention to their measurements. Dan’s post that included a quote from Bakken’s website from some time ago even showed that Kenyans, runners who I have never heard of using HRMs in training, would strap them on for this reason.
- May 27, 2004 at 12:38 am #14739
This must prove that they really are a performance aid!
- May 27, 2004 at 8:01 am #14740
I recently bought one tbh. It was only £35 ($60???) which was quite cheap, but it isn’t a famous make or anything. It is a HRM plus stopwatch and watch, so it’s not bad specced for the money.
The jury is still out on it at the moment. TBH, when I’m tired, my HR is higher, when I’m feeling strong, the HR is lower. So is the HRM actually telling me anything I don’t already know? In that sense, no.
I do think that it is useful maybe for monitoring running carry weights, or hill running, etc in order to monitor progress from previous runs. And it that sense it is useful. Comfort wise, it’s comfier to not wear one, obviously!!!
I don’t wear it every time, but perhaps once a week for monitoring purposes, and it’s not a bad pice of kit for that.
- May 28, 2004 at 3:49 am #14741
I was looking through Running Tough by Sandrock—- On pg 128 — There’s the Cullpepper workout where Goucher and Cullpepper used a HR monitor for a 10k on the track and run at a certain percentage of their max . Then do it again later in the training to see if their time improves at the same HR. usually right after their winter base training– couldn’t tell you if they still do it —but check it out pretty cool workout !
- May 28, 2004 at 12:50 pm #14742
It seems as though HRM advocates almost without exception say that training intensities should be set based on heart rate and that you are training less effectively if you do not do so. This stated workout that Culpepper and Goucher did is one that first sets a benchmark and then later uses that benchmark to measure improvement. Of course, there are dozens of ways to do this, one of which is to use a HRM but I’m not going to tell someone to spend money on a HRM to accomplish something they can do other ways for free unless they have money to burn. I have yet to see a single reference of these guys actually basing their training intensities off of what a HRM says, though. From what I have seen, they go by feel or by a certain offset from race pace.
- May 28, 2004 at 1:52 pm #14743
When I take my HR at the end of a hard workout and I approach my max HR (somewhere btwn 180 and 186), I then take HR/pulse readings one, two and three minutes later. If the reading drops below 120 in 3 minutes, I know I’ve sufficiently recovered. The quicker it drops or the lower it goes, the better shape I’m in.
Today, after running a steady 7.2 mile run, with the 1st 4 miles in 7:30 pace and the last 3 miles run in 7:15, 6:52 and 6:14, my HR immediately afterward was 186. One minute later, it was 130. Another minute and it was 120, and down to 114 the minute after that. Of course I do this w/ my hand over my heart and do 20 second intervals, so it’s not an exact science.
So, I know I am rounding into pretty good shape. Do I need a $100-300 HRM to tell me that? probably not…
- May 28, 2004 at 2:12 pm #14744
what it comes down to is cost vs. gain…
my husband bought me a HRM two years ago for a Christmas present… it was something he could get for me that supported my running without needing to know a size or color… the year before he got me headphones that I only use when I am in the gym cross-training…
this past year he hinted that he might get me a ‘fore runner’ so I could know all my info… he’s an applied math guy and while he doesn’t run he works out 5-6 days a week… I said “pass” on the ‘fore runner’
I’ve used the HRM enough times to know my heart rate increases over the course of a long run even if my effort stays the same… and that I tend to slack a bit on the last loop of my shorter runs and that I recover quickly… right now I use it to take my HR first thing in the AM before I get out of bed, something my coach wants… and it’s easier to use the HRM than try and focus when I just wake up…
I think it has helped, but I don’t rely on it… I’m hoping the coaches do more for me since I’m paying lots more for their help than the HRM … just another tool…
- May 28, 2004 at 2:36 pm #14745Ryan wrote:Of course, there are dozens of ways to do this, one of which is to use a HRM…
Can you list some of them? Maybe just the first dozen.
- May 28, 2004 at 2:39 pm #14746Peter wrote:Today, after running a steady 7.2 mile run, with the 1st 4 miles in 7:30 pace and the last 3 miles run in 7:15, 6:52 and 6:14, my HR immediately afterward was 186.
How is this a steady run if you’re going from 7:30, down to 6:14?
Also, if your max HR is 180-186, what are you hoping to achieve with this workout if only 1 mile is at/or near your max HR? Just curious what you’re after with this workout.
- May 28, 2004 at 4:06 pm #14747Zeke wrote:Can you list some of them?
Can you think of a dozen workouts? Any one of them run at equal efforts both times will suffice.
Racing at a distance such as 10k works wonderfully well.
Morning heart rate, which I manage to get without my HRM, tells me quite a bit of useful information.
Simply monitoring my training log without picking any specific workout tells me a lot.
Just paying attention to how I feel on training runs, without any benchmark and without pouring over my training log, tells me a lot about what kind of shape I’m in and whether I’m progressing or regressing and by how much.
Maybe I was overstating with the word “dozens”. How about several? Is that a better word? The point is the same, though.
- May 28, 2004 at 6:02 pm #14748
I got a HRM as a gift, and I really don’t use it that often. i really only use it when I am cross training to see what kind of effort I am at. I agree with Ryan about most runners being just fine using their own system of perceived exertion. I know when I am going easy or hard, I don’t need a HRM to tell me.
I do think they are helpful to “new” runners so they can get an idea of what they should and shouldn’t be doing out there. But, make sure to not become dependent on them, because, imo, they can make you a little too touchy feely about what is hard and what isn’t….basically, the numbers will tell you you are at a limit, but sometimes you have to bust through that.
I can see someone using a HRM for an Ironman, because they want to put out the same effort for all 3 disciplines and HR is the best way to tell that. Otherwise, don’t waste your cash.
- May 28, 2004 at 7:34 pm #14749
Why is it most runners detest HRM?
I agree that using HRM to determine intensity zones for intervals and such can be a bit silly. But what about using it to help monitor recovery? I’d venture to guess that each and every one of us has done the following:
1)Had a great workout on Monday.
2)Gone for an ‘easy’ run on Tuesday that wasn’t as easy as you had intended.
3)Found yerself DRAGGING for your Wednesday workout and wondering why.
HRM can be used to reduce this tendancy. Whereas one can go out and just be flying and not realize it, HRM doesn’t get fooled. It’s too easy to misjudge PE – a lot of very good runners still misjudge PE sometimes.
Even on hard days, HRM can be a nice confirmation of what you already assumed. I did 4 x 5′(3′) mod-hard the other day, and didn’t look at my HRM data until after the run. My goal was to simply build through the 4 repeats and feel like I could do a 5th if I needed to. I did the workout but questioned whether I could’ve done a 5th one…HRM showed I averaged 169, 173, 175, 176 for my repeats, and 141, 144, 145, 146 for the 3′ recovery periods after each. That data, to me, was simply confirmation that I could’ve done a 5th without killing myself. I’d never act on the data alone, but it did help guide me through what PE had suggested was a grey area.
- May 28, 2004 at 9:11 pm #14750
I really don’t think that most runners detest HR monitors. I think some on this web-site do and that’s their style not wrong or right. If you go to another site or a race you might find some who like it more than others . The thing I think is cool is everybody finds their own way which works and through trial and error find the things in different training methods that helps them enjoy or get faster in races. I’m more of a feel guy for the most part– but I enjoy the HR monitor and use it maybe 2-3 days out of the 7 I run. I use it like you said as feedback after a workout for instance I did 4 x mile last week and ran at slightly faster than 5k pace — I didn’t look at the monitor until I got home after the cool down. Than I went back to a previous workout a month earlier and looked at the effort and paces I ran then and compared them. Another way I use it is on fartleks or tempo runs. For instance my max HR is 182 . I know when I run at 160 HR it is around 6:30 pace –so if my goal for the day is to run a 10 mile tempo run at that or close to that pace and I don’t want to go on the track– I run at that HR for the run and I know it’s close to that pace. I could probably do it without and come close to the same pace. But I have a tendency to go out too fast on these runs and be trashed for the next workout—So I like it. So on hard workouts I don’t depend on it but look afterward for info and on some off track workouts I use it. I never use it on easy days– I just shuffle around and tell myself what ever time I run I should be able to go around for the same amount of time again if I ran the right pace.
There not for everybody — but I do think we can learn from other peoples experiences and then choose what we want to take and what we want to leave alone.
I feel thats the way I learn the most on web-sites from others experiences and pick and choose what works for me through trial and error and keep the stuff that works.
- May 28, 2004 at 9:35 pm #14751doggler wrote:Why is it most runners detest HRM?
Why is it you think most runners detest HRMs? I don’t see that. I see a group of people who say the HRM is not a substitute for listening to other signals. I see a group of people who see many people becoming way too reliant on HRMs instead of paying attention to more meaningful body signals.
It’s common knowledge that HRMs will fail you in a race if you rely on them to pace you in a race because of factors like cardiac drift. So you either run a race by feel or you rely on your HRM and don’t run up to your capability. Well, if you train strictly by the HRM, as I have seen a number of people do, when do you ever learn to run by feel? The people I have seen doing this either hit the wall hard or sprint in the last 100 meters of a race wondering why they have so much left in the tank.
Sure, there are uses for HRMs if you’re into that thing. However, many people act like there are no drawbacks to HRM usage when there in fact are drawbacks. Also, I have yet to see a practical application for HRMs that can not be accomplished without buying one. If you feel like spending your money on gadgetry, go ahead and get one. Personally, I have spent my money on one and, based simply on its usefulness, I would have been better off buying a couple pairs of shoes instead.
- June 1, 2004 at 2:50 pm #14752
Something else a HRM is useful for. Granted, this is from a multi-sport forum, but the concept of stimulus and recovery is still the same. Yes, you can try to “read” your body for many cues/signals, but even the best of us get the signals wrong every now and then.
- June 1, 2004 at 4:20 pm #14753doggler wrote:Yes, you can try to “read” your body for many cues/signals, but even the best of us get the signals wrong every now and then.
And even the best at reading heart rates get it wrong every now and then. Once again, the other ways of gathering information can be just as effective – if not more – as using a HRM if you learn those ways as you should learn to use a HRM if you are going to use one. The example in your reference is a great example of the fact that there is a lot of learning involved if you want to use a HRM also. The person asking the question hasn’t become educated enough and thought the heart rate in question was a sign of being fully recovered when it was in fact a sign of the exact opposite. This seems to be a common mistake.
- June 1, 2004 at 5:58 pm #14754
I didn’t say I DETEST HRM’s or anyone who uses them. I do like mine, I just prefer not to use it when running. I think it is a great tool for when I am cross training,and maybe I will wear it next time my wife and I…;)
anyway…one of the pitfalls of a stock HRM is that they give you your training zones by using a very general formula, therefore you may be working harder, or not as hard as they numbers show. My Polar has my zones set using the 220- age formula which equals out to 193 ….but If I got tested or my max HR….it may be higher or lower than that numer. The HRM doesnt know that about me, it just knows that I typed in that I am 27 and it shot my zones out using that formula.
This can end up throwing things way out of whack.
- June 1, 2004 at 6:10 pm #14755ferris wrote:My Polar has my zones set using the 220- age formula which equals out to 193 ….but If I got tested or my max HR….it may be higher or lower than that numer. The HRM doesnt know that about me, it just knows that I typed in that I am 27 and it shot my zones out using that formula.
A big problem. Of course, one that can be easliy prevented by doing a workout to actually find your MHR but, based on observations, one that is frequently encountered. I played around a bit with HRMs again last year after not bothering with them for a few years. My calculated MHR was 194. I had my heart rate over 200 and never felt like I totally maxed out. The HRM was actually going nuts, reporting that I was over 100% of my max and telling me that I should slow down. I think about the only thing it didn’t do is call 911 and report that I was about to die. I’m betting my MHR is in the 205-210 range, over 5% higher than the calculations suggest.
- June 1, 2004 at 6:15 pm #14756
been there… when I use the elliptical I have to put in an age 10-15 years younger or the poor machine freaks out that I am going to hard… but it’s kind of nice to think that I’m that fit… only because of the calulation, but it’s still nice…
just like doing their “fit test”… “superior” sounds good but I have to tell myself that this includes people sitting on the couch eating donuts…
- June 1, 2004 at 6:23 pm #14757
I agree, that is a big problem. Of course, one that can be easliy prevented by doing a workout to actually find your MHR but, based on observations, one that is frequently encountered.
One way to estimate MHR using workout data.
I hear your guys complaints…ferris, only the most basic HRMs pigeonhole you into zones based on your age. The one I use is one of those Timex Ironman HRM/watches. Looks just like the Ironman watch that most of us probably use. You specify what the min and max for your zones are. If you bother with that…
I think we all agree on one thing – not using a HRM is probably better than using it incorrectly. Same can be said for stopwatches too… 😈
- June 2, 2004 at 5:46 pm #14758
I have a $50 cheap polar, and I think it’s great. When I’m on a regular training schedule building up to a marathon, I’ll use it 2-3 times a week. The workouts I like to use them for a easy/recovery days since I and I think most people have a tendency to go too fast on those days. I also like to use them on Tempo Runs (meaning 4-9 mile runs at 15k-1/2 marathon pace, about 6:00 miles for me), however if my HR seems out of line, either too fast or too slow I adjust and run the pace per the definition of a tempo run. Long runs (15 miles plus) are also were I wear it, again to insure I don’t blast a run too hard and keep it a true indurance building run.
I have never worn one in a race, as I know it would be distracting, because I’d be concentrating more on my HR rather than how I felt. I also never wear it doing intervals.
- June 3, 2004 at 1:22 am #14759
Wong Fei HungMembermilrunner wrote:The workouts I like to use them for a easy/recovery days since I and I think most people have a tendency to go too fast on those days.
Most interesting, where did you learn the latter part of that assertion?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.