quote:<HR>Originally posted by tigger:

If I understand things correctly, an RQ of 1.0 corresponds to lactate threshold pace. For elite runners this is approximately half marathon pace. For slower runners it would be 15k to 10k pace. (In my case it's about 11.5k pace.) Therefore I am assuming that using fat for fuel is not important for the majority of common race distances.

You say that you had poor aerobic capability before starting your current training methods. By capability I mean not just your body's ability to burn fat, but also the number and size of your mitochondria, amount of muscle fibre, blood capillary density, heart size, stroke volume, etc etc. It is likely that your shorter distance time improvements are due to improvements in the other aerobic things, and not due to fat burning. Fat as a fuel would not be very important at mile or two mile distances. All of the other aerobic improvements come along with improved fat burning when running at RQ less than 0.85, just as they do at RQ above 0.85 but below 1.0. It just takes a little longer at slower pace.

Your results have been impressive, but curious in one respect. Your longer distance times suggest you can run faster at the shorter distances than your PR's. For example, a 3:09 marathon is equivalent to a 5:18 mile time. Have you noticed this and if so, why do you think it is like that? Do you think it is because race longer distances and don't focus on anaerobic work?<HR>

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ATLrunner:
I've always used ventilation as a guide, so I can't really comment on the before and after. Although as I've read, and learned through experience, my definitions have changed. When I first started running, easy to me meant below LT, typical paces was at or above LT. Training this way, I improved fast... very fast. I had always been in decent shape, but when I started training to race, an 8:30 pace would have me gasping for breath after a couple of miles. After running for about 4 months, I started running a few races. Results below:

Date/Dist/Time/Pace
6/15 3.5M 24:21 6:57
7/13 5M 34:34 6:55
7/27 4.2M 28:18 6:44
8/24 4.2M 28:00 6:40
8/31 2.6M 16:28 6:20
9/14 4.2M 27:38 6:35
etc.

As you can see, doing most of your running at LT pace will drop your times in a hurry. Now, I would agree that it is not a good way to train long term. Risk of injury is too great, and you likely won't be able to run many miles, which will make your longer race times poor in comparison to your shorter ones.

To answer your question as best I can, yes, you're absolutely right. Building an aerobic base through easy running is the best way to reach your potential. When I began a periodized regimen, including base building, I got much faster than the times above. I was running many more miles as well. It's the miles, not the HR that's the goal. Running easy, whether measured by HR, ventilation rate, or # of trees passed per min. simply allows you to achieve the high mileage without injury. I suggest using ventilation for people who for one reason or another don't want to use a HRM. I trained with one for a couple of months, and hated it. During that time, I did notice that a 3/3 rate was indicative of a HR of 145-160(roughly in the MAF range since I'm 27). So my point is, to those who don't have a HRM, or don't want to use it, there are other measures you can use that will do just fine, and (not coincidentally) will corellate nicely with the heart rates talked about in this thread.<HR>

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ATLrunner:
It's not a question of what you do, it's a question of what you can comfortably support. You couldn't support 3/3 breathing at 10K race pace, you wouldn't get enough oxygen. On the other hand, you can breath at a faster rate on an easy run than is necessary with no ill effects.

From Daniels' Running Formula:

Note: By T pace, he means threshold or half marathon pace.

"When you're not breathing particularly hard, you might use slower breathing rhythms, such as a 3-3 rhythm (three steps breathing in, three steps breathing out), which is often used during easy runs but which becomes stressful at T pace or faster. A 4-4 rhythm can also be used but isn't recommended because the depth of breathing consumes energy and the slowness of this rate often does a poor job of clearing CO2 fast enough from the lungs."

...

"You can also use your breathing rate to monitor your intensity of effort while running. You should be comfortable with a 3-3 pattern on an easy run, and maybe even a 4-4 pattern, if so desired. However, if 3-3 doesn't give you enough air on an easy run, then it's not an easy run."

Countless others say basically the same thing.

Try it.

You may breath at a 2-2 rate during an easy run, but I would be stunned if you couldn't support 3-3.<HR>

quote:<HR>Originally posted by tigger:

I have 3 months remaining before my marathon and am considering doing the longer runs at a very low heart rate. I currently run them around 135 to 140, and would likely drop that about 10 beats per minute if I went slower. Any thoughts on the results other than longer training times?
FYI - I am into week nine of a Pfitz 24/55. I did 2 months of 50+ mpw prior to starting this training plan, but have been dogged by sciatic issues recently that are slowly going away due to stretching. This will be my first marathon in 7 years.<HR>

quote:<HR>Originally posted by dcv2002:
Here a question. I've been noticing on some of my medium-to-long runs (i.e. 10+ miles) the following happens. I don't feel that great for the first 4-5 miles, running a litte slower (8:40-9:00mpm) as my HR gradually creep up to MAF. Then recently I've noticed that my HR will drop (I've seen MAF-10 to MAF-2) in the later miles (say 6-11) and I actually pick up speed (8:10-8:20mpm). I've actually hit sub 8 in the last mile or so. All of these 10+ mile run have mile splits that decrease in pace. Rarely do I see a slower pace at the end of runs.

Now does this mean I've hit a plateau and my body needs some different training? or does it mean that I'm just getting old and I'm working the rust out after 4-5 miles. I never run my first mile under 9 minutes usually its 9:10-9:20. Then the rest of miles are sub 9. I have increased the mileage (this week was a 60+ week in 5 days) plus I have added hill repeats.

I still have six weeks from Sunday until I start my Daniels marathon program. <HR>