I vote for the inaccurate max HR.

This from coachbenson.com

What's the solution? It seems each of the above writers has found one of several possible answers. By hook or crook, they figured out what seems to be a pretty good number for their max HRs. As a heart rate detective, I have to use all of the above techniques and several other tricks that I have heard about or dreamed up. At any rate, the point is if you think you're running at paces that don't make sense trying to stick with your self-determined THRs, suspect that your estimate of Max HR isn't correct. Then remember that I keep telling everyone that MHRs could be 24 bpm higher or lower than what your age would predict if you're among the 10-15 percent of population whose hearts are larger or smaller than average size. And, finally but most importantly, here's how to tell if you have hit max heart rate:

1. It won't begin to appear until you have gradually picked up the pace over a period of at least as long as it would take you to run two miles all-out. Or, roughly 10-15 minutes.

2. Once you feel like you're ready to quit, you need another couple of minutes of running as hard as you can while checking your heart monitor every15-20 seconds to see if your HR has stopped climbing. Once it levels off and refuses to go higher no matter how much longer or harder you run, note that number. It's a very reliable starting point for measuring your maximum.

3. Taking a maximum stress test is a learned skill. Don't be surprised to see a higher number on a future occasion after you realize how hard you can push yourself and not drop dead from the apparent terminal level of exhaustion.

I know that all this discussion seems interminable and you may still not be sure of what number to use. Well, be comforted. You aren't alone. Neither do runners who rely solely on stop watches. Specific answers are never easy, nor cheap. Remember that running , just like life, allows for the use of both"Science and Art."

Using a higher max to determine your paces might not quite match you up to the DRF marks, but given your fitness based on your training and 5K times, your easy pace should be faster than 10 or 11 minutes.

All of the formulae aside, I'm from the "go by feel while being completely honest with yourself" school of recovery run pace. I think that you do yourself no good by trying to hit xx:xx pace on a recovery day if it's not there on that day. Ignoring this rule has led to injury and burnout in the past for me. That said, I do use the HRM on my tempo days. This is to keep me from going too hard or too easy for this specific workout.

"Run hard on your hard days and easy on your easy days" is one of the best bits of advice I've ever gotten.

------------------
hup[/URL" target="_blank">

I agree with several posters. First, I wouldn't be surprised if you're working from an underestimated HR max. You don't say how you "determined" it. The worst way, I'll testify, is to calculate what it "should" be from age-based charts. I'm 47; my actual max, at the end of a very hard progression run, is 200. The charts would have it be 177-182. So don't trust the charts. Nor should you trust that, when you've simply run hard for a few minutes and gotten yourself panting very badly with fire in your chest and belly, you've registered your actual max. A much better way to do that is to run a 20 minute tempo run or time trial that has you easing over your anaerobic threshild, then finish up with a 2-3 minute building burst in which you basically sprint and sprint and keep sprinting until you drop--keeping an eye, every 10-15 seconds, on your HR monitor. Peg the highest reading you can, then sprint even harder and see if you can milk another few beats. Anything less strenuous than this is almost sure to register less than your true max. The tempo portion assures you that all your systems are fully involved, so that you don't, for example, tire your legs before you've forced your heart to work extremely hard. (That's why a 2 minute sprint won't do.)

I wouldn't waste a moment worrying about whether you're running too easy when you run at 10 minute pace. Your race time is actually very good for an overweight guy--and you are indeed, for a runner of your height, at least 20-25 pounds overweight, if not more. I read this morning that Paul Tergat is 6 feet tall and under 135. Just be as honest as possible, warm slowly into every run (you should never, ever, ever be panting at the one-mile point), and, if you need to, talk quietly to yourself so that you pass the so-called "conversational pace" test for easy-run pace. As long as you're honest with yourself and allow your easy runs to find their own pace, you can't go wrong; your body is always right, in that case, and the book (pace Daniels) is always no more than a very rough guide to what you, in your individuality, should be doing.

Your 5K time is quite respectable; if you simply put in the easy miles with occasional by-feel pickups over the next six months and drop another 10-15 pounds, your race times will fall, no hard training needed. Why not make that the plan for now?

BTW: How do you know that you're running 10-minute pace? Don't trust car odometers; know that Fitsense and other pod technologies require calibration; also know that Garmin and other GPS units sometimes drop mileage and thus register falsely slowed paces. The best way to measure mileage is with a good bike and a calibrated odometer. (I've used all the technologies I've just named; don't get me started! Inaccurate readings will mess with your head.)

http://This message has been edited by KudzuRunner (edited Nov-09-2005).

quote:<HR>Originally posted by JoeO:
I have always understood the "easy" pace in Daniels to be something along the lines of a MAX easy pace: The fastest you should go. Not the pace at which you should run.

When you are running an easy day, I don't believe there is such a thing as too slow. That's why they're easy days.<HR>

good catch!! you know, I've followed Daniels for several marathons and never figured that one out. It was when he put out the 2nd edition and I glanced at the tables and noticed that I'm suddenly allowed to go slower on my long runs. I actually asked Dr. Daniels about this a few months ago on another website asking if he did more studies. He said he wanted to provide a range. I suddenly had a "duh" moment.

My VDOT is the same as yours, and HR very similar (Max 187, resting 44). I've been seriously distance running for 6 years, and have run 5 marathons. I agree Daniels "E" pace is way off. I know my HRM is accurate, because I've checked it against manually taken readings at various times. To stay in the recommended HR zones for easy pace, I can run no faster than 9:30 pace. His book calls for 9:00 based on VDOT.

I have used various marathon training programs (Higdon for the first, Pfitzinger for three, and Durden for one). Last year I decided to try Daniels for my second marathon of the year. I found his paces and speed work way to aggressive, and ended up with a stress fracture. This year I went back to Pfitzinger - no injuries. Next spring I'm trying Hanson's.


------------------
- Larry -

My Profile[/URL" target="_blank">