Author Topic: Beardys running log - Ct5k (Read 144694 times)

Auntie Helen · « **Reply #1125 on:** 28 January, 2021, 10:34:39 am »

Just went out for my first run in the rain - it was OK really! I wore my Night Vision Cycling Jacket which I bought just before I started with Velomobiles (you don't need a waterproof jacket for Velomobiles as you are dry and warm) so it has barely been used - good to finally do something with it!

My running is not speeding up at all, I still average 8 to 8:30 for a kilometer, but I find it an easy rhythm now and am doing it more for calorie burning (so I can eat more cake) than wanting to become a runner. But, having run now for six months about 3 times a week, I suppose I am a runner!

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1126 on:** 28 January, 2021, 10:42:17 am »

My pace doesn't seem to have improved at all either AH but I have seen significant improvements in my endurance and ultimately fitness and health are my aims as oppose to record breaking and elite athlete status any time ever.

Ashaman42 · « **Reply #1127 on:** 28 January, 2021, 11:04:56 am »

I got out yesterday for a gentle 5k and my legs feel ok today unlike last week. Which means I will be weightlifting later and then another run tomorrow as it doesn't look like it'll be cycling weather.

redshift · « **Reply #1128 on:** 28 January, 2021, 03:31:04 pm »

Knee. WTF is that all about then? Trotted round my usual 5k this morning, and after nearly a year of nary-a-problem, and having lost 20kg into the bargain, today my left knee is moaning at me.

Now, I admit that my MCL took a beating when I used to do regular martial arts, and it does occasionally remind me that it leaks, but you'd think all that would have flagged itself this time last year. Oh no, it waits until today to ask 'should we be running?'

I think it must be positional, as my left hip has come out in sympathy. I probably slept funny. I'll rest it for a few days and buck up on my stretches, see how it goes.

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1129 on:** 29 January, 2021, 12:26:54 pm »

I sometimes wonder about physiology. I can wake up with a pain in my side or numbness in an arm or wrist even if I am clearly not in a position where I have been laying on it. And yet at other times just nothing. The human body is a bloody strange thing.

Just been out for a "stress test". I watched a recent video on The Running Channel on YouTube about heart rates primarily because I wanted a method to try and get a fix somewhere near to my max heart rate. The 220 minus age gives me 162 but I regularly exceed that. Using a Garmin chest strap I ran a steady 5k then really gunned the sixth km. I got my heart rate up to 186. So, I have a resting hr of 46 and a max hr of 186.

And, I'm not feeling light-headed, dizzy, nauseous or any other side effects. 😊

One final thing: that 6k took me to the most kms in a month since I started C25K last January and 78kms more than I shuffled last January. Rest week over, three weeks pf progression to look forward to. 👍

PaulF · « **Reply #1130 on:** 29 January, 2021, 12:41:30 pm »

Quote from: Polar Bear on 29 January, 2021, 12:26:54 pm

Just been out for a "stress test". I watched a recent video on The Running Channel on YouTube about heart rates primarily because I wanted a method to try and get a fix somewhere near to my max heart rate. The 220 minus age gives me 162 but I regularly exceed that. Using a Garmin chest strap I ran a steady 5k then really gunned the sixth km. I got my heart rate up to 186. So, I have a resting hr of 46 and a max hr of 186.

And, I'm not feeling light-headed, dizzy, nauseous or any other side effects. 😊

In which case you probably weren't trying hard enough

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1131 on:** 29 January, 2021, 12:53:32 pm »

Yes. I had considered that too. 🤔 😉

hulver · « **Reply #1132 on:** 29 January, 2021, 03:57:14 pm »

Forgive me for not catching up on all the posts since last time I was here, it's been a while.

I've been concentrating on my cycling training for ages now, and not done any running since August really. Recently though I've been scared off the bike training (poor bike fit and a sagging saddle have led to some numbness / loss of sensation issues) so I'm staying off the bike for at least 2 months until things are better. As I don't want to lose the fitness I've been building up over the last 12 months, I'm back at the running again.

Tell you what, losing some weight certainly helps. I'm officially no longer obese, just over weight now, and running is a lot easier than it was.

I started the couch to 5k again, but got frustrated with it as I'm definitely not moving from the couch. So over the last 2 weeks I've moved from just following the programme to actually running 5k.

Wednesday I ran my first 5k run. Felt fantastic. Not a super quick time, I'm doing around 7 minutes per km at the moment. But that's following at "Run for 90 seconds, trot for 2 minutes" thing. Basically following the ct5k programme, but when they say to walk I do an easy jog, and when they say to run I speed up.

I'm quite astounded how different running is to cycling, on my HR at least. When I'm cycling, if my max HR is around 172/174. And if it gets there I really know about it.
Today when I got back I got a notification from Trainingpeaks that I'd reached my top HR for the year! 184. And my peak 1 minute HR of 178. That means that it stayed at 178 for at least 1 minute. If I'd had that on the bike I'd have been hanging over the handlebars afterwards, but I didn't even notice while I was running, just saw it when I got home.

So, running is great. With warm up and cool down walks, I'm doing 38 minutes for my 5k loop. Well happy with that.

And I think about you all everytime I go out there, you're a great inspiration.

chrisbainbridge · « **Reply #1133 on:** 29 January, 2021, 08:09:23 pm »

Depending on how you are measuring HR you may be seeing a lock to your stride rate. Particularly happens with optical monitoring.

sojournermike · « **Reply #1134 on:** 29 January, 2021, 11:40:41 pm »

Good stuff everyone. I’ve had a poor week with no exercise between Monday and Thursday, but got out in my shiny new shoes tonight for 5.7 miles at 8:10 pace. Faster than I expected to be honest - but I blame the shoes.

PB - I tend to agree with Paul that you have a maximum heart rate when running of ‘at least 186’, but I don’t think you should feel dizzy or anything when you hit max HR. It tends to fall off that peak pretty quickly when you stop and double up to relieve the oxygen debt;) Well done anyway. I find hitting HRmax hard these days - needs to be a good longish acceleration at the end of a hard run really. I’d been working on an assumed 171 for months until I ran that pattern a few weeks ago and hit 176. Is there more to come? Don’t know, but I was breathing heavily afterwards.

Chris, agree you can get locks to stride rate with optical HR monitoring - I tend to tighten my watch before a run - but anything Garmin from 935 on is pretty good I think. It’s certainly the case that running tends to push HR higher than cycling at a similar perceived effort. You can also see this in power measurements. Even though you can question the validity of Stryd power for running, most people that do both have a higher running ftp than cycling. I suspect some of this is a consequence of running engaging more muscle groups (upper body too) and so allowing more effective lactate use and, consequently, higher sustained effort. However, a big element may also be that the concentric contraction required for cycling is just less efficient and harder to sustain than eccentric contraction in running - certainly for me it is (not really a well trained cyclist!)

Mike

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1135 on:** 30 January, 2021, 08:51:14 am »

I didn't have to stop and double up. I was sucking air like a "Henry" but I eased off into a trot then a walk within 20 metres and was able, though gulping like a top-feeding trout, to stay walking the 1km home. After 10 minutes my hr whilst walking was down to mid 120's and below 100 after 30 minutes. As per my long runs my hr remained slightly elevated into the evening by 10 to 15 bpm over a rest day but is completely back to normal this morning.

I'm not sure how to express this but I am curious in a cautionary way that I can hit such a max hr at 58 years old. I am not a super fit athlete and although I have exercised in one form or other to a modest extent all of my life the only time there was any real intensity to it was in my twenties and thirties when I trained for and ran a few marathons with a PB of 3 hours 38: nothing remotely earth-shattering. I am hoping that it is not indicative of an issue.

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1136 on:** 30 January, 2021, 09:09:36 am »

I am getting demoted by my Garmin everytime I go out at the moment. VO2max score was 54 last spring. Over the past two weeks it has gone from 53 to 50, and I am now only in the top 5% of my age range, and not the lofty heights of the 1%. Apart from running, I am sitting on my arse and not moving for nearly all the rest of my day...which goes to show that frequent moderate activity is vital.

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1137 on:** 30 January, 2021, 09:42:42 am »

I don't know how accurate the garmin VO2 max calculation is but when I use online calculators I typically get a score upto 20 higher than the garmin numbers. I place no store in the garmin "scores".

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1138 on:** 30 January, 2021, 09:55:01 am »

Well, my only interest in the Garmin Vo2max score is in relation to itself, and not in relation to real world vo2max because I don't really have a use for that.The Garmin score does increase and decrease according to how much anaerobic training I do, and it did demote me pretty rapidly after 8 months of not using the garmin so I'm minded to believe it has some accuracy in relation to my fitness.

The usefulness now is that it has forced me to realise that, bar a run every other day, I am totally sedentary

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1139 on:** 30 January, 2021, 10:09:22 am »

I can see that but if the figure bears no relation to reality and is inconsistent it isn't worth spit is it?

I note that it promotes me and demotes me at will regardless of my training quantity or intensity. I'm pretty sure that whatever the algorithm is, it's crap.

I was similarly disappointed with the blood oxygen measurements which regularly showed me being below 90. We all know that I would be close to a ventilator if that was the fact given how covid has made such information public.

Perhaps I have a faulty Garmin. Always possible.

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1140 on:** 30 January, 2021, 10:50:22 am »

Ah, but mine does seem consistent, and I don't mind what number it gives me, as long at it bears a relation to fitness changes, which it seems to. I suppose what I am trying to say is that it forces me to reflect on what I am actually doing rather than what I think I am doing

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1141 on:** 30 January, 2021, 10:55:25 am »

Fair enough.

I used to do similar with mine but got frustrated by it's inconsistencies. I tend to get annoyed with "snake oil" gadgets that simply don't measure up to their expensive hype.

sojournermike · « **Reply #1142 on:** 30 January, 2021, 12:56:58 pm »

I don’t mind the Garmin vo2max algorithm. It’s inevitably a bit inaccurate, but I find it fairly consistent. I would be very doubtful about the other calculators PB if they are that far apart - but it also depends on what they claim to measure. I believe the Garmin numbers are VO2max based on gross weight - the VO2max against lean body mass is likely to be quite a bit higher;) I was tested several times in my 20s as part of a research project comparing different approaches to estimate VO2max against lab testing and comparing their effectiveness with athletes )runners) vs games players. The Garmin numbers I get now, adjusted for body fat, are broadly consistent with 25-30 years of ageing and being less fit than my younger whippet. Certainly, they are within what I would expect the error bars to show.

PB, I would assume that a high max HR indicates anything amiss in itself. The usual estimate is one of those numbers that is probably not far out overall but is wrong for every individual - and therefore useless at an individual level. My max HR tends to be a bit lower when I’ve been training a lot, I presume due to increased stroke volume, but not by even 5bps. I’m also unconvinced that just because I’m 55 (closing in on you!) I should try to avoid hitting it. It’s an individual physiological limit and not the start of an inherent danger zone. Of course, some people may have heart issues that mean that excessive exertion is problematic, but you probably don’t know until it happens:(

I have a very good friend who periodically has ‘funny turns’ when running. We think it is probably a bit of af, but they haven’t seen anyone about it for years. Must be 20 years ago on of their cardiologist friends put them on the hospital treadmill to try and see what was going on, but it didn’t go fast enough to allow any meaningful exertion... unsurprising given the recent English cap I. The work mountain racing championship.

chrisbainbridge · « **Reply #1143 on:** 30 January, 2021, 05:17:46 pm »

Got out for my longer run, 14k.

I use my fenix 6 for optical HR and everything else. Between August and December it was absolutely spot on and I reckoned it was pretty much 100% accurate. Then about the start of the cold weather I found that after about an hour the HR figures went completely bonkers. With no change in pace or elevation the HR would suddenly jump to 155-180. I know that this was NOT my actual HR. Looking at my last few runs it almost perfectly matches the strides per minute.

What I think happens is that in the colder weather and with a tightish strap my skin get so cold that there is not enough blood flow. This is probably made worse as i keep that area of my wrist exposed as I like to maintain my HR under 130 for my long runs.
I am going to try another upper arm optical HR monitor and see if that works better with the monitor over the course of the artery and under clothing

sojournermike · « **Reply #1144 on:** 30 January, 2021, 05:25:29 pm »

Yes, it’s cold that makes a mess of optical reading. I think it’s simply that your body constricts surface blood vessels and so there is nothing to read - apart from stride rate. My 935 has been fine so far this year (rubbish on the bike mind), but I just use a chest strap if I want more accuracy, plus it gives me running dynamics.

chrisbainbridge · « **Reply #1145 on:** 30 January, 2021, 05:30:32 pm »

Quote from: sojournermike on 30 January, 2021, 05:25:29 pm

Yes, it’s cold that makes a mess of optical reading. I think it’s simply that your body constricts surface blood vessels and so there is nothing to read - apart from stride rate. My 935 has been fine so far this year (rubbish on the bike mind), but I just use a chest strap if I want more accuracy, plus it gives me running dynamics.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Fenix. All this is part of the fun. Yes I am sure that the skin and subnormal blood flow decreases in the cold and you get a wash in/out effect from the movement which is picked up. After all the optical sensor is just doing a doppler shift analysis on the reflected light.

I am happy with chest strap on the bike but do not find it comfortable when running.

sojournermike · « **Reply #1146 on:** 30 January, 2021, 05:35:07 pm »

I keep nearly buying a Fenix:)

I’m saved by a combination of it being a bit bigger than the 935, the 935 still working and an expectation that their will be a 955 along at any minute (and the certainty that my purchase of a Fenix would trigger the 955 release!)

The Fenix does look brilliant though - I remain tempted by the titanium case with orange band...

sojournermike · « **Reply #1147 on:** 30 January, 2021, 05:41:09 pm »

And not in stock at the discounted price currently - phew

Polar Bear · « **Reply #1148 on:** 30 January, 2021, 06:31:05 pm »

My Fenix and the 735 before it did just as your Fenix does Chris. This quirk has completely disappeared with the acquisition of a Garmin ANT+ chest strap.

Hot Flatus · « **Reply #1149 on:** 30 January, 2021, 06:35:24 pm »

I've tried doing an activity with a Garmin watch on and a cheststrap going into a different device. The HRM data was markedly different. I can't remember exactly but I seem to recall wildly innacurate readings from the watch early on the activity. From what I remember though over the course of a decent run or ride, it didn't make a huge difference to the overrall picture.