Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Tuesday 12 miles

am) 10 X 1:30 (on grass) at ~10k effort on 1:30 jog. Legs didn't feel good at all. Last night's run at HR 140-150 was too fast and too hard.

pm) 4 miles in 30:12 with max HR 128.


GZ said...

I know we have talked about HR max caps ... but you 128 has me thinking if there is a minimum HR consideration before aerobic benefit (of significance) is realized?

Lucho said...

Absolutely. I've talked quite a bit about the HR minimum being part of the key to this. Mine is HR 140-150, so I have tried to keep it above 140 in order to stress my aerobic system more. The problem is that very few athletes have a problem keeping their HR up! Kerrie Wlad and Jeff Keil both have this issue simply because they have developed a strong aerobic economy. There is for sure a minimum but often times an athlete with an aerobic weakness can simply hold their HR range for all of their runs simply because it is so slow. I would say for me that anything below 135 HR (unless it is very long) would be recovery. 140-150 develops aerobic economy and fat burning ability.

Matt said...

2 things.

I'm having a little trouble keeping my HR up on down hills which is freaking awesome. I feel your pain, Lucho ha ha ha.

Secondly, get your HR up!


kerrie said...

i didn't know JK had such a hard time getting it up! lol

as for me, it might be just because i'm lazy as the pace required to maintain a certain minimum hr requires too much concentration/effort and some days(okay, a lot of days) i just don't have the energy.
i also don't think every run has to have 'aerobic benefit', sometimes it is just fun to jog around and daydream- in the end, it is still time on your feet.

Lucho said...

Zing! Nice one Kerrie. I remember you saying something like that last year. Ironman definitely leaves you empty more often than running does. Which would cause the suppressed HR due to low energy.