Subject: RE: Heart Rate Issues For a field test, this really doesn't make much sense- you need to ask your coach why he did not have you complete a maximal effort determining either the time to reach a set distance (monitoring splits), or the distance within a set time. All of this should have been then related to at least peak HRmax, HRavg, and RPE if you were going to be establishing HR ranges. By the first test, it appears that your coach is assuming there is a direct relationship to a random HR, or has a specific test that either wants 77% of your age-predicted HRmax, or 70% of your Karvonen. Which doesn't exist. The 2nd test appears to be more of a velocityVO2 style test, which is not a valid one either (the way he Rx'ed it). If he's using Daniel's concepts, he needs to stick with Daniel's directions, because the realtionship between velocity and VO2 that Daniel's determined is specific to the effort, which you're obviously more than capable of hitting faster than 10:00/mi. But out of fairness for your coach and you, ask why these tests were chosen, what he's basing the ranges off of (%'s), and why not a max effort. Alot happens at max efforts than can not be extrapolated from a submax effort (which is why submax VO2 estimates are 10-20% off). Yes, that 5k data might have been used, but if so why bother with the training-duration days of testing? |