HR, pacing and power - testing, zones

I can respond to your second question. Run LT testing can be done in a similar fashion as thwe bike. Personally, I simply use 10K race results and observed HR to determine run LT or a lab test and create training zones from there. You can do pacing as well, but pace will obviously vary with the course/conditions, just like HR does. If you do use pacing, I wouldn't spend a lot of time monitoring HR.

Bryan,

Thanks for the response.

Yes, I've done the same test for run LTHR testing - all out for 30 minutes, average HR over the last 20 minutes defines LTHR. I've used that in the past with good results. Excellent point on run pacing and terrain/conditions. It seems that HR would be an adequate measure for most purposes there.

-Kirk

No problem Kirk. Yeah, I train HR for both bike and run. When I do pace based work, I will ignore HR, especially doing track work/intervals. You sound like you have a good amount of experience working with HR and likely know how conditions and such will alter HR and you can adjust accordingly. I think that's the key to succesful HR training.

Thanks, Bryan, and yes, I'm a non-recovering data junkie. 8^)

You make another excellent point about ignoring HR during track work. Training LT adaptations seems to be "puking hard" and other measurements don't matter that much. Actually, I'm almost totally convinced that any Zone training is just a way to draw a line in sand to make sure we're working really hard to get improvements in speed, but not working too hard during those long, endurance runs such that we can't recover.

I'm surprised you don't have a power meter on your bike, but I'm encouraged that HR seems to serve you well there.

The only time I feel a PM would help me on the bike is actually doing intervals where HR can take too much time to build up and I go too hard too soon and I am not able to complete the set properly. Also when it's cold out and HR is low.

You should read Jorge's blog about power zone testing protocols.

I believe he does two tests a long and short. He had a calculator that you could download and use to set your zones.

If you train with power use power and observe your HR and RPE to triangulate your effort.

I've been using power since '06 and now on the bike go by RPE and power and ignore my HR..never put on the HR strap in training or racing.

If you look in the Challenge Me! forum there is a thread on the winter cycling program V3.  There is a spreadsheet link that calculates CP from a 3 or 5 min max power test and a 20 min test.  He also links to the proper protocol for running the tests. 

Kathy and scottuf - yes, Jorge is the source of me starting this whole transition to power. I've been toying with trying to start his bike program in 2011, but I'm also struggling with trying to put together a training plan that will meet my tri goals. His plan plus running and swimming has me boggled.

Once you've tested for your critical power, how do you divide up your zones for training? Are your power zones analogous to HR zones?

Edited by KirkD 2010-12-14 12:17 PM

agree- very difficult to fit it all in, and i'm basically having to give up on his winter program in order to get my run training in for an upcoming HM.

to answer your question, Jorge has 2 programs, either train with power or train with HR.  i don't have a power meter, but from my understanding, if you have one train exclusively with that and don't worry about HR.  the problem with HR training, especially doing quick intervals on the bike is that it lags so far behind the effort that it's hard to judge properly.   

From Jorge's spreadsheet based on the specified testing protocols:

Level	% of CP	% of THR
z1	< 55%	< 68%
z2	56 - 75%	69 - 83 %
z3	76 - 90%	84 - 94%
z4	91 - 105%	95 - 105%
z5	106 - 120%	106% >

scottuf - Yep, I'm in the same boat. I want to do the bike program, but I have an Olympic tri that I'm very focused on. I need to make sure my swim and bike are taken care of as well. And then there's that marathon that I would REALLY like to do that conflicts with the Olympic and the bike program. ugh.

donto - that is perfect! Thank you. (I should really have read Jorge's stuff more thoroughly.)

When is your Olympic race? When is the Mary you want to do?

Why not do bike power starting after the holidays and integrate your swim and run around it. Then say 12 weeks out from your Olympic transition to Oly plan based on power (hard to come by free though).

In winter I try to swim 3-4x a week, run frequently mostly easy 5x or 6x a week, work hard on the bike when I do trainer rides working on pushing up my FTP doing zone 4 and zone 5 workouts and those tend to be short and hard. So I run most days, swim and bike days alternate..so I swim  M, W, F and one day on weekend if it works with family, bike T, Th and other day on weekend.

Kathy,

That is possibly another topic for another thread, but since you asked...

Here's my hopeful schedule:

Half marathon - March 26th
Marathon - May 1st (Not really an A-race, but I'd like to have a sub 4-hour finish - my first mary)
10K - May 30th (not a big impact on training plans, I don't think)
Sprint tri - June 4th (An A-race for me, but again, probably not a huge impact on training plans)
Olympic - June 25th (A-race)

Here's how I see it:

I have 17 weeks until the marathon and then 8 weeks after that is the Olympic. Jorge's bike program is 15 weeks, so I could do his program say 3 days per week instead of 4, and build up distance on the run, give myself a 2 week taper to the mary. The big question is whether I could tolerate the bike training and the run volume simultaneously. I'm less worried about the swim. I have the opportunity for a couple of clinics with an olympic coach in the next few months, so I'll be spending a lot of time doing technique work while maintaining my fitness there 2-3 days per week.

From the marathon to the Olympic is 8 weeks. I'd have great run base, and good bike power, but what about volume? Will I suffer on the distance? Is 8 weeks enough to transition from a marthon program to an Olympic program?

Last of all, and not on the list, I would REALLY like to do at least one HIM this year. I did IM Branson last year and it crushed me due to poor bike fitness - 6000 feet of climbing on the bike killed me. I would like to repeat it this year with a MUCH better base. Or possibly a different one altogether -IM Poconos looks interesting in October. There would be 12 weeks between the Olympic and IM Branson, and 15 weeks to IM Poconos.

At this point, I was thinking of sacrificing the marathon plans so that I could do an Olympic speed program (Gale Bernhardt again). The half-mary and sprint fit in well with that. After the Olympic and to the HIM is as yet a mystery.

I've also been considering getting a coach, but financial concerns weigh heavily on that decision.

-kirk

I would suggest you please refer to Hunter/Coggan's book Training and Racing with a Power Meter. There, you will find that they will give percentage reference to HR as it correlates to LTHR, but Dr. Coggan goes on to explain that HR zones will almost never match your power zones.
As suggested above, I would use PM as primary, RPE/HR as seconday, HR more of an observation. After you have repeated many 2x20min@FTP, you will know what your cycling LTHR is.
Using two different test protocols to arrive at one FTP, second LTHR will not yield matching zones for sure.
In the world of testing, the closest I got to a matching protocol is Endurance Nation FTP test that uses identical procedure for both and is in my biased opinion the closest to actual MLSS or LTHR in real world.
By definition, max effort for 60min yields close to LTHR.........Applied to running, for elites, half marathon is usually the effort that yields it, for mortals, solid runners 15k HR or pace will give you pace at threshold and LTHR and for slower runners it is 10k that gives that kind of data. 
And in closing, whatever you use, use consistently in order to be able to track your progress. 

you don't think it would ever help during your races?  to nail that perfect wattage for a race...especially 70.3 or IM distance?

There's no such thing as perfect wattage, or HR, or RPE when it comes to long course racing. It's all about the training.
Seriously though, for long course bike intensity levels are moderate in general and allow for a pretty wide spread of effort within that moderation, at least in my experience. All my Half and Full IM bikes have been executed exactly at the intensity I trained for them and the results have been there, I usually have the very top bike splits, if not the fastest, at races and still can execute my run. So no, I don't see a huge benefit for me but I attribute that more to my experience and understanding of my own phsyiology. For others, a PM might be what they need to find that same sweet spot. I certainly feel a PM would be useful for short course racing.

Edited by bryancd 2010-12-14 2:34 PM

I'd recommend you get both the books by Skiba about tri training and power training for Triathletes.

You can find them here.

Lots of general and specific information that will help you.

About your possible schedule doing a late winter/early spring Mary puts a big hole in your tri training of 4-6 weeks with taper, race and recovery. You need to consider what is priority for you but timing is not ideal depends of course on how quickly you recover.

Yep. Exactly what I was thinking. My inclination is to hold off on the marathon until later in the year considering my top priorities are the sprint and oly.

Thanks for the book links. I'll check them out.

-Kirk

maybe it the experience part.  i am only in it for 2 years so i wouldn't know any better.  but pm definitely improved my pace.  especially on the shorter courses, can't speak for long course as i only have done 2 such events and neither were exactly perfect.

I think bryancd offers some good advice and insight on this thread, but I also think it should be mentioned that his viewpoint on pacing metrics is not the only one. In some settings, his is not a very popular stance.  He has absorbed some pretty heavy beat downs on some not so friendly tri forums regarding pacing by HR.

I would zero in on one thing he said and then expand on it. Pardon the non exact quote but I think it was something along the lines of "I rely on HR unless it is cold out and my HR is low". Problem here is you can add to this a whole slew of other qualifiers as well:

I rely on HR unless it is to hot out and HR is high.
I rely on HR unless my fatigue level is greater than normal and HR is low.
I rely on HR unless I have food in my belly and HR is low/high.
I rely on HR unless I am getting over a cold and HR is high.
I rely on HR unless I just yelled at my teenagger and HR is high.

You get the point.

HR is an indicator of total stress on the system. The system being your body. This does not make it a useless metric by any means. It does make it a less useful one than power for cycling.  Power moves you forward, and increased power is what we train to produce. HR does not move you forward, it is simply a response to producing power, among many other things.

I have been on powermeter for 6 years and I almost always wear my HR strap. At threshold power, for example, my HR will vary in a range of roughly 10 beats over a months time and by as much as 5 beats on a day to day basis. Because I use both metrics for a long time, I have gotten very good and determining exactly why my HR is off on any given day. HR does become more and more of a curiosity as I progress.

Problem is, if I had not been using power along with HR, if I was just using HR alone I would have performed many sub optimal workouts over the last 6 years. Not workouts that were a waste of time mind you, just not optimal. I would not have squeezed 100% out of my time on the bike, as I feel a power meter allows me to do.  

I can certainly envision a cenario where I trained and raced with a HR monitor and still worked hard and went pretty fast. I cannot envision a scenario where I go as fast as a power meter has allowed.

Yes, but at the races, I'm the one issuing the beat downs, Dave. I actually met Paulo here over IMAZ week and we had a good laugh!

And I would contend that although power is not variable, your ability to produce power is and is also effected by external conditions and physical states. Nothing is perfect. What works best is the protocol you understand as it applies to yourself and use it consistently. Trix is a good example. He was likely simply riding too slow in training and needed a visual aid to help in manage pace. Using a watt or a HR or RPE can all be used to achieve thew same result if used properly. Not riding at a sufficient intensity for a sufficient duration is 90% of most AG triathletes problem when it comes to making improvements on the bike.

Edited by bryancd 2010-12-14 5:04 PM

Amen and hallelujah!

Well, I sure can't argue results with you then.  Oh wait, maybe I can! 

http://www.vacycling.org/2010/results/stateTT.pdf

I kid, I kid. We can flex muscles all day and get nowhere. 

I am not going to re-hash old discussions that are searchable here and elsewhere. I think HR is useful. I think power is more useful. That's all.

HR sure is cheaper though.

Actually, that's a great case in point. I think power is of incredible value for a TT. Like I mentioned above, for short course it's great. I'm not as convinced that over 56 or 112 miles, with a 13.1 or 26.2 mile run after, it's as crucial. I think monitoring your effort and pace with direct physical, what is my body doing not how many watts am I producing, can be very valuable.

My Mom won 2 AG World Ironman Championships and set 2 course records for women Masters back in the '80's with no computer and eating fig netwons, so go figure.,