login
Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!)
-
No new posts
 2007-01-15 9:33 AM |
Veteran  279   Tucson, AZ |  Subject: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!)Hi everyone, Got my HRM back in October and took my first stab at the 30' time trial lactate threshold test we all know and love. For reference, here's the link/info for that test. That was back in October and I figured I was way overdue for a new LT test. Since I skipped my long run yesterday I thought today would be the perfect opportunity to do the LT test. Here's the data from my run:  I did a 10 minute warmup, then the 30 minute test... I had the HRM automatically take laps after the warmup and after the first 10' of the test. My avg HR for the last 20' of the test is 178bpm. As far as effort goes, I definitely gave it my all. So, is 178 my LT? I remember last time a few people suggested I incorporate a fudge factor of like .95 or .97 and use that to find my zones... is that still the case? Do you have any general comments or insights about my test data/results? Thanks! |
| 2007-01-15 10:03 AM in reply to: #654724 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) For what it's worth (and my general aversion to HRM training even though I now have one again) this looks to be the prototype test result and looks fairly accurate and well performed. I'd say you can comfortably assume that your running LT is somewhere in that range of 175 - 180 and calculate your zones around that. |
| 2007-01-15 10:11 AM in reply to: #654780 |
Elite 3650   Laurium, MI | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) i would use 178 too. If after a few runs, you feel your rpe isn't syncing up to your zones, then you might fudge a little, but the test looks good to me too. Edited by vortmax 2007-01-15 10:12 AM |
| 2007-01-15 10:19 AM in reply to: #654724 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL Gold member | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Sounds like you did the test correctly, good job! Use 178, if things don't feel right do another in a month or so... Keep track of the weather conditions for this test as if the next time you do it and it is much warmer or cooler it could affect it some. Your logs are empty, do you plan on using the BT HR zone calculator or using the formulas from another source? |
| 2007-01-15 12:59 PM in reply to: #654724 |
Master 2381 Frisco, Texas | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Good job on the LT test. The only thing I would add is to also record your distance and pace for the 20' interval. You can use this to compare test to test and look for improvement. Ideally, at some point in your athletic career your LT HR will stop rising. After that you should still see improvements in your pace and distance even though your LT HR doesn't increase. You' ve had a huge increase in your LT HR over the last test. That's a good thing. I assume your pace was also faster? I ran an LT test about 2 weeks ago. My running pace improved 9% even though my LT HR remained exacatly the same as my previous test. Gail Bernhardt advocates using a fudge factor. She assumes an LT test is 101% of actual LT HR. For a 5k running race she assumes the avg HR is 105% of actual LT HR. I use the avg HR without any fudge factor. TJ |
| 2007-01-15 2:55 PM in reply to: #655149 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Well, considering your LT never really changes per activity .......... then it should always be in the same range. (Your pace at the LT will change, but the point where your body can't shed the lactic acid fast enough from accumulating is pretty much genetically determined and a constant). If you have a huge disparity between LT tests, then it probably wasn't done correctly during one or more of them. |
| 2007-01-15 5:06 PM in reply to: #655330 |
Master 2381 Frisco, Texas | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Daremo - 2007-01-15 2:55 PM Well, considering your LT never really changes per activity .......... then it should always be in the same range. (Your pace at the LT will change, but the point where your body can't shed the lactic acid fast enough from accumulating is pretty much genetically determined and a constant). If you have a huge disparity between LT tests, then it probably wasn't done correctly during one or more of them. No. The LT HR does respond to training. In other words, there is a training effect; with proper training you can move your LT HR closer to your Max HR. The perfect aerobic engine would be when LT HR equals Max HR. You may be thinking of Max HR. Your Max HR is genetic and doesn't respond to trianing. If your LT HR moves up (or down due to detraining) then your training zones will change. The OP tests show a huge difference in LT HR. This may be due to, as you state, an invalid LT test. Or it could be that the first test was done when he first started training. The second test would show the training effect on LT HR. Thus, his training zones would change. TJ |
| 2007-01-15 5:13 PM in reply to: #654724 |
Veteran 279 Tucson, AZ | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Thanks for the responses everyone. For my first LT test I fudged it quite a bit. I had just gotten my HRM and was anxious to get started. I was going out for a run and after warming up I felt good so I pushed hard for 30 mins. The course had some significant hills and the day prior probably wasn't a full rest day. Long story short, I was using it because it was probably in the ballpark, but not completely accurate. This one I tried to do as much by the book as I could. Of course, it changes my zones pretty significantly... to the point where what I thought was Zone 2 has actually been Zone 1. I'm going to have to do some more research and figure out what each of the zones (or at least working at/below aerobic threshold) should feel like. Anyone have any links/insight? As for my logs... yeah, they're empty. I put a ton of effort into making a pretty slick Excel training log and I prefer that (which is fine until it's time to start sharing that data with other people). Oh, and the zones... I'm using the Friel/D3 spreadsheet to figure them out. Thanks again everyone! |
| 2007-01-15 6:56 PM in reply to: #655512 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL Gold member | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Carl Carlson - 2007-01-15 6:13 PM ...This one I tried to do as much by the book as I could. Of course, it changes my zones pretty significantly... to the point where what I thought was Zone 2 has actually been Zone 1. I'm going to have to do some more research and figure out what each of the zones (or at least working at/below aerobic threshold) should feel like. Anyone have any links/insight? Check out the attached, downloaded info from the net. Attachments ---------------- Joe Friel's Training Bible exerpts (Ken Mierke and Mike Ricci).pdf (74KB - 34 downloads) |
| 2007-01-15 9:06 PM in reply to: #654724 |
| Champion 8903 | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) You can also back it up with a modified version of a Conconi test, though I think they're harder to do for running than they are for cycling. I did one where I rode at a steady 90 rpm, and increased my power by 10 watts every minute. I recorded my heart rate each minute and also the perception of breathing. I kept going until I could no longer hold 1 minute at 90 rpm. Examining the graph (power meter download through Cycling Peaks software) you can see the point at which your heart rate takes a definite jump into the anaerobic zone. I use that HR and power level as my LT, and it was pretty darn close to the results I got using a method similar to yours...within 1 BPM on the HR monitor. |
| 2007-01-16 1:00 AM in reply to: #654724 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: Help me interpret this 30' LT TT data (with graphs!) Wow, it's great to see that graphical representation of your LT test. It looks like you did it just right, congratulations! I would use 178 as your LTHR. My personal thought is that the 1-3% difference while giving some variability is not large enough to have a big practical impact on your zones adn actual workouts. I had a similar experience when I did LT HR tests for biking & running, the HR I had thougth were zone 2, were actually zone 1. Now that I "know" that I'm not going to blow up by working at that HR (which I had previously thought was zone 2 based on RPE), I find that I can go longer at a higher effort just due to the mental benefit if knowing where I am. I hope that made sense! This illustrates why it is important even for people who don't like or don't want to work with HR monitors, that occasional calibration of your RPE with a somewhat objective & repeatable test is a great training move. I second recording your distance and pace to compare for future tests. One final note about LTHR, or estimation of it regardless of method. The LTHR is trainable, but in order to "train" it, or raise it, you need to do workouts at that effort level, which is Zone 4/5a efforts. In a traditional Freil Style periodizaiton plan, this is done closer to your races during the build periods. If you are not actively training your LTHR, it may actually drop, but that doens't mean you have lost fitness, just building a different type of fitness...endurance, increasing mitochondria, building new capillaries, increasing oxidative enzyme production, etc. THe result is that you will increase pace/distance at the same HR, or decrease HR at the same pace/distance, even if your LT lowers during this training period. I think.  |
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK