heart rate range for marathon race

Paul Meyer wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

Some studies (http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/hrmpitfalls.shtml)
seem to suggest that the heart rate for a marathon race is about
20bpm higher than during similar training runs (same pace, same
conditions).

Normally long training runs will be about 20bpm under one's lactate
threshold (LT). Some sources say a marathon can be run at about 96% of LT.

Quoted message said:

While I will use the split time (rather than the heart rate)
to adjust the pace during the race I would still like to set the
heart rate limits on the monitor to meaningful values.

You want your HRM to beep at you during the race? I sure as hell don't. If
you're using splits, then you should just set a wide range on your HRM or
turn off the beep IMO.

Quoted message said:

How do other people normally set the heart rate limits for
their Marathon races?

I never use the limits, but just use the HRM to avoid going too hard (above
LT in a marathon length race), or to keep the effort up when doing repeats
in training. It's more useful in post-race analysis when downloaded and
graphed on the PC.

Quoted message said:

Just to avoid misunderstanding, I am just talking about the
values I set on my heart rate monitor. Whether I run within
these limits during the actual race is a different question.

Thanks,
Paul

PS: I did my last marathon at 170bpm (average) and I'm doing my
long training runs (30km at race speed) at around 158bpm.
I did a 20km at 180bpm (average) with a peak at 198.
I was thinking about setting the range from 160-175.

When was your last marathon? Have you trained significantly more for this
one than you did for that one? When you say long training runs (30k at race
speed) @ 158 is that a race or training pace? The HRs will be very
different. One cannot train at race pace for long runs for psychological
reasons. You did 20k @ 180 for a race? or training? What is your
approximate LT? If you know your LT, then your HR for the marathon can be
approaching that value 95-96% in many people, but you will have to check
that by running your goal marathon pace in training.

-Tony

Paul Meyer said:

Some studies (http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/hrmpitfalls.shtml)
seem to suggest that the heart rate for a marathon race is about
20bpm higher than during similar training runs (same pace, same
conditions).

While I will use the split time (rather than the heart rate)
to adjust the pace during the race I would still like to set the
heart rate limits on the monitor to meaningful values.

How do other people normally set the heart rate limits for
their Marathon races?
Just to avoid misunderstanding, I am just talking about the
values I set on my heart rate monitor. Whether I run within
these limits during the actual race is a different question.

Thanks,
Paul

PS: I did my last marathon at 170bpm (average) and I'm doing my
long training runs (30km at race speed) at around 158bpm.
I did a 20km at 180bpm (average) with a peak at 198.
I was thinking about setting the range from 160-175.

"Tony" <qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<4mPdd.3735$EL5.1404@trndny09>...

Quoted message said:

Normally long training runs will be about 20bpm under one's lactate
threshold (LT). Some sources say a marathon can be run at about 96% of LT.

I don't know my LT and the formula I found gives a very broad range.
I do not intend to measure my LT in lab testing. While I do want to
improve my time (I run at around 3h30) I think that LT testing would be
an overkill considering my running time.

Quoted message said:

You want your HRM to beep at you during the race? I sure as hell don't. If
you're using splits, then you should just set a wide range on your HRM or
turn off the beep IMO.

Yes, I was thinking about the beep but I might just leave the beep out
as you suggested. Was just wondering if anybody sets the limits for the
race to get the beep.

Quoted message said:

When was your last marathon? Have you trained significantly more for this
one than you did for that one? When you say long training runs (30k at race
speed) @ 158 is that a race or training pace? The HRs will be very
different. One cannot train at race pace for long runs for psychological
reasons. You did 20k @ 180 for a race? or training? What is your
approximate LT? If you know your LT, then your HR for the marathon can be
approaching that value 95-96% in many people, but you will have to check
that by running your goal marathon pace in training.

My last Marathon race was at 170bpm average (about 4 years ago).
The 20km at 180bpm average with a peak of 198 was a race.

I do run my long training runs at the pace I will do during the race
and it doesn't seem to do any psychological damage to me. What would
be the psychological reasons for running slower? Actually, I find it
psychologically beneficial to run at race pace during the long
training runs.
I have already seen your comment in articles and books but I never
really found a convincing reason for it. I know I should just listen
to the people who know ... 🙂

Paul Meyer said:

Some studies (http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/hrmpitfalls.shtml)
seem to suggest that the heart rate for a marathon race is about
20bpm higher than during similar training runs (same pace, same
conditions).

While I will use the split time (rather than the heart rate)
to adjust the pace during the race I would still like to set the
heart rate limits on the monitor to meaningful values.

How do other people normally set the heart rate limits for
their Marathon races?
Just to avoid misunderstanding, I am just talking about the
values I set on my heart rate monitor. Whether I run within
these limits during the actual race is a different question.

Thanks,
Paul

PS: I did my last marathon at 170bpm (average) and I'm doing my
long training runs (30km at race speed) at around 158bpm.
I did a 20km at 180bpm (average) with a peak at 198.
I was thinking about setting the range from 160-175.

I dug this out of the archives - http://tinyurl.com/7yq5b
Also try here http://www.teamoregon.com/publications/wizard.php

Due to HR drift you will end up with a higher HR than suggested. I
would start out under that value and end up slightly over.

tkb

There are way too many variables that effect the reliabilty of heart
rate monitoring during a race to make it an accuracte gage of effort.
Adrenaline jitters will push your HR all over the place. At the start
your HR may run way over normal for the pace, while at the end a lower
HR from dehydration may cause you to believe you "shoud" be able to pick
up the pace.

I wore one for several marathons (as well as during training runs) and
as an experiment of one could never get any correlation between race
effort (times) and HR. Best bet, pay attention to how you feel and go
with that for pace.

I can't ever remember seeing a professional runner in a marathon
adjusting his/her pace based on watching their HR. And they are going
for the gold, literally, and have the best of everything available, for
free.

Paul Meyer said:

Some studies (http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/hrmpitfalls.shtml)
seem to suggest that the heart rate for a marathon race is about
20bpm higher than during similar training runs (same pace, same
conditions).

While I will use the split time (rather than the heart rate)
to adjust the pace during the race I would still like to set the
heart rate limits on the monitor to meaningful values.

How do other people normally set the heart rate limits for
their Marathon races?
Just to avoid misunderstanding, I am just talking about the
values I set on my heart rate monitor. Whether I run within
these limits during the actual race is a different question.

Thanks,
Paul

PS: I did my last marathon at 170bpm (average) and I'm doing my
long training runs (30km at race speed) at around 158bpm.
I did a 20km at 180bpm (average) with a peak at 198.
I was thinking about setting the range from 160-175.

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Bumper) said:

I can't ever remember seeing a professional runner in a marathon
adjusting his/her pace based on watching their HR. And they are going
for the gold, literally, and have the best of everything available, for
free.

That may be true. However, top triathletes and cyclists DO use them.

--Harold Buck

"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

Harold Buck wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Bumper) said:

I can't ever remember seeing a professional runner in a marathon
adjusting his/her pace based on watching their HR. And they are going
for the gold, literally, and have the best of everything available, for
free.

That may be true. However, top triathletes and cyclists DO use them.

Yes, very true. Despite variations in HR due to many factors, those of us
who use them all the time learn to read much more than just the HR from
them. It's a very valuable biofeedback tool.

-Tony

True, but their bicycles are equipped with gizmos that give a very
accurate indication of energy expended at the cranks, which may
corrolate better with the HR. Probably similar to running on a
treadmill.

Harold Buck said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Bumper) said:

I can't ever remember seeing a professional runner in a marathon
adjusting his/her pace based on watching their HR. And they are going
for the gold, literally, and have the best of everything available, for
free.

That may be true. However, top triathletes and cyclists DO use them.

--Harold Buck

"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

TenKBabe wrote in message
<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Paul Meyer said:

Some studies (http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/hrmpitfalls.shtml)
seem to suggest that the heart rate for a marathon race is about
20bpm higher than during similar training runs (same pace, same
conditions).

While I will use the split time (rather than the heart rate)
to adjust the pace during the race I would still like to set the
heart rate limits on the monitor to meaningful values.

How do other people normally set the heart rate limits for
their Marathon races?
Just to avoid misunderstanding, I am just talking about the
values I set on my heart rate monitor. Whether I run within
these limits during the actual race is a different question.

Thanks,
Paul

PS: I did my last marathon at 170bpm (average) and I'm doing my
long training runs (30km at race speed) at around 158bpm.
I did a 20km at 180bpm (average) with a peak at 198.
I was thinking about setting the range from 160-175.

I dug this out of the archives - http://tinyurl.com/7yq5b

This one gives marathon pace as 87% of AT, but 94-95% is more established in
everything I've read.

Quoted message said:

Also try here http://www.teamoregon.com/publications/wizard.php

This calculator looks pretty good, at least as far as projected HR goes,
though many people will have an AT higher or lower than the given value
since it's based on MHR and RHR.

-Tony

Quoted message said:

Due to HR drift you will end up with a higher HR than suggested. I
would start out under that value and end up slightly over.

tkb

[email hidden] (Paul Meyer) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

How do other people normally set the heart rate limits for
their Marathon races?

Beating, if it stops worry.

Paul Meyer wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

"Tony" <qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<4mPdd.3735$EL5.1404@trndny09>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Normally long training runs will be about 20bpm under one's lactate
threshold (LT). Some sources say a marathon can be run at about 96% of

LT.

Quoted message said:

I don't know my LT and the formula I found gives a very broad range.
I do not intend to measure my LT in lab testing. While I do want to
improve my time (I run at around 3h30) I think that LT testing would be
an overkill considering my running time.

IMO LT testing is a good idea for any runner who is going to try to race
their best. 3h30 isn't that slow; it's a respectable time for many people.
In fact I will probably run my marathon around 3:40-3:45 this year. You
can test LT in a variety of ways, the easiest uses an all-out race as a
benchmark performance, and then scales the result depending on the distance
and time run. Match the time it takes you to run your race and then divide
by the %LT given from the closest performance level. This table comes from
data in the book "Lactate Threshold Training" and represents percentages of
LT that elite athletes can run for a given time and distance.

0:13 5k 109.3%
0:27 10k 104.1%
0:42 15k 101.4%
0:57 20k 98.8%
1:00 HM 98.4%
1:14 25k 97.0%
1:32 30k 95.2%
2:06 Mar 94.3%

So if you ran your absolute best 10k in 50 mins, with an avg HR of 177, your
LTHR would be about that, 177. Likewise, if your HM result is 1:20, then
your LT is your avg HR for that HM divided by about 96.5%, as that lies in
between the times of 1:14 and 1:32 above. If you want to know more about
this I will post something more.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You want your HRM to beep at you during the race? I sure as hell don't.

If

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you're using splits, then you should just set a wide range on your HRM or
turn off the beep IMO.

Yes, I was thinking about the beep but I might just leave the beep out
as you suggested. Was just wondering if anybody sets the limits for the
race to get the beep.

If you're going by pace, I would advise keeping the beep off. Even if
you're using HR as a way to mark your effort, your primary method is always
how you feel.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

When was your last marathon? Have you trained significantly more for

this

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

one than you did for that one? When you say long training runs (30k at

race

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

speed) @ 158 is that a race or training pace? The HRs will be very
different. One cannot train at race pace for long runs for psychological
reasons. You did 20k @ 180 for a race? or training? What is your
approximate LT? If you know your LT, then your HR for the marathon can

be

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

approaching that value 95-96% in many people, but you will have to check
that by running your goal marathon pace in training.

My last Marathon race was at 170bpm average (about 4 years ago).
The 20km at 180bpm average with a peak of 198 was a race.

It's hard to draw conclusions from these numbers, not knowing whether you
were at full effort or not, or what kind of shape you were in 4 years ago.

Quoted message said:

I do run my long training runs at the pace I will do during the race
and it doesn't seem to do any psychological damage to me. What would
be the psychological reasons for running slower? Actually, I find it
psychologically beneficial to run at race pace during the long
training runs.
I have already seen your comment in articles and books but I never
really found a convincing reason for it. I know I should just listen
to the people who know ... 🙂

A race effort done to the best of one's ability is very hard, and it's
exceedingly difficult to match the same pace in training except for shorter
periods in intervals or sometimes in short tempo runs. If you're racing at
a substandard level, not up to your full potential, then yes of course it's
more possible to run equivalent times in training and in races.

-Tony

Tony, the question was what to set a HR monitor for during a race. I
replied in my always less than humble opinion, don't bother. because...

I trained and ran races with a HR monitor for several years, I kept
exquisite records of every session. I had the benefit of having a stress
test treadmill and cardio nurses to run me to a "real" max HR, etc. etc,
etc, ad nauseum. I could never get a correlation between HR and effort.
Either training or racing.

I complained to my running partner at the time, a cardiologist, he
starting listing all the usually unmentioned variables that go into a HR
at any given moment. So I started keeping track of external variables
such as temp and humidity. Guess what? Nothings linear when it comes to
the human body. Still dubious correlation. I had become a slave to a
false god and I was getting back less than what I was putting in.

So I set aside the monitor and chest strap and stats and just went back
to running. Now I track miles and time, and I'm enjoying running more.

You mentioned that HR monitoring is a valuable feedback tool, and it is
but what is it feeding back. I am reminded of events from over 30 years
ago, when a certain doctor and I would be on ER call for the weekend
together. The nurses began to dread it. Because every one of those
Friday nights at least one patient would be brought in whose lab results
would - by the textbooks - indicate that life with those test numbers
was incompatible. In short, by the book, they were dead, they just
didn't know it. But since we were treating a person and not a book most
lived to walk out of there. The hospital solved the problem by
scheduling us for different weekends.

Real world, you've been out boozing it all night, you get two hours
sleep. You drag your butt out of bed. You feel lousy, with good reason.
But you have to do that scheduled training run, by the numbers. You make
every effort to stay within the parameters your HR monitor says you
must. You struggle to maintain the required HR, you have a lousy run,
but you did it. Now did your biofeedback make you a better runner that
day, did it help increase your training factor or did it tear something
down in the process, did you risk injury or worse, a bad attitude toward
booze. I honestly don't know the answer, maybe, maybe not. But today I
would still lace up the shoes and shuffle along content with burning all
those toxins out the system and happy to get the time and miles in the
log book.

I am not, let me repeat, not trying to say your approach is wrong. If it
works for you great. What I am saying is that based on my "experiment of
one" here is the the conclusion I came to and why. If another person
reading this is trying to decide between buying a HR monitor or a second
pair of shoes to train in, I would recommend the shoes. Of course, if
they really, really just have to have gizmo on their wrist they I would
suggest a Forerunner 101 or 201. Did I mention I still keep track of
miles. AR is incurable, you only channel it to another source of relief.
If Ozzie could only rid me of AR I probably could rid myself of socks!

Tony qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com said:

Harold Buck wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Bumper) said:

I can't ever remember seeing a professional runner in a marathon
adjusting his/her pace based on watching their HR. And they are going
for the gold, literally, and have the best of everything available, for
free.

That may be true. However, top triathletes and cyclists DO use them.

Yes, very true. Despite variations in HR due to many factors, those of us
who use them all the time learn to read much more than just the HR from
them. It's a very valuable biofeedback tool.

-Tony

Yup, there are many factors that affect HR, and a great many of them affect
pace as well. I've never been a slave to the HRM, but I find it very useful
for 1) keeping the effort low on a long run, and 2) keeping the effort high
during intervals or tempo work. It can also be useful for figuring out your
race pace ahead of time, though not very useful during the race itself.

For daily runs HR is not a useful measure by itself; going by feeling is
always first. Because I run trails a great deal of the time, pace doesn't
work. Aside from environmental factors, on any given day the body can be
more or less responsive to exercise in general, and I've found my HR usually
confirms how I feel. When it doesn't confirm, that's where it is most
useful, and this happens about once a week. For example, on some days while
I feel fine, the HR is sluggish to respond, and from experience that means I
should be careful not to go hard. The HR response rate, and it's
correspondence to how I feel on a given day, help tell me what my state of
rest is and how hard to go on that day. Another example: when I'm fully
rested and ready to race, my HR responds rapidly and goes high very easily.

So while HR is not a good absolute measure, it's a valuable tool for me.
Here are some factors that can affect HR (do you know of others?):

1) Overtraining, Insufficient Recovery and Illness
2) Nutrition
3) Altitude
4) Medication
5) Jet Lag
6) Infectious Disease
7) Mental Stress
8) Temperature and Humidity
9) Race Nerves and Race Environment

-Tony