Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Official Running Thread







Greg Bobkin

Silver Seagull
May 22, 2012
14,852
Got one run updated to Strava (from GC), but nothing else. It did, however, let me know I'm the 'Local Legend' for Mill Hill, which is nice :lolol:
 


knocky1

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2010
12,970
Got one run updated to Strava (from GC), but nothing else. It did, however, let me know I'm the 'Local Legend' for Mill Hill, which is nice :lolol:

The Legend of Mill Hill rescued the thread from Page 4 this morning only for it to sink down to page 2 in hours. I'll bring it back.

Checking the sea yesterday morning and I barely recognised a trim [MENTION=474]Mr Blobby[/MENTION] speeding towards me. He was on mile 16 or more and wasn't puffing, huffing or showing any signs of effort. Great upward curve from one of my Weakest Link stalwarts!

Enjoyed my month off and despite eating non stop I've barely added anything round the waist. Likely to resume some plodding this week and prepare for a winter training schedule.
 


Clive Walker

Stand Or Fall
Jul 5, 2011
3,167
Brighton
Lockdown Update

88 RUNS

846 KM.

Ave 5.09 pkm

Still relatively injury free and still enjoying it. Treating myself to a nice new pair of trainers was a nice boost halfway through June.

121 runs

1161.2 km

ave 5.14 pkm

Increase in the milage but slower on the pace. Seems to make sense to me. Decided that im going to half my output in August and fill the time with some more strength and conditioning in the Gym.
 


Artie Fufkin

like to run
Mar 30, 2008
683
out running
Another delay on a decision from the London Marathon today. They're now saying a final decision will be made no later than Aug. 7th (8 weeks out from race day). It's becoming a bit of a PR disaster. I think they should call it a day but I'm sure there's a lot of money at stake.

If it does go ahead I mostly worry for those that haven't been able to invest time to train because of the extended uncertainty, but feel they'll need to run it for their respective charity.
Running a marathon is hard and the distance can be dangerous if not respected. I'd hate for it to go ahead and we see far more people than usual getting into difficulty.
 




Greg Bobkin

Silver Seagull
May 22, 2012
14,852
The Legend of Mill Hill rescued the thread from Page 4 this morning only for it to sink down to page 2 in hours. I'll bring it back.

Checking the sea yesterday morning and I barely recognised a trim [MENTION=474]Mr Blobby[/MENTION] speeding towards me. He was on mile 16 or more and wasn't puffing, huffing or showing any signs of effort. Great upward curve from one of my Weakest Link stalwarts!

Enjoyed my month off and despite eating non stop I've barely added anything round the waist. Likely to resume some plodding this week and prepare for a winter training schedule.

Thread is down to page 3, so I've rescued it. Not really much to report from me, still keeping the streak going, times keep coming down, closing in on 200 miles for the month, but I'm not sure I'll make it. Someone give me some motivation/guilt-tripping – I've got 15 miles to do in two days...
 


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,479
Burgess Hill
If we're just looking to keep the thread active, I didn't get that far with the vertical challenge last week due to other stuff. Did what I could though and managed 12,200ft or so in about 30 miles of 'running'. Some insane stuff went on in the wider community, including a bloke I spoke to on the Tank Tracks on Saturday morning (hill at the start of 13 THW half marathon fame) who was doing 24 repeats to do 10,000ft in a day.
 


Garry Nelson's teacher

Well-known member
May 11, 2015
5,257
Bloody Worthing!
The Legend of Mill Hill rescued the thread from Page 4 this morning only for it to sink down to page 2 in hours. I'll bring it back.

Checking the sea yesterday morning and I barely recognised a trim [MENTION=474]Mr Blobby[/MENTION] speeding towards me. He was on mile 16 or more and wasn't puffing, huffing or showing any signs of effort. Great upward curve from one of my Weakest Link stalwarts!

Enjoyed my month off and despite eating non stop I've barely added anything round the waist. Likely to resume some plodding this week and prepare for a winter training schedule.

Good to hear; hope your batteries are recharged. My times are p+iss poor and that's without any prolonged layoff. I managed a 23.18 in prefect conditions today which is actually my best 5k for 5 weeks (sad but true). Don't want to sound like the thread's Grim Reaper, but this is defo an age thing. On the upside I managed a 5k PB on the rower today, so some parts of the GNT body are in working order.
 




Garry Nelson's teacher

Well-known member
May 11, 2015
5,257
Bloody Worthing!
Further to my previous email on rowing, it did make me wonder about the efficacy of cross-training. Not much science here, just anecdote, but I'm surprised at how little effect my particular mode of x-training has had on my running and I wondered if others had the same experience?

I know that x-training has benefits - spreading the training load across different muscle groups, keeping you ticking over when running is out, keeping the weight off etc. But looking back I can see that the most effective way of keeping any sort of running peak is to...........run. In my own case, cycling has been reasonably effective but usually as a complement to running and not a substitute i.e. extra sessions on the bike.

As for the rowing, it certainly feels as intense as running (I don't wear an HRM) and I'm pretty much 'maxing out' and improving. Perhaps it's down to adaptation/technique.. I'm just a bit surprised that this cross training is not yielding much 'cross-over benefit' in my running - even in terms of not arresting/mitigating a fairy sharp decline,

Anyone else with views on this - has cross training worked for you?*

*and at least this gets the thread back onto page 1!
 


Simgull

Well-known member
Jan 3, 2013
1,647
Hove
Brighton Marathon sort of off then? My guess is a virtual, run 26 miles in the week, raise money for good causes and claim a medal.
 


D

Deleted member 2719

Guest
I have recently trained at 85% of heart rate max for the past 3 runs rather than 90-110% and my VO2 has gone back up to 49, superior for my age.

How does that work then???
Was it just one of those things or was I training to hard before?

What heart rate effort should be ideal for a 56 year old, running just for fitness and to maintain their love machine status?
 




dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,479
Burgess Hill
I have recently trained at 85% of heart rate max for the past 3 runs rather than 90-110% and my VO2 has gone back up to 49, superior for my age.

How does that work then???
Was it just one of those things or was I training to hard before?

What heart rate effort should be ideal for a 56 year old, running just for fitness and to maintain their love machine status?

I'd recommend variety in your training efforts rather than sticking to the same effort all the time - a mix of easy (60-70%), comfortably hard (80-85%) and a some interval training that can be anything from 80% upwards (including some eyeballs -out close to max HR sessions of short repeats - including on hills). As for VO2 max, wouldn't worry too much about it - assume your number is from your watch so it'll only be a rough estimate but it's a decent indicator and barometer. If you add in some harder intervals along with some longer, easier efforts it'll probably go up further.

I've had a couple of full (lab-tested) VO2 max tests done - it's a pretty horrific thing to do :eek::eek:
 


Indurain's Lungs

Legend of Garry Nelson
Jun 22, 2010
2,260
Dorset
I'd recommend variety in your training efforts rather than sticking to the same effort all the time - a mix of easy (60-70%), comfortably hard (80-85%) and a some interval training that can be anything from 80% upwards (including some eyeballs -out close to max HR sessions of short repeats - including on hills). As for VO2 max, wouldn't worry too much about it - assume your number is from your watch so it'll only be a rough estimate but it's a decent indicator and barometer. If you add in some harder intervals along with some longer, easier efforts it'll probably go up further.

I've had a couple of full (lab-tested) VO2 max tests done - it's a pretty horrific thing to do :eek::eek:

I would re-iterate that. My Garmin watch has had my VO2 solidly at 56 or 57 since february in which time I'm running 2-3 minutes quicker for a 10k!

On the other hand, those gains may be shortlived as I rolled my ankle on Monday and haven't been able to walk properly, let alone run, since then!
 


D

Deleted member 2719

Guest
I'd recommend variety in your training efforts rather than sticking to the same effort all the time - a mix of easy (60-70%), comfortably hard (80-85%) and a some interval training that can be anything from 80% upwards (including some eyeballs -out close to max HR sessions of short repeats - including on hills). As for VO2 max, wouldn't worry too much about it - assume your number is from your watch so it'll only be a rough estimate but it's a decent indicator and barometer. If you add in some harder intervals along with some longer, easier efforts it'll probably go up further.

I've had a couple of full (lab-tested) VO2 max tests done - it's a pretty horrific thing to do :eek::eek:

Thanks Dazza, you're not one of the ones on here that I felt needed a lab test:whistle:

Sounds interesting incidentally how close was the lab test to your watch?

I went out and put the plan in action this morning and failed, I still ended up at the 80-87% range when trying my hardest not to break 80%! Mind you there was no air and I had just tweak an old back injury so was running very inefficient a bit like Peter Crouch dancing.

I just wonder if it might take a few goes as my feet won't slow down enough! How much do you think is in the brain against a muscle memory type of thing?

I have always had two speeds nearly flat out or sprint, how many gears does a short distance runner(5-10k) need?
 




dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,479
Burgess Hill
Thanks Dazza, you're not one of the ones on here that I felt needed a lab test:whistle:

Sounds interesting incidentally how close was the lab test to your watch?

I went out and put the plan in action this morning and failed, I still ended up at the 80-87% range when trying my hardest not to break 80%! Mind you there was no air and I had just tweak an old back injury so was running very inefficient a bit like Peter Crouch dancing.

I just wonder if it might take a few goes as my feet won't slow down enough! How much do you think is in the brain against a muscle memory type of thing?

I have always had two speeds nearly flat out or sprint, how many gears does a short distance runner(5-10k) need?

I know what you mean - my 'easy' runs are too fast but I have a very high cadence (developed through ChiRunning style) which I have to try to manage.

I don't think my watch gives me a VO2 estimate - that said I haven't looked. It does a whole ton of stuff I don't need/use :D
I did the lab test a couple of times as a volunteer - one of the Beachy Head big names is the lead Sports Science lecturer at Brighton Uni and he sometimes asks for runners to take part in student experiments as part of their dissertations - and they offer a free VO2 max test as a 'reward'. It's an interesting thing to do.....I also did one last year during my annual medical - that's only supposed to be a modest fitness test (up to 80% of 80%), but the consultant was a runner, so asked me if I wanted to 'carry on a bit and get a true number rather than an estimate' :D

The true lab treadmill test is horrible - 3 mins at warm up pace, 3 mins at lactate threshold pace and then the pace is increased a bit further for another 3 mins, then the treadmill incline is raised 1 degree every minute and you simply keep going as long as you can - only full minutes count too. RTYP basically.
 


Greg Bobkin

Silver Seagull
May 22, 2012
14,852
Thread is down to page 3, so I've rescued it. Not really much to report from me, still keeping the streak going, times keep coming down, closing in on 200 miles for the month, but I'm not sure I'll make it. Someone give me some motivation/guilt-tripping – I've got 15 miles to do in two days...

Knocked out nine miles this morning to make it to 200 miles for the month – just like in any race, the last couple were tough. I know that's not much of an achievement to some people but, having run less that 30 miles for the year in Jan and Feb – and questioning whether I would actually continue running at all – it's quite the turnaround! The brain is a funny old thing – but I'm delighted to have a fully-restored running mojo :rock::rock:
 


Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
55,749
Back in Sussex
VO2 max is interesting...

I've noticed from runners I interact with on Strava that Garmin watches seem to err on the generous side with their estimates. There are a few people I see post amazing VO2 max scores, certainly relative to my own reading from Apple Watch/Health, but they are considerably slower than me. I know there's more to VO2 max than running quicker, but it doesn't seem quite right.

I was talking about it with someone else the other day and wondered if it's a bit like women's dress sizes, ie stitch a 10 label on a size 12 dress - the woman feels great "I fit in a 10!", so some sports watches are intentionally generous with their VO2 max readings so the user feels even better about their performance.

As [MENTION=27279]dazzer6666[/MENTION] says, I take them just as an estimate, but if I'm trending upwards when using the same device, then I assume I'm doing the right thing.
 


Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
55,749
Back in Sussex
...in other news, ten miles covered this morning makes it 200 in a month for me for the very first time, and today also marks six months of running every day.

Quite how I managed both of those, I do not know - there were days earlier this month when I could barely walk due to my knee pain. I know some people will think that as an exaggeration, but it's really not. For some reason when my knee is like that, very gentle running is less painful than walking, and I've discovered I can push on through and it will gradually improve.

Yesterday my legs felt the best they have all month and I was looking forward to seeing what I could do this morning, but my legs just felt dead and unresponsive from the off, so I eased back and enjoy the beautiful warm morning air. Just one of those days I guess...
 




Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
55,749
Back in Sussex
Knocked out nine miles this morning to make it to 200 miles for the month – just like in any race, the last couple were tough. I know that's not much of an achievement to some people but, having run less that 30 miles for the year in Jan and Feb – and questioning whether I would actually continue running at all – it's quite the turnaround! The brain is a funny old thing – but I'm delighted to have a fully-restored running mojo :rock::rock:

That's a bizarrely similar post to the one I've just made!
 


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,479
Burgess Hill
VO2 max is interesting...

I've noticed from runners I interact with on Strava that Garmin watches seem to err on the generous side with their estimates. There are a few people I see post amazing VO2 max scores, certainly relative to my own reading from Apple Watch/Health, but they are considerably slower than me. I know there's more to VO2 max than running quicker, but it doesn't seem quite right.

I was talking about it with someone else the other day and wondered if it's a bit like women's dress sizes, ie stitch a 10 label on a size 12 dress - the woman feels great "I fit in a 10!", so some sports watches are intentionally generous with their VO2 max readings so the user feels even better about their performance.

As [MENTION=27279]dazzer6666[/MENTION] says, I take them just as an estimate, but if I'm trending upwards when using the same device, then I assume I'm doing the right thing.

Think this is right - the kicker on VO2 max is how the body reacts/copes when the test gets really stressy (the last 1-2 minutes) - the estimates on the watches are just that and can't replicate the true effects.

The test I have during my annual medical is also 'estimated' under normal circumstances - last time we went way past that so much closer to 'actual', and I came out at 55.6. This is almost exactly the same as my results from both of the full lab tests I did. My estimated max from the previous medical exam test (where I went to 80% of 80%) was 46 so I'd suggest the 'estimate' under lab conditions was quite a way out and not a good measure of where my 'top end' is. I suspect the same will be true for the watch readings for many people (but overestimating rather than under for precisely the reasons [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] cites).

For anyone genuinely interested, lots of UK Unis offer a paid testing service including Brighton - cost £180 + VAT

https://issuu.com/universityofbrighton/docs/sescu_postcard_-_laboratory_assessm/1?e=2898258/8628439
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here