AeT Re-Test – Surprising result, or do i don’t get it?

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #27764
    nullkru
    Participant

    Hi Everyone,

    I did an AeT Outdoor test several Weeks ago. With an avg HR around 141BPM. Because i was not satisfied with the result. I searched a loop which is fairly flat and allows me to run it several times (not out/back). I ran it with a HR around 150-153bpm. Which is way higher than my last test. But again i got a negative Pa:Hr. I could manage that effort longer than the 60-70′. I was fasted and just had a coffee before.
    Next time i will do it on the Treadmill. But can anyone explain to me what happens here? Is it safe to assume top of Z2 is around 150 BPM?
    Sorry for bothering you with this questions but i want to understand this.
    Here is the link to the run: http://tpks.ws/UEOKVXVENMIXXJA5ROTSKRNFVI

    Big thanks in advance.
    Greetings from switzerland and have a great day — mirko

    1: Old Test Post: https://uphillathlete.com/forums/topic/aet-testing-outdoors-need-a-little-help/

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.

Posted In: Mountain Running

  • Moderator
    Scott Semple on #27785

    If you got a negative Pa:HR, then I think that means that your average heart rate in the second half was lower than the first half. In that case, the run was definitely within the limits of your aerobic capacity. You can probably try a faster pace next time until Pa:HR is +5% or less.

    I think it’s safe to assume that the top of Z2 for you is higher than 150 bpm.

    Participant
    nullkru on #27803

    Thanks Scott!
    So i will set the top of Z2 to 150 bpm for the next few weeks on my watch. Then i will retest it again with a faster pace.
    One followup question even if the top of my Z2 now is 150bpm. Do i improve my AeT by running 5-10 beats under it. Because of the ADS, or should i aim to run closer to those 150bpm?

    Should i also update these settings in TrainingPeaks and recalculate the TSS?

    So much questions. I think i need to buy more stuff in your shop or spend you some coffees/beers if i ever see you in person :)!

    thanks again and have a nice evening — mirko

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #27818

    In general, it’s best to “push” your aerobic threshold (AeT) up from below. In contrast, your anaerobic threshold (AnT) can be both “pushed” from below and “pulled” from above.

    Remind me: Your AnT HR is ~170, correct? If so, then you’ll want to do almost all of your training below your AeT until AnT/AeT = 1.10 or less.

    If AnT stays at ~170, then you’ll want AeT to climb at least to 155 before you start adding much intensity. (With proper training, both thresholds could rise, so don’t assume that AnT will always be ~170.)

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #27819

    For Training Peaks, the “threshold” number to enter in your Settings is 170. Everything in Training Peaks references the anaerobic threshold, not the aerobic.

    AnT isn’t the best benchmark for training, but it’s probably ideal for measuring fatigue. With the TP threshold set at AnT, CTL and ATL will be good measures of training stress.

    Participant
    nullkru on #27831

    Wow thanks again Scott,

    your right my AnT HR is about 170 bpm. I recalculated TSS and set my upper Z2 to 151 bpm. I will
    set an alarm on my watch at 145 bpm from now on. Or is this to low to get a adequate training stimulus (as mentioned in the book)?

    –mirko

    Participant
    Rachel on #27851

    Have you thought about doing one more test at 153-155? You might not even be aerobically deficient and it would change what zones you spend your time in.

    Participant
    nullkru on #27880

    @rachelp, i will definitely retest it. After my injury when the docs allowed me to do intervals i almost did all my “endurance” work with higher intensity training. this is why i believe i developed serious ADS. After reading about in the book.

    now im curious how easy is to easy for a let’s say 90-120′ minute runs. sure some of them are recovery style runs. but if im feeling fresh should i run close to 150, or are 10+ beats under it still beneficial. to push my AeT. For real long runs 3-4h+ i think Z1-AeT is fine.

    greetings — mirko

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #27895

    Like Rachel, I suspect you don’t have ADS. When you find a pace where your HR drift is less than 5%, I suspect your heart rate will be higher than 150, perhaps even in the 160s.

    There’s no such thing as “too easy”, especially when you’re talking about 5-10 beats. If your AeT is 150, then 145 is 97% of AeT; 140, 93%.

    When your AeT and AnT thresholds are very close, and when the speeds are very fast, then a 10-beat difference may have a very different training effect (and you’ll be able to feel the difference). Until then though, I wouldn’t worry about it.

    Participant
    nullkru on #27942

    You’re just awesome! Thank you so much.

    Will definitely retest again. If my AeT is really higher. Does this mean i should be able to run “easily” e.g. 2+h at my AeT? Because i can’t imagine that. Or do i get it completely false?
    Or is this the case then?:

    When your AeT and AnT thresholds are very close, and when the speeds are very fast, then a 10-beat difference may have a very different training effect (and you’ll be able to feel the difference).

    hope i don’t annoy you to much. i just try to understand it completely. if i can re-read a chapter in the book about this please give me a hint ;).

    so wish you a great weekend. Thanks again Rachel and Scott!

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #27951

    Does this mean I should be able to run “easily” e.g. 2+h at my AeT?

    Not necessarily. For people new to training, the gap between AeT and AnT is usually quite large. With an undeveloped (or damaged) aerobic system, AeT will be quite slow. So new athletes can do almost all of their training at AeT.

    As athletes get fitter, the two thresholds converge. This usually means that AeT rises to meet AnT. It does so first by heart rate and then by pace.

    Once AeT and AnT paces are relatively close together, AeT is no longer “easy”. It’ll be almost as fatiguing as AnT work. The metabolic cost is low (~2 mM), but the neuromuscular fatigue is high.

    For example, I spent the first three years of my skimo training at AeT almost all of the time. By the fourth season, I just couldn’t tolerate the volume at AeT, so I had to train slower. And then much slower as my top speeds got faster. The good news is that once AeT and AnT are close, AeT training doesn’t need as much of a stimulus as it did in the beginning. Training slower will support it quite well.

    If you use Training Peaks to track your training, this is where their metrics really help because they’re based off of AnT. The TP metrics are not ideal for describing fitness, but they do a pretty good job of gauging fatigue.

    TP always measures fatigue based on AnT, so as AeT rises, the fatigue in Training Peaks from those workouts also rises.

    Does that make sense?

    P.S. Is there a lab near where you live that you could get a lactate test done? You seem serious enough about your training that I think you’d benefit from knowing exactly where your AeT is.

    Participant
    JGwartney on #27965

    Once AeT and AnT paces are relatively close together, AeT is no longer “easy”. It’ll be almost as fatiguing as AnT work. The metabolic cost is low (~2 mM), but the neuromuscular fatigue is high.

    Scott-
    Thanks for this explanation, it presents a clearer picture of what training progress will feel like. I hadn’t considered the transition from metabolic to neuromuscular stress.
    -Jon

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #28008

    Great! I’m glad it helps.

    I was really confused when it started happening to me. I thought things were going horribly wrong when in fact it was the opposite.

    Basically, with a lot of aerobic training Zone 3 will narrow–as Zones 1 and 2 grow–until it’s almost gone. You can see this on lactate curves as the inflection points get compressed toward the higher intensity part of the chart (on the right-hand side).

    Then things get really interesting as you can start to develop different “gears” above AeT for different types of events. For mostly steady-state events longer than two hours, you want AeT as far to the right (at as high an intensity) as possible. And an ultra-athlete may not be able to tolerate much time at all above AeT.

    For events shorter than two hours or those that are more stochastic, you want a flatter lactate curve above AeT to make time there more tolerable. (But still having AeT as high as possible.)

    But anyway, that’s a rabbit hole for another time…

    Participant
    JGwartney on #28027

    He said Stochastic!

    Participant
    nullkru on #28046

    Thanks Scott,
    yes it make sense now! My brain is a bit hard wired to the “classic” 5Z system. Now i slowly get it :)!
    I will do a Lab test in the future. But right now i still get my body used to the volume i want (Injury this Feb. several stressfractures in my hip. Long time off from running and now slowly ramping up my volume).

    Last year i ran a bit over 700h with 314,605m vert and 6,649.38 km. Then in the winter i made a dumb failure (not decreasing volume and paied enough attention to my recovery).

    If i’m feeling good next week i will redo the AeT Test. Slowly i think i need todo more Workouts in Z1.

    have a great day all — mirko

    Participant
    nullkru on #28189

    Hi again,

    so today i did another AeT test run. This time i tried to run between 151 – 159 bpm. Effectively i ran between 160 and 164 bpm.
    This time with a minimal success. For the 1h testing part my avg. HR was 161bpm, with a Pa:Hr of 0.36% (at least not negative again ;)). Definitely felt my legs, the breathing was elevated and i think i couldn’t sustain that effort for another hour. I hope i did this correct.

    I think now i’m at a point where a lab test would make sense. Because i don’t trust my testing.

    I will set the top of Z2 to 161bpm and will definitely do my next runs in Z1. Right? The spread between AnT and AeT is now definitely lower than 10%.

    Here’s the link to the test: http://tpks.ws/T2XXUPNJISRMQMYPOJ36GVMCXQ

    Hope to get another feedback from you guys. Have a great day — mirko

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.