Muscle endurance and AeT

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #51771
    juskojj
    Participant

    Today I tried doing an AeT on my treadmill @10% incline. Did my 15min warm up, ramped up to my target HR (trying to see if I was within 10% of my AnT), I was around 4.7mph and u couldn’t walk that but could jog, breathing was easy but my legs were getting a bit heavy and little sore after about 30min so I didn’t keep going and slowed down to finish a workout.

    My question is should I try this outside again or do I need to work on muscle endurance?

    I’ve been at this since the end of last June and have been getting in 4hrs or more all in zone 2 as I’ve progressed. The route I take normally according to my wahoo is 357ft gain over 5miles, which is pretty flat.

    I’m just having a hard time believing I’m not within 10% after 6 month’s of continually zone 2 training getting an average of 4hrs or more a week in. Fora period of time, early on, I was getting 8hrs a week.

    Once I go back to work I should be able to maintain 4hrs a week of training but I don’t want to fall off.

    My last outdoor AeT test i did I was 160bpm with an Ant of 186, so I’m close. I know you say not to do any ME workouts in until within in 10% but being so close is there any harm in doing them? Or even doing more zone 1 and occasionally a zone 3?

  • Participant
    juskojj on #51853

    Lindsay,
    One other question, whats need to keep aerobic base and not loose? Basically how much training to maintain?

    Participant
    LindsayTroy on #51865

    I think this is a very personal question and may be better suited for a coaching call rather than a forum post. Sorry to not be more helpful

    Keymaster
    Shashi on #51903

    whats need to keep aerobic base and not loose? Basically how much training to maintain?

    As Lindsay mentioned, what is needed to maintain an aerobic base will depend on the individual.

    If you are looking for general guidelines, Scott provides some in this forum topic.

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #53348

    What Shashi and Lindsay said! Thanks, guys. Great answers.

    Steve: Why do you care what your max heart rate is? For training, it’s not helpful. It’s like knowing your VO2 max: fun to talk about at parties but knowing it is irrelevant in training.

    Participant
    russes011 on #53394

    Scott,

    I understand HR monitoring is a poor surrogate for perceived effort, and in general, has no proven benefit when it comes to race performance or outcomes, but we all like these gadgets nonetheless. They provide motivation and feedback on multiple levels.

    Although I never mentioned max HR in this post, I’m happy to play the devil’s advocate in defending it. Max Hr is an objective number, unlike say AeT HR, which is quite subjective and prone to significant variation.

    Ones max HR, for a given age range, is basically set in stone, it is what it is. Although max HR doesn’t predict race performance per se, it can predict Z2 pace based on population studies in both untrained and well-trained athletes. If you take nearly all the expert opinions (Daniel’s etc) out there, and all the scientific studies over the past decades, the average is about 75% of max HR. For the average person, this is what it is–we are sadly not all above average. If one has the health and ability to measure max HR, then this is the best way to determine a starting estimate for AeT (alternatively, one can use a percent of AnT HR, but alas, AnT HR is also subjective and variable). From there you can fine tune it with RPE and/or a series of drift tests over time, keeping in mind that on any given day it could vary. I understand the limitations of applying population studies to individuals, but the only thing less reliable to the individual than population studies is no studies at all. Hence, the old adage: “insurance is for those who are bad at math”.

    The RUB is that there really is no such thing–physiologically–as a aerobic threshold. At best its a range. Furthermore, when you define it with HR, due to the inaccuracies of HR, this value or range becomes even less accurate and more variable due to the following issues having significant effects on HR: hydration, sleep, emotions, diet macros, fasting status, weather, terrain, previous training, accidental bouts of harder efforts during the warm-up, the actual duration of the AeT drift test, etc. Determining aerobic fitness by a metric which uses a ratio of AeT to AnT, both of which are ranges at best, and via a measure (HR), which is prone to being confounded, may be less precise than we want it to be. This may partially explain @juskoff’s dilemma.

    Respectfully,

    Steve

    PS – I’m obviously no expert or professional coach. I tend to learn by making mistakes, or by folks correctly me when I’m wrong, which happens all the time.

    Participant
    juskojj on #53494

    @LINDSAYTROY
    One other question. I should have access to a 25story building in my city, since its a hotel/apartment complex so it’s public. My question is for strength training and ME should I start body weight or add weight like carrying a pack and for how long? Just go up all 25 flights or?

    I also have access to a stair stepper at work now so can I use that or be better off just doing step ups, split squats, ect..

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #53529

    @russes011:

    …we all like these gadgets nonetheless. They provide motivation and feedback on multiple levels.

    Sure, so use gadgets and metrics that mean something and improve performance, not ones that are irrelevant.

    Participant
    LindsayTroy on #53533

    I think these may be what you’re looking for @juskojj, I’m not a coach and therefore can’t really prescribe workouts, but hopefully looking at these will give you sufficient ideas! The general advise is to do a max strength block before doing a muscular endurance block.

    Muscular Endurance (ME) Workout: Water Carries

    FREE At Home Muscular Endurance Workout with Progression

    General Strength Training for Mountaineers and Climbers

    Participant
    russes011 on #53599

    Scott:

    You appear quite certain that using a percentage of maxHR to help determine training zones is never useful or relevant–point taken. I will of course defer to you on this topic and continue my reading to convince myself of the same.

    — Steve

    Moderator
    Scott Semple on #55275

    No, never. It’s way too generic to be useful for effective long-term training.

    However, relative heart rate measurements based on maximum are useful when comparing aerobic and anaerobic abilities between people. For example, some of my clients have aerobic and anaerobic thresholds as high as 87% and 91% of maximum HR. With clients that are new to structured training, I’ve seen those same thresholds at 65% and 80% of maximum HR.

    The huge variation is the main reason that generic formulas don’t work. If the first group trains with the second group’s prescriptions, they’ll lose fitness. If the second group uses the first group’s prescriptions, they’ll explode.

    But to compare individuals, using a hard-stop relative reference like maximum HR (or VO2Max or VLaMax) can be useful.

    Generic formulas (i.e. averages) describe populations, but they almost never describe individuals.

Viewing 10 replies - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.