[rita]

rita on April 30, 2021 at 10:07 am · in reply to: Training Peaks Odd TSS readings #53523

This page has useful information on TSS & how to adjust it for trails (it suggests using hrTSS and then adjusting it based on certain factors such as the elevation gain or weight carried to account for the higher training stress): https://uphillathlete.com/trainingpeaks-metrics-ctl-tss/

[rita]

rita on April 17, 2021 at 8:11 pm · in reply to: Solid/ Real Food during 50k #53213

Potato hashbrown, waffles/pancakes, avocado sushi, pb&j on toast, baby food fruit purees, fresh fruit (pineapple, watermelon, berries)

[rita]

rita on March 26, 2021 at 9:24 am · in reply to: Z3 uphill intervals #52424

Following (in the same boat)

[rita]

rita on March 26, 2021 at 9:13 am · in reply to: Calculating TSS (Training Stress Scores) #52423

There’s also this page: https://uphillathlete.com/trainingpeaks-metrics-ctl-tss/

[rita]

rita on March 17, 2021 at 4:13 pm · in reply to: Garmin HR zones vs TP Zones #52136

That training calculator doesn’t mention zone 5. The uphill athlete book has an explanation on the 5 zone model, where zone 5 has no associated heart rate to measure intensity since the duration at this zone is too short (8-60sec) for HR to reflect. What I did in Garmin was set Zone 4 to be from LT to an approximate max HR, and Z5 to be above that which my HR would never actually reach during training.

[rita]

rita on February 23, 2021 at 12:34 pm · in reply to: Upper body strength #51161

Thanks Alison, I will try the eccentric lowering for the push-ups, sounds like a great idea. I’ve been adding in more upper body sessions with knee push-ups, table rows and negative pull-ups and chin-ups which I’m actually starting to notice some improvement in! Another factor I was thinking of is perhaps not eating enough.

[rita]

rita on February 8, 2021 at 12:33 pm · in reply to: Upper body strength #50587

Thanks! Nice to hear that I’m not the only one with the very slow progression and quick strength loss. I like the suggestions of doing these workouts more often in a week, especially since the upper body is not used as much day-to-day, and focusing on building up that neuromuscular connection. It seems like I’m not doing them often enough which might be key. I’ll try progressing to the knee push-ups after I’m more comfortable with the incline push-ups and start incorporating the assisted pull-ups.

[rita]

rita on January 8, 2021 at 6:46 pm · in reply to: Interpreting AeT drift test #49032

Just following up with my benchmark test for ~180 without drift: tpks.ws/2UV3Y3UZB5KK7TI4FEYTRMETSU

This was done on a 1% incline and treadmill was set to constant 7:55 pace (footpod’s paces shown still not super accurate). Felt pretty amazing and a comfortable moderate effort! I think outside this may be slower.

[rita]

rita on January 6, 2021 at 1:45 pm · in reply to: Interpreting AeT drift test #48917

Sounds good! Most of my runs are much slower than those two runs I posted, so having to train at a mostly 9:30 pace (even considerably slower than that) is not a problem for me – I’ve become so accustomed to these zen-like runs that I really enjoy them and prefer them so much 🙂 On the trails I’ve been mixing in a lot of hiking, usually for uphills to ensure the intensity is low, and generally focusing on more time on feet above else. During the last year I’ve noticed I’ve become a lot more fatigue resistant, recovering faster and needing less food which has been great! But I wish I had known about UA and these drift tests earlier on as it would’ve been interesting to see the data on the progress like you have. Those are some great results for that training load and such short time! It’d be interesting to see how much that’d improve if you added more volume.

Thanks for the forum suggestions, lots of great stuff here. I’ll be sure to add Scott’s routine 🙂 I’ve been getting some lower back pain during extended steep climbing sessions that I suspect may have something to do with core strength/posture, so think this could really help with that too.

[rita]

rita on January 6, 2021 at 10:31 am · in reply to: Interpreting AeT drift test #48901

Hmm, seems like this forum spam filter doesn’t like the full TP links, my response didn’t go through:

I’m not sure what my pace on the treadmill for those tests was set to (wish I recorded, but was only concerned for HR data at the time), but I suspect the footpod was not that accurate. I will follow-up with my results for a new test with hopefully more accurate data. But for some comparison, here are the TP workouts for a couple runs I did outside where I averaged around 8:55ish or so at 163-167bpm: tpks.ws/35NW5AXYETOPBTI4FEYTRMETSU & tpks.ws/VUVJW2W2TNHXFTI4FEYTRMETSU.

Thanks for the lactate meter link. Did you find these drift tests to give you high correspondence to the lactate tests (or GET/MET)? Not sure how confident I should be of my results. Seems like the meter would be useful for the benchmark pace tests since HR fluctuates so much if I wanted more accuracy & tracking.

I’ve saved Scott’s Killer core workout after I discovered it yesterday and intend to try it out, looks good 🙂 My current strength training routine is mostly climbing (usually hiking up steep grades, running down) which I’ve found to be very effective for lower body, and some bar work for upper body (incline push-ups, hanging leg raises and such), although I cannot do Scott’s full leg raise version and have much room for improvement 🙂

[rita]

rita on January 5, 2021 at 1:34 pm · in reply to: Interpreting AeT drift test #48838

Thanks Reed! That’d be awesome if I could get to those speeds. I’m currently focusing on Lake Sonoma 50 this April that I would like to improve for. Those zone ranges sound great and my perceived efforts at those zones match up to the intensity descriptions in the TftUA book. A huge portion of my training has been under 165 or so, so I will stick to that as my primary zone, and it sounds like then I should also add some Z3-4 sessions to help improve my aerobic speed, perhaps once weekly starting with Z3 to help build up more muscular endurance.

For my AnT calculation, I arrived at 195 since Joe Friel’s method requires you take the average of the last 20mins (perhaps to account for cardiac lag), but the average of the entire 30mins (192) that you took seems like a better approximation as that’s when I usually feel I’m at my capacity when running outside, although I will round down to 190 as you suggested to be conservative.

For my drift tests, I calculated the drifts by taking the averages of the two halves instead of the Pa:Hr shown (since my footpod seemed to have thrown out some inaccurate pace changes), and I considered the starting heart rate where it stabilized as the test AeT, instead of the average HR of the entire hour, as described in the article. I also just recently conducted a nasal breathing test outside where I gradually ramped up and concluded with spending several minutes around 185 (sustainable, but I wouldn’t say comfortable). Using 180 as a ballpark sounds good though so that my Z3 training range is not too narrow to target.

I’m not sure of the significance of 3% incline that was suggested in the article for the treadmill drift test, but I am thinking to do a new test for my current aerobic speed at around 180 on a 1% grade (that may translate better to outdoor speed on flat), to set as a benchmark for myself, after some better footpod calibration. I think it should be currently somewhere between 8:00-8:30/mi.

Thanks again!