[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on January 8, 2020 at 6:25 pm · in reply to: Cycling as a mean to build AeT #35777

Thanks, Scott! As always, I have a few follow up questions but I’ll try to find some answers over the next few months by training and chipping away at ADS.

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on January 6, 2020 at 5:59 pm · in reply to: Cycling as a mean to build AeT #35615

Just saw this thread and it raised an ongoing question I can’t seem to answer. My experience biking – which I do at least once a week simply because I love riding and it gives my legs a day off – seems to be the opposite of what most everyone else experiences. My AeT is 135-140 (I do the field test every few weeks). I can bike at that HR forever. It is much easier for me than holding AeT while running. I can literally sing, not just talk, without losing my breath. I usually cap a ride at 90 min simply because I’m out of time, but I feel like I could go on indefinitely. Secondly, there is no significant speed decrease over that time at that HR. Running at AeT certainly isn’t hard but it’s not as easy as biking. I assumed that biking AeT must be higher, but after reading this thread I’m more confused by my experience. If anyone has a thought or just just a guess, I’d appreciate it!

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 13, 2019 at 9:32 am · in reply to: pa:hr on Training Peaks free version #34314

Thanks, rachelp. I tried to upload a screen shot but it didn’t work. Maybe I’ll go back to TP Premium too! ?

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 13, 2019 at 9:26 am · in reply to: pa:hr on Training Peaks free version #34313

Thanks for the polar tip, JeremyG. I still have my older polar watch and HR7 strap. I’ll give it a try. I knew there would be a reason to keel it.

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 10, 2019 at 2:44 pm · in reply to: pa:hr on Training Peaks free version #34092

Sorry “Gal” is supposed to be “gap” – thank you auto correct.

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 10, 2019 at 2:42 pm · in reply to: pa:hr on Training Peaks free version #34091

Maybe I’m understanding it incorrectly. I mean a pa:hr of 1.56%, so under the 5% ceiling. BUT: As I reviewed the last test I concluded that I began too slow and with too low HR. I believe that accounts for the low pa:hr. So I retested and took better care not to have slow down between warm up and starting the test. Came out significantly higher pa:hr of 5% and change. So – if I’m understanding how the pa:hr percentage data works – I’ve still improved but just need to keep going as is. My AeT to LT Gal is 15%. I know that’s still high but it’s better than the 18% I started with.

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 10, 2019 at 2:05 pm · in reply to: Why would HR go down on a steep hill ? #34084

I second Dada re: wrist/optical HR. They seem to work for some people, but for me personally I only use wrist HR to check HR during the day and when I wake up. If I’m running, I use a strap. There are a couple ways to make wrist HR better: warm up for a good 15 min or so. I find it takes optical HRMs a bit to “lock on”. When I don’t have or forget my strap for some reason I always assume that my HR will be erratic and impossibly high and low for a mile or so. Second, experiment and see if it works better on the other wrist or turned so that the sensor is underneath (palm side) your wrist. Also try moving it up your arm a bit and cranking it down tight. Finally, get a strap if you can afford it. My Garmin HRM run (i have the black one with the snap on pod) works great. Used to use a polar H7. One not very secret trick is to use a little electrode gel on the strap sensors, especially when it’s cold and dry out.

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 9, 2019 at 8:28 pm · in reply to: pa:hr on Training Peaks free version #34032

Thanks Scott. I contacted TP and they said the same thing. I did a test today outside on a gentle loop and pa:hr was 1.56. So I think my AeT has improved quite well over the past months of following your guidelines for ADS. I’m edging closer to the 10% rule. I’m at around 12% and plan on sticking with running below AeT to get to 10. With that pa:hr, is it safe to assume that I could start my next test (in a month or so) at a higher HR? Since reading and following Taft UA I’ve seen improvement like nothing else I’ve tried before. I’m all in. Thanks!

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on December 8, 2019 at 4:41 pm · in reply to: pa:hr on Training Peaks free version #33959

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate it. I suspect you’re right. It’s ok for a general idea I suppose, but it would be nice to see both halves of a workout. Had premium for a while but let it lapse – maybe after Christmas….

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on November 18, 2019 at 7:53 pm · in reply to: HR Spikes? Is a little ok? #32235

Thanks, Scott. I’ve been good at keeping below AeT until the past couple days when HR spiked just a bit. I’m sticking with below AeT for certain. Would you recommend a just little bit of higher intensity leading up to a mountain 50k in January?

Brian

[Brian Vickers]

Brian Vickers on November 18, 2019 at 10:07 am · in reply to: Training Peaks calculated threshold #32170

I had the same thing from TP after running a 1/2 marathon I decided to jump into basically as a sort of AnT experiment. TP (I only have the free version) notified me that my LT was up to 173 which is a few beats over consistent road self-tests (Friel guidelines). After looking at the data and how long I ran at or over LT (1:26 out of 1:44) the adjusted number makes sense. I’ll stick with that unless another self-test tells me otherwise. For me, it just meant a new AnT number. I didn’t adjust AeT zone 2 for it. I only see it affecting what little z4 training I do (10-20% annual).