Author Topic: Age vs Vertical  (Read 285675 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11918
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +6851
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3915 on: March 16, 2020, 05:43:45 pm »
0
I saw a guy in the gym today beasting on the bike, he was doing intervals i think. If you can ramp the difficulty up and then do tabata protocol (i think 6x20s on, with 20s rest?) it can be a great conditioning tool. Doing steady state with bike though, i find im better at challenging my legs than my heart and lungs .. hr sticks around 135bpm which is a bit too leisurely but still hard work for my legs..

tabata is 8x20s on/10s rest. and the "on" is all-out, like you're riding away from a lion that's catching up to you.
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

sunday: run 14+ km
monday: lift
tuesday: run 10-12 km
wednesday: run 10-12 km
thursday: run 10-12 km
friday: rest
saturday: run tempo/VO2 max/speed x 6-8 km

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3916 on: March 24, 2020, 05:35:01 am »
+2
19 March 2020

RUN 6.1K @ 37:48

Was 5K fast ( 29:00 ) and then 1.1K super slow



20 March 2020

RUN 7K @ 53:58

Went slow (7:49 average km pace ) , was supposed to be easy but average HR was 147 and watch said it was a VO2 max workout. Fail.



21 March 2020

RUN 5K @ 43:17

Watch said i was badly unrecovered and generally beat, so went ultra boring slow (8:30) to get a recovery workout.
Average heat rate was still 141 and watch said it was a pace workout. lol mega fail.



Aaaaaand , as of yesterday we are locked down. Solo running is still allowed though (but you need ID and a statement of where you live and why you are out ).

woot

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33001
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +8412
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3917 on: March 27, 2020, 10:28:55 pm »
+1
19 March 2020
Aaaaaand , as of yesterday we are locked down. Solo running is still allowed though (but you need ID and a statement of where you live and why you are out ).

damn..

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3918 on: March 31, 2020, 03:15:17 am »
+2
19 March 2020
Aaaaaand , as of yesterday we are locked down. Solo running is still allowed though (but you need ID and a statement of where you live and why you are out ).

damn..

It is fine, lockdown is the only way. Our government has shown immediate reflexes. Which is socking here, normally we are the worse. Maybe we were just lucky because the worst case in the world happened in Italy, right next to us, with a time delay of 2-3 weeks. So we saw a live demonstration of what is coming and locked down everything while still having very low numbers. It looks under control for now, authorities say we will stay locked down for another 4 weeks ( already 2-3 in ) and then re-evaluate.



26 March 2020

RUN 6K @ 48:19

Goal was an ultra-slow get-back-at it , achieved, watch agreed , said it was a base-focused slow pace workout.



29 March 2020

HIIT SESSION:

-1K @ 4:56
-500m @ 2:34
-400m @ 1:53
-5x200m ( slowest 51'' / fastest 45.9'' )
Slow jog 1K @ 8:30

Rest between sprints was slow walk ~200m ( so rest time about 2:30 ).

Watch said it was a pace workout. lol NOT , it was exhausting.



30 March 2020

RUN 4.65K @ 35:25

Watch said i was 100% recovered so i went for a fast 5K.
lol NOT , after 2K at a pace around 6:00 ( which felt hard as race pace , so high 4s/low5s ) i gassed out. Walked a bit , dropped HR down, slow jogged about 2K. HR was close to 150 and was getting tired even when going very slow. Makes sense after yesterday's brutal HIIT. Said fuck you garmin, im beat, called it a day and walked back home.



GARMIN guys : I have serious indications that my Garmin's GPS is not that accurate. Google maps and my samsung phone GPS agree on the mileage of the courses i do, garmin says it is less. That also kinda agrees with the paces i see sometimes and how they feel: I know im going faster, but watch thinks i covered less distance so it says i was slower.
Does anyone have similar experience? Have you tested your watches in terms of course distance accuracy?
woot

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3919 on: April 08, 2020, 10:31:35 am »
+1
1 Week of bad weather. Tons of rain, wind, even a bit of snow. Looks like it's over for good now, entering good old Greek spring.

De-trained period ending watch data : VO2max = 43, estimated race times 5K 25:58 / 10K 57:02

7 April 2020

RUN 6K @ 42:22
Went 5K comfortable ( 34:02 ) and then 1K slow cooldown (8:20 )
Average HR : 139
Watch workout benefit assessment : pace (keeping medium paces for long time ) , agree.
woot

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3920 on: April 09, 2020, 07:29:50 am »
+2
8 April 2020

RUN 6.15K @ 48:39
Went slow, goal was recovery.
Average HR : 139
Watch workout benefit assessment : base ( low impact running ) , agree.

However, estimated VO2max is on a decrease status, still 43 but 5K estimated PR has gone up to 26:05.
To make this even worse, 'body battery' is at 5% since yesterday after the run, it didn't improve at all at sleep (7hrs) and today 5K PR has gone to 26:10. Meh.
woot

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3921 on: April 13, 2020, 12:13:33 pm »
+2
10 April 2020

HIIT SESSION

-Warmup jog 1K

C1a : Sprint 400m @ +90% ( fastest : 1:47 / 4:31km pace , slowest 1:55 / 4:47km pace )
C1b : Recovery walk 200m
C1 info : 6 rounds

-Cooldown jog 1K

Total 5.7K @ 42:28

Watch workout benefit assessment : anaerobic endurance, agree.



11 April 2020

Mixed running comfrotable and recreational walking, total ~5K @ ~40'

Watch workout benefit assessment : base ( low impact running ) , agree.
woot

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3922 on: April 14, 2020, 05:31:36 am »
+2
13 April 2020

RUN 6K @ 40:41
Went 5K just a bit faster than comfortable ( 31:06 ) and then 1K very slow cooldown ( 9:35 )
Average HR : 147
Watch workout benefit assessment : limit (muscle endurance/fatigue resistance) , disagree, felt more like pace (medium effort).
woot

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3923 on: April 21, 2020, 04:22:56 am »
+2
Massive update:

16 April 2020

RUN 5K @ 31:02
Cool down 1.5K
TOTAL : 6.5K @ 44:49
Watch workout benefit assessment : base, disagree it was between pace and limit.




17 April 2020

RUN 8.6K @ 1:02:54
Watch workout benefit assessment : limit , disagree, went slow and easy, felt like it, HR was high but I was fresh in the end, had another 5K very easy.



18 April 2020

HIIT SESSION

-Warmup jog 1K

C1a : Sprint 400m @ +90% ( best was 1:41/4:17 pace, 2020 PR )
C1b : Recovery walk 200m
C1 info : 8 rounds ( +2 rounds )

-Cool down jog 1K

Total 6.45K @ 46:43

Watch workout benefit assessment : anaerobic endurance, agree.



19 April 2020

Recreational walk 3K



20 April 2020

RUN 5K @ 27:35
Cool down 2.2K
Total 7.2K @ 47:05
Watch workout benefit assessment : VO2max (training for long time above lactic threshold), agree.

Started as an up-tempo 5K aiming for anything below 30:00 , at 2K i was keeping 5:45 relatively easy so decided to turn it to time trial. Had a few reserves left at the end, still 2nd fastest 5K of 2020.



Remarks from latest sessions:
-Garmin's GPS/distance assessment is accurate AF , it was the phone that was missing it sometimes.
-Apart from that last 5K time trial which was on road, all the other workouts this month were done on grass/soil. Turns out road is much faster. That has been fooling my watch too about my capacity/ability, but it saw the light too yesterday with the 5K time trial: estimated 5K race dropped from 25:50 to 25:20 and i wasn't ever recovered.
-Started being aware of my foot-strike and trying to adjust it. Feels like heel-middle-front is better ( faster, more force at each stride ) than my normal middle-front, is that correct?
woot

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11918
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +6851
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3924 on: April 21, 2020, 12:38:31 pm »
+2
i think it's a mistake to overanalyze your foot strike. it'll naturally be different at different paces and on different surfaces and may change over time as you get stronger and fitter. being too intentional about it is a recipe for injury IMHO. there's no universal "ideal" footstrike or running posture.

cool to see you adding volume steadily.
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

sunday: run 14+ km
monday: lift
tuesday: run 10-12 km
wednesday: run 10-12 km
thursday: run 10-12 km
friday: rest
saturday: run tempo/VO2 max/speed x 6-8 km

Coges

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2798
  • Respect: +1985
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3925 on: April 21, 2020, 08:17:16 pm »
+1
i think it's a mistake to overanalyze your foot strike. it'll naturally be different at different paces and on different surfaces and may change over time as you get stronger and fitter. being too intentional about it is a recipe for injury IMHO. there's no universal "ideal" footstrike or running posture.

cool to see you adding volume steadily.

Could we say that heel first is a recipe for disaster though? I think anything other that that is where you want to be.
"Train as hard as possible, as often as possible, while staying as fresh as possible"
- Zatsiorsky

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3926 on: April 23, 2020, 04:18:03 am »
+1
^^^
You guys are right. I don't know where i got this heel strike thing from. Thankfully i wasn't able to be aware of my foot strike during the last 5K time trial, so went normally. Only at previous session ( 400m intervals on grass ) i applied what i logged. Now that i read a few more things, i see the only thing worse than changing your foot strike is changing it to heel strike LOL.  :uhhhfacepalm:
LBSS right about volume but maybe too much, felt beat, watch agrees, last week volume is bigger than current fitness level. But i knew i had 2 heavy rain days coming up so it was kinda planned over-reaching. Now gotta slowly make my fitness reach this volume level. Lets see...
woot

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11918
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +6851
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3927 on: April 23, 2020, 08:59:01 am »
+2
i think it's a mistake to overanalyze your foot strike. it'll naturally be different at different paces and on different surfaces and may change over time as you get stronger and fitter. being too intentional about it is a recipe for injury IMHO. there's no universal "ideal" footstrike or running posture.

cool to see you adding volume steadily.

Could we say that heel first is a recipe for disaster though? I think anything other that that is where you want to be.

no, i don't even think that's necessarily true. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2014/oct/09/is-heel-striking-the-enemy-of-good-running-form
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

sunday: run 14+ km
monday: lift
tuesday: run 10-12 km
wednesday: run 10-12 km
thursday: run 10-12 km
friday: rest
saturday: run tempo/VO2 max/speed x 6-8 km

Coges

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2798
  • Respect: +1985
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3928 on: April 23, 2020, 08:18:21 pm »
+2
i think it's a mistake to overanalyze your foot strike. it'll naturally be different at different paces and on different surfaces and may change over time as you get stronger and fitter. being too intentional about it is a recipe for injury IMHO. there's no universal "ideal" footstrike or running posture.

cool to see you adding volume steadily.

Could we say that heel first is a recipe for disaster though? I think anything other that that is where you want to be.

no, i don't even think that's necessarily true. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2014/oct/09/is-heel-striking-the-enemy-of-good-running-form

I should clarify what I see when I think of heel strike. I see that leg fully extended and straight. Overstriding and that massive force going through the heel being partially cushioned by the mattress being worn under the guise of a shoe (otherwise knows as Hokas).

I read the article though and here's what stood out to me:

- heel striking is generally seen to be less than ideal.
- studies suggest that changing foot strike can just change the loaded area for potential injury
- speeding up cadence will positively affect running form (=less heel strike)
- researchers found at the 5 mile stage of a marathon 93% of runners were heel striking (fewer of the faster runners landed on their heels)
- foot strike cannot an independant change. Alterations to cadence and strengthening must be taken into consideration
- AND anyone who commented in the article runs doesnt' heel strike haha

I really like this article too.
https://therunningclinic.com/runners/blog/archives-anglaises/why-a-majority-of-runners-even-among-international-elites-are-heel-strikers/

With the main points being:
3. The majority of these good level athletes, however, have what we call a"prorioceptive heel strike" (the foot flattens smoothly as soon as it hits the ground). We believe this way the foot grounds is no more harmful and no less effective than midfoot or forefoot striking because it doesn't involve a strong braking phase or brutal impact force.

and

6. The heel strike is not the only thing to look at. A heel strike may be acceptable if the shinbone is vertical, the knee is bent, and the impact loads just in front of the center of gravity. A biomechanical analysis must therefore be global. The 4 biomechanical clues which often combine and express the same problem are:

- less vertical orientation of the tibia/shinbone
- deceased knee flexion during contact
- ground contact far ahead of the center of gravity
- the heel strikes the ground first


So maybe in summary, heel strike under the right conditions isn't a bad thing. Heel strike for the general population without consideration of overall running form potentially is.
"Train as hard as possible, as often as possible, while staying as fresh as possible"
- Zatsiorsky

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5259
  • Respect: +3108
    • View Profile
Re: Age vs Vertical
« Reply #3929 on: April 24, 2020, 12:42:48 pm »
0
^^^
Good info! I think ill go with 'natural' for now, keeping an eye for too intense heel strike.

23 April 2020

RUN 7K @ 46:50
Went comfortable at all times.
Watch workout benefit assessment : limit. I disagree, it was a pace workout. HR was high ( average 148 ) but it was easy and was kinda fresh at the end.
woot