HEARTRATE TRAINING MISTAKES RUNNERS MAKE | Sage Canaday Run Tips and Advice 

its more aerodynamic

i noticed the hair first too, haaa! Makes him look younger

😂

I always get a haircut before a big race. Makes me feel faster

i m world class runner,check kipchoge his last 200m when he won 5k at the world that sprinting for him ,but berlin WR is marathon/endurance pace bro god bless

Driss Dacha i know man, that was a joke just to emphasize how fast Kipchoge is.

4:30 pace definitely feels like a sprint to me and I train everyday XD

Driss Dacha looked you up. Story checks out lol.

@@drissdacha6743 glad to see world-class runners watch sage

If you have no serious health issues, go for it. Still I think you don't really need to do the test if you are not a pro. Hill repeats is probably the quckest way to reach your real max heart rate. (or very close to it)

If you running all out everytime, your heart can potential give in due to working above your ideal workout heart rate. So even if the devices are 10b/min out, it still going to keep you and your heart save.

45 min all out can be quite tricky to do. Why not 30 min all out and take the last 20 as a reference?

I cant seem to find this. Can you post a link?

DJ Deen you need a Garmin watch and search in the Garmin Connect IQ app

Source?

@@gaythugsmatter7029 likely experience.

There's another one near his left ear

Me too. I was about to search for a video that was a solid color to check my TV. Thankfully I checked the comments first.

Same here. I started checking if my monitor was still in warranty much before I had the eureka moment.

Glad I saw the comment, cause I was planning on searching for a panel test. Phew

God, I already order a new monitor

How did u calculate your lactate hr?

I really like the 30 minute test run. Last time I did the test, the very bottom of zone 1 was almost exactly the same as my MAF heart rate. So almost all the easy running I do is above MAF, but it's still really easy. 80/20 is great. Hope it's working well for you.

Don't risk it bro. I disagree with this extreme sounding advice.

HR watch good tool for progress/success ,monitor u recovery ,detect fatigue ,other stuff ,i m coach any 1 need personal coaching ,like make boston qualifier etc,,,can contact me at my face book ,same name as my youtube name,

There's a massive genetic component to max HR.

SomeAssemblyRequired yeah I’m 24 and have hit 208-210 quite a few times on high efforts. So can agree it’s definitely different for everyone else

True. I always thought my max was 205 but this got me thinking. I can hold 183 for 95 minutes (90%) and I’m not even close to being pro. Max might be higher than 205..

True. I always thought my max was 205 but this got me thinking. I can hold 183 for 95 minutes (90%) and I’m not even close to being pro. Max might be higher than 205..

Peter Appelt I think using power zones is just as effective as using heart rate zones or perceived effort zones. In all three cases, we pick a number and then create zones based on a percentage of that number. Perceived effort is great for experienced runners who can judge pace/effort by feel. The only problem is when other factors of fatigue (glycogen depletion, dehydration, altitude, etc.) throws off perception. When considering technology- running by heart rate, GPS pace, or power each have their pros and cons. In my opinion, the pros of power-based training more than compensate for the cons. Sage is right though- if you are running on technical trails (or extremely windy conditions or very mushy terrain) power meters will likely suffer in terms of accuracy.

The more data the better! I am even tracking my cadence...getting up to 180 steps per minute is tough!

I'd argue you could still use both. Clearly people throughout history were able to train without the use of technology to guide them. However, the technology gives us numeric values to gauge against our observations during training. If you are running at a perceived effort of "conversational pace" and your heart rate monitor is showing you in the high Aerobic or Threshold zone, then your preset heart rate training zones might be spaced too low. Or if you are running at a perceived effort of "hard," yet your heart rate monitor is showing you in the low Aerobic or Easy zone, then your preset heart rate training zones might be spaced to high. Since most of us don't have access to a lab, like you mentioned, the best we can do is use the technology as the tools they are, but make our own adjustments to get a bit better fine tuning.

Indication at 11:33

@@FTStratLP Im pretty sure that in another video he said the lab tested his VO2 Max to be 60. Im guessing the Garmin algorithms said his VO2 max was 80 i.e. this video

Also, all these generalized algorithms used by companies like garmin or in books like the jack daniel running formula reflect the averages of a tested population's results. The problem with this is that people can have greatly varied heart rates. There are 50 year old, world class, runners with a max heart rate above 200(emphasis on the 's' in runnerssssssss cause its not terribly uncommon). If those runners used 220 - their age formula then they would be over 30 beats off which is a lot. Again though, the formulas are an average and most people will fall around that formulas number than not. Its a good starting point

My Garmin Fenix has a very strange way of measuring vo2 max. It basically takes a measurement of speed vs. Hr the first 10 minutes of a run. Problem is, I might just be running slow intentionally and below my efficient speed at that point of my workout. Or I might be running uphill on a trail because my house is at the bottom of a hill. When I was on holiday and my run started on a downhill my Vo2 went up like 40% for a month. I told Garmin they should include altitude data and measure at more points in the run, but they never reply to any feedback.

my polar hr test gives me vo2max results about 56-58 and accurate test reveals my vo2max is 43 so... there you go

Same here , I get to 160 and I'm not even breathing through my mouth

Me too. I’m 38 and broke 1:30 in my half marathon and my heart rate range was 185-202bpm

It's not worthless, it's just not intended for those operating at the highest possible levels. For most people it's good enough. If you need better, that's what those lab tests can do.

You run how many days per week bro? Btw, that is a huge achievement! Congratulations. Keep going 👏🏾

@@FuhseiMain thanks man, and right now still sticking with 7 days a week but starting to feel pretty worn down

Cameron McKinney me too. I feel like I’m running so slowly but it’s always that high. Really sucks. I’m not sure how to combat it

Same, I’ll be chilling running at a SLOW pace to the point where if I go too much slower I’ll be speedwalking. Heart rate gets into that range so easily

Fulforce im the same bro. Im 20 y/o and my pace for easy runs are like 6:50/7:30 anywhere between (any slower it would feel like im speed walking) and my heart rate is ALWAYS around 160??? Wtf

1) are u comparing yourself to sage canaday? Don't. 2) what is your 5k pb and peak hr? If your easy runs are 160-180 and you do a sub 20 5k that would be wierd. Much more likely you're running a 5k closer to 30mins, you're overweight, or you're running "easy" at an unrealistic fast time. Oh, and I trust you're using a chest strap.

This shouldn't be considered as unusual and will likely depend on several factors: 1) Your maximum HR 2) Your overall fitness level 3) How often do you run 4) Bodyweight 1) Some people have unusually high HR - while mine was around 190 in early 20s, I've known other similarly aged athletes whose HR spiked to 210 or above. Consequentially, the percentage of the max HR was different for me and them 2) If you've had a long break from exercise, it may take up to couple weeks for the HR to set at lower values - even though your perceived effort feels the same 3) If you're involved with another sport, and only run occasionally as a cardio tool - your body is not being "optimised" for running. This should not be mistaken for being unfit. To put this into perspective, I used to row at a high level for a long time, meaning I'd only run here and there, and would mostly use rowing and cycling as cardio tools. So I could perform on rowing ergometer, in a boat or on a bike, but let's say that running at or below 5min/km would exert too much energy and my HR would easily spike to 160-170 even for just a jogging session. Nowadays, with additional 5-7kg of bodyweight, I tend to run a bit more frequently, and while my fitness level is not anywhere near what it used to be, I can pull the sub-5min/km pace much easier, but can't get even near the erg/bike scores I used to pull. 4) Bodyweight - it's really simple. With additional bodyweight, you just carry more weight and exert more energy - therefore higher HR. Runners body types are slim with no excess weight, or unnecessary body mass. These guys in the videos are just that - slim and efficient. The other thing is the VO2 max - all runners use the relative V02max figures, meaning that the absolute VO2max value is divided by the bodyweight. E.g. let's say there's two people with identical absolute VO2max (say 4500ml / min) but one of them weight 75kgs and the other one weighs 100kgs. Relative VO2max for a 100kg person would be 4500 / 100 = 45 ml/min/kg Relative Vo2max for a 75kg person would be 4500 / 75 = 60 ml/min/kg It is obvious that the 75kg person will perform much better than the 100kg person, meaning less effort for the same performance

i get real high start off readings upwards of 200, and i'm 47. It goes down by mile 2. Its not that i start off too fast, but something that happens when I swim and when I do yoga, something I refer to as "athletic shock". I run 10k. Half the time, I'll stop for 40 seconds in that first mile to lower the HR. Readings for HR after mile 1 goes down to 170

It's very common for a watch to mistake cadence and BPM. My Garmin does it too, especially on a sunny day when the sun is low somehow..

Rickey Gill Surely the meth method is cheating and illegal 😂

The solution seems to be to run it 13 secs faster. :)

Btw absolutely at the limit and collapse doing this.

I'm pretty much in the exact position as you. So many questions to how to train in a sensible way in regards to training zoens. I've recently read 80/20 endurance programme and downloaded a programme to my garmin off that site. There are various ones to choose from 5k up to ultra. Worth having a read and maybe try out a stable programme that teaches you to run at BPM rather than pace etc to get you used to the zones.

how old are u?

27

I ran my last half with a 175bpm avg. Im 45yrs old. I felt very ordinary upon finishing. It was 1hr 50mins. Yet in a lab test my lactate threshold was 175bpm?

@@dazamad Probably your HR-strap not working right :)

@@bikeinmotion i wish. My halfs before that were 173 and 170.

Maybe you dont breath in deep enough.

Because u r running too fast..slow down ur pace

To be honest I have found power zones are similar to lactate threshold heart rate zones.

Zone 1: Recovery (0 - 151 bpm) 7:35 7.3% Zone 2: Aerobic (152 - 160 bpm) 0:43 0.7% Zone 3: Tempo (161 - 169 bpm) 2:29 2.4% Zone 4: SubThreshold (170 - 178 bpm) 25:39 24.6% Zone 5A: SuperThreshold (179 - 183 bpm) 36:27 35.0% Zone 5B: Aerobic Capacity (184 - 189 bpm) 30:12 29.0% Zone 5C: Anaerobic Capacity (190 - 255 bpm) 1:08 1.1% This was from my last half marathon according to heart rate training I shouldn't have been able to race a half like this.