This was a very clear explanation. As a Canadian covid-confinement 50+ year-old running newby, I find that the level of information required to run intelligently is underestimated. This clarifies a lot while telling how you change your plan was also interesting. I had two easy runs this week. I was fast and really easy in the first. In the second, I was much slower and struggling. I believe this is just daily form but I lack the experience you have of knowing how to best adjust on the fly. Hearing how experienced runners do it helps me a lot to try.
Ted King’s channel is also is full of amazing gravel racing content. He seems to be a really down to earth guy. Glad to see you’re supporting another endurance athlete’s business. Kudos to you👍🏻.
Thanks, I didn’t know Ted had a channel actually but I’ll be sure to check it out! Here’s a link for anyone else interested who might be reading this - this is the co-founder of Untapped who I mentioned: ru-vid.com
I noticed I too had that tendency to do my easy runs way too fast. Happy to see I'm not alone. Guess I need to use the "discussion" trick more. Thanks for the great videos!
Thanks for the video, Jeff. Learning so much with your training diaries episodes. I intentionally keep all my running simple as premise and, in this sense, I think perceived exertion is a key component. I often take a look at my HR data after my workouts, but I've never paid attention on it while running.
Running with chest heart rate is not only useful for one run its a very good effort tracking method. Encouraging people not to use/learn how to use hr zones is not really a good advice in my opinion, especially for beginners. When you are more advanced and you know how a zone2 run feels like it doesnt matter that much if you have a hr strap or not, thats true. When summer comes and the weather is getting warmer its really good to know how your body is compensating and you can adjust the paces etc. I could say 10 other reasons why its useful to use HR data. Dont forget every data is good if the person knows how to understand it and use it smartly (if its accurate and reliable).
I appreciate your comment and your point-of view, but I disagree especially when it comes to newer runners. Heart-rate is even more useless for beginners, for all of the reasons I mentioned. For example, what's a "good" heart-rate, and what does it mean if it's higher or lower on one day vs another? (There can be a number of factors) What about if it changes over time as fitness improves, should we still try to keep our heart-rate 'low'? I think you'll find that most coaches will agree with my recommendation of running based on perceived effort.
Yes, I believe this does matter for beginners. Yes, if you are using data to inform your training, you will want to retest regularly to account for physiological changes. Yes, you should still try to keep your heart rate low (for endurance sports). Perceived effort is fine for very experienced runners, but beginners are absolutely notorious for misjudging what "easy" running is. For many beginners who start later in life, they may not even be able to maintain a running pace in the appropriately low zone (depending on a litany of factors like everything else). RPE is completely subjective. If your heart rate is varying from one run to another, there is a reason. You shouldn't throw that data away because it doesn't match how you felt that day.
Yes I believe in HR zones too. For me somedays it’s almost impossible to know if I am on Z3 or beginning of Z4. Also sometimes I have a z5 interval session scheduled, I feel I am all out but in reality I am still half way on my z4 (for any specific reason my body is just not ready to reach z5), I just bailout and do a recovery run instead. I think it’s very personal choice (and yes I do a VO2Max test every 2 or 3 months to recalculate the zones).
Great video Jeff! For anyone interested in really nerding out on the physiology of energy metabolism, lactate, and the aim of zone 2 workouts, I can't recommend enough the two interviews Peter Attia did with Inigo San Milan.
Really enjoying all your videos! Having watched this, I agree that doing my training sessions against RPE rather than HR does make more sense. I always felt HR training could be a bit hit and miss in that my HR could often read very differently to how i was feeling and didnt seem right. I suspect that is down to the factors you have mentioned in this video. Keep the training diaries coming as look forward to them each week!
Thank you so much for making this video. Because this is something I've been paying a lot more attention to, I had also asked about your HR training on Strava. This video made me realize I'm hyperfocusing on numbers that probably aren't even all that relevant. As always, amazing content. Thank you so much for what you do.
This was great! Just had a max effort today and ran besides a slown moving bus that helped me keep up speed. More on tresholds would be nice! Thanks Jeff!
This one was very informative, thanks :) Im glad you make these training diaries - its a lot of good info for us beginner runners but I believe some veterans of the sport can take some from these too :) Stay healthy!
Spot on analysis in my view. Thats why the Kenyan's run their slow runs at close to 6min/km and then kill themselves on the hard runs........Another reason why all of the fancy pancy watches these days should be ignored. Running has always been, and will always be about feel. Ask Arthur Lydiard, NZ's greatest athletic coach.
Perceived effort matches the bodies variable rhythms, state of fatigue and stress plus environmental conditions better than any watch or formula ever can.
Thanks for sharing your experience on this subject Jeff! Two questions I had: 1) What number on the RPE scale would you say correlates to your AT and LT readings from the lab? 2) And are you aware if running has any different type of affect on lactate buildup vs hiking if the RPE is the same?
AT is likely around 3-4 RPE. LT is considered to be around 10K pace so probably around 8-9. Technically, RPE would be the same for hiking really hard up a really steep climb vs running on a flat surface with the same effort. That's what's so great about it, it controls for terrain as well.
Another useful video Jeff. Food for thought, and personally I agree with not over engineering things. But no lab here to do all those tests… and in Switzerland it would probably cost an arm and a leg haha
Really enjoying the training vids. Was wondering if at end of training vids or at some other time you do a vid on what your training week looks like when you are not actually training for a race. What does a week training to just maintain fitness base, no over training or injuries looks like. A training base that you could easily ramp up to a training schedule for a race you joined last minute or a long fast packing weekend like the vids you have done of those before. Thanks! Jose
I've been using "Brix" gels, maple made gels also. Made in Quebec since I think 2014. 1 to 3 ingredients depending on the flavor you choose. I'll take a look at untapped when I have a chance.
Great video, I try to go on RPE however I have two problems 1 knowing where I am on the scale. Would love to see you do a video with you running, progressing up the scale showing how much you should be able to speak etc while doing the different numbers 2 when to back off. Say if I’m aiming to do an effort at scale 4 do I slow down before I think I’m going into scale 5 or do I wait until I think I’m in 5 then slow down? Any help would be great thanks from the Uk
Really enjoying your training diaries videos, Jeff. Thanks so much for sharing your activities and theories/tactics behind them. I'd be curious to hear your input on the "right" RPE level to target for easy runs. I've noticed that I tend to run faster paces on my 1 hour easy runs than my weekly long runs, even though my effort level seems to be lower on the easy days than on my long days.
Glad you mentioned that 220-age method. This is the one I've always used as a casual exerciser, and have always been suspicious of it as a useful indicator. Indoor biking is my main routine, and even very low resistance and low speed, I'm hitting the 130 bpm area (~70% of Max HR), which is the same HR as a faster speed, at least for the first 30minutes or so.
Huh interesting. I need to figure out my hiker pace. I too want to charge up a mountain only to stop a quarter of the way feeling like I want to collaspe and then forced to go much slower. Also thank you for the entertainment while I recover from a cold.
I have always trained using perceived exertion. First because in my early running years there was no such thing as smart watches. Then I started experimenting using HR zones based on my threshold heart rate. I found that perceived exertion was a very accurate way of measuring if I was training too hard or not hard enough. Now, I've gone back to just perceived exertion and pace. Heart rate zones are just too iffy and therefore not very helpful.
Thanks for another great informative vid, Jeff! I notice you often wear AirPods during your long runs on the trails. What do you listen to - music, podcasts? Do you listen during the entire run, or only when you get "bored" perhaps? Do you think there is any merit to running with no music and focusing on breathe and how the body feels to simulate the race environment? Thanks in advance!!
Your approach is quite similar to the one presented by Jason Koop is his training guidebook, though his 1-10 is spreaded out a little differently. I've been using it all winter, trying to focus more on breathing rate rather than pace and HR. It is definitevly a work in progress, but I'll get there. quick tip I stole form Killian Jornet regarding easy runs: "you should be able to breath through your nose only" Can't say I successfully managed it yet, but it's fun to try.
Jeff great video and real like the series. I’m no where as advanced as you with running but have started running more as a supplement to cycling. What are your thoughts on training with power? I have been using the Stryd foot pod for a couple of months and find power a much better indicator of effort and tracking than heart rate. It simplifies training and is similar to cycling training with power.
Thanks! I’ve actually never trained with a power meter, but I feel a little conflicted about it. I’ll see if I can get ahold of one to test out one of these days.
“It used a 5 zone system with Zone 1 at marathon pace” Even HR/pacing/intensity systems known for being heavy on the intensity will still put two zones below “marathon pace”. That seems crazy fast, even accounting for all the heart rate or intensity systems that all seem to contradict each other. That seems like a system like that would be difficult to recover from? I mean for my personal reference, I’ve done a solid heart-rate-drift test to find my aerobic limit. And it is still below my average HR on my last marathon. (Which sat between my aerobic and lactate thresholds). BTW I only use that aerobic limit number to keep myself honest on “easy” runs or an occasional test on a flat route. Otherwise its all RPE.
With the methodology they used at the Peak Centre, anything below the aerobic threshold was considered Zone 1. I’m not sure how you would really determine any lower zones without them being somewhat arbitrary percentages related to your aerobic threshold. But that’s where RPE could be used for sure.
Hey Jeff not sure if covered but, your race schedule has a fair bit of vertical gain, recent conversation has been about inclusion of speedwork, whats your plan and some best ideas to prep for hill work, as like so many portions of a training program there are some must haves and some extra bits worthwhile to include specific for trail thanks
You’ll see a big shift in my training as soon as my first race is behind me as I begin to focus on elevation before UTMB. Not an ideal schedule by any means! This is when I’ll likely shift all my speed work to hill repeats.
Fascinating not using effort to monitor your training, which is heart rate. Being new to your channel I’m guessing you are a VERY experienced ultra runner?
At the end of the video, you mentioned you're planning to get another set of tests done soon. Are you planning to return to using heart rate at that point, or do you still plan to stick with the RPE? I guess my question is, if you are having frequent lactate threshold tests done, does it make sense to continue using heart rate?
Great question. I would likely use heart rate again for a few months following a fresh set of results, but would eventually go back to RPE if I wasn’t planning on getting retested on an ongoing basis.
Unfortunately there is a lot of misleading information around, wether it’s training, clothing, supplements etc.First, you need a large group to test on so that the results are meaningful. Second, you need full independent peer reviewed scientific studies. Look at hydration supplements, majority are Not independently scientifically proven, especially the supermarket brands. The same with clothing. Ever wonder why the brands don’t show things like ISO/ATSM Standards and which test was used. Majority of products are sold by marketing, Not proven scientific evidence. I’ve switched to a chest based HR strap because all the Optical sensors are not accurate. Very hard to get independent scientific data on nutrition etc.
I would probably start out at around 3-4 RPE for the first half the race. It should feel nice and easy. You could then start to ‘lay it on’ a little thicker as time goes on, progressing to 5-6. I tend to then run the last 10-15 km of any race quite hard, say 7-8. If you’ve paced it properly you should have lots in the tank for a strong finish and to leave it all out there!
Interesting video. Here in Norway, everybody and their grandmother seems to be doing threshold training. It is a bit sad to see complete beginners - often well to do people in their late 30’s to late 40’s - take every bit of fun out of it by emulating the approach of world champions and olympians. Personally I do find some success by following a HR formula. I am not an athlete by any means. it keeps me going at a sustainable rate when building and maintaining an aerobic base. Introduce mountains and the formula becomes useless, at least if you want to maintain some speed.
So you don’t use heart rate because it’s inaccurate yet you use RPE which is even more inaccurate since now you have to guess am I running at a 9 or was that really a 7 but I could have pushed harder. A 6 could feel like a 3 if you only go a short distance.
@@JeffPelletier RPE has an even larger lag time than heart rate. When do you take your RPE measurement? When you start an effort? At the end of an effort? Say you run a 10 min tempo. Was the entire run an 8? Did you keep the same pace throughout? Did you say at the start of the run it was a 6 but as my heart rate caught up then I realized it was really a 7. But at the end it was a 9? How many data points do you note down with RPE? 1? 5? Come on RPE is worse than heart rate by far. Besides, you say heart rate doesn’t account for fitness? Really? Are you just comparing it to the useless 220-age nonsense? Even without a lab, a decent runner will start to notice what their heart rate does on any particular run. With a simple treadmill test one can get to a maximum heart rate or outside on a hill. From there percentages can be taken and used. If my easy run hr is 120bpm but I’m fatigued from the day before or it’s a double run day and my hr is reading 135-145 or higher then I know I have not recovered because I’m working harder. I’m not going to look at my pace and say o it’s a 9 min mile. Should be a 2 -3 on RPE but your RPE scale goes from breathing easy to breathing heavy. There is a huge gap in there.
The biggest flaw in your argument is your belief that heart rate zones can accurately be defined based on a ‘simple treadmill test’. This tells me that you likely haven’t done a proper analysis in the lab to compare those numbers to. If you had, you’d realize how inaccurate this method is.