About 2 bpm higher for running for me, but to be honest I normally just think of my cycling threshold 90% of the time.
I use RPE and pace more for running anyway.
Yep - as above - my running HR is about 3-4 bpm higher. Probably as it’s weight bearing. Also as noted I use my power meter for TT pacing, but RPE for running.
From what I’ve heard it’s pretty common for threshold HR to be slightly higher for running (I’ve heard increased upper body recruitment cited along with having to work against gravity more, but I’m certainly not an expert.)
I think you could probably get away without a test- IME you’ll get enough data points from longer efforts/races to be able to ballpark it fairly well if it’s of interest to you. If anything I find that somewhat easier/more practical than cycling HR, since your effort is generally less variable anyway.
1 Like
I’ll do a 10k at some point which will give me some decent data. Have a flat half marathon in March so am interested how that plays out. I usually just listen to my breathing in every endeavour and check it’s not running out of control.
Yeah I usually find 10ks line up nicely with my threshold HR… a half would probably work too, but I bombed the last couple of those 
This for me too 
I look at my HR data afterward but during runs (especially threshold or intervals) I don’t consider it.
1 Like
Most don’t do “threshold” like cycling in the running world. They base training paces off of races. For example, 10 x 400 @ mile pace with 1 minute recovery or 5 x mile at 10k pace with a lap jog recovery, or 6 miles at half marathon pace.
If you aren’t sure and really want to know your pace you may want to do a race?
1 Like
39:17 at the Joe Kleinerman 10k this morning
6:39, 6:30, 6:09, 6:09, 6:17, 6:03, 1:xx
Considering I ran all of 70 miles in November and 97 in December, it’s actually a better result than I expected
Almost an identical time to what I ran last June in Queens. Which makes me wonder slows me down more, the 100 turns and constant pot holes of Flushing Meadows, or the hills of Central Park. I know I definitely prefer running in Central Park.
4 Likes
Unless it was terrain related that is a hell of a lot of variation in mile splits. You probably could have gone 30s quicker with a less conservative first 2 miles. Negative splits are great - but not 30s/mile. If you ran the first 2 in 6:25 I bet the last 4 would still have been similar!
Harlem hill first mile into second, and then a couple of smaller ones until about 2.5. But also, in my old age, I have trouble getting going in the first mile. This despite a 4 mile warm up. I even tried some accelerations, but 15 minutes waiting in the corral for the start is enough to stiffen me back up.
1 Like
First week done… Just under 60 miles. Kids were home for winter break and I was working so all treadmill miles. Finished off the week with a two hour progression run. Felt very controlled (aerobically) but did start to feel a bit fatigued muscularly (mostly lower back). Not too surprised given that this is the longest run I’ve done in months. HR and overall effort however felt comfortable.
As an aside, kind of interesting to see hr lines up quite well with the lactate protocol I did a few weeks ago.
Overall I feel I’m starting the training block in a good place.
4 Likes
Everything on point here. The only thing I would change is the rest day. Yes rest is important, but if he wants to do something, super easy miles or an easy bike ride should be low effort.
Another thing I would add, paces should be, IMO, based on your fitness and not your goal… So the paces seems to be too fast…when I did my sub 3, my fastest run was a long progression wo, 22 miles starting easy and pacing to the last 2 be MP. Average was 7:10, mpm which was significantly faster than most of my easy runs at 7:50 to 8
Also, to note, some people think running fewer miles at higher intensity is also beneficial… Not all or interval, but not easy… It would be like biking at endurance pace instead of recovery
2 Likes
Solid progression
1 Like
@grawp
Max HR is typically going to be higher for running than cycling. Thus your running threshold HR will likely be higher as well. This is due to the amount of muscle being recruited.
@adenega
Way to kick off the year! The first result of the year for the thread 
Thanks. I’ll look forwards to finding my max HR at some point 
. I think going uphill in a fell race would be good for that!
1 Like
That sounds like fun! 
Probably won’t race. Maybe a friendly 5k.
Primary Goal: Run often enough to not spend every lunch break in the break room where more work normally finds me.
Secondary Goal: Would like to run often enough that DOMS doesn’t ruin my week should I happen to run a couple of miles at a spirited pace.
If I do race: Sub 20 minute 5k or equivalent 8k… 10k would have to be a jog.
1 Like
yep I know what that feels like - my last 10k turned into an 11.5 mile run with a long warm up to wake me up and a reasonable warm down so I don’t stiffen up on the way home! 
That is a very well executed progression run. Try and do progression for all my non interval runs (although not the cut in pace of your run) . Especially as at my age starting off super easy allows me to warm up (didn’t seem to matter 25 years ago!). Good stuff
1 Like
Just wanted to throw in a celebration of my regular Sunday morning run. Every weekend a small group of us leaves the car park at 8am for 15 or so km at an easy, chatty pace. Always finish at the same coffee shop and usually one of us has baked flapjacks or cake.
It’s a simple pleasure with no other purpose than to enjoy the company of friends and the outdoors. I’m very fond of it. I can beast myself the rest of the week.
4 Likes