Cyclists with a "Running" Problem

[Andymann]

I see where you are going in the explanation. But what happens for a route with more climbing than descending as your example assumes equal uphill to downhill?

Relative to an equal effort flat route a net uphill course run at the same power as the flat route will no doubt take longer? If pace has to reduce somewhat on the uphill sections to maintain the same power then the route will take longer.

Or is an adjustment to required power made if it's a hilly course but a similar PB is intended as on the flat course?

 

That's actually an interesting question which I'm going to ask the Coach tonight - what approach would Dinamic use if an athlete came to them and said they wanted to run a Marathon pb? - would they look at the overall gradient of the route and then adapt the Power values on the day to suit?

 

I do more of the donkey work so I actually don't know what the answer would be - my guess is though, that you would do your run test to establish Critical Power, and train as per normal on zones calculated as a % of CP, but then look at the race route and use a gut feel (or experience) to decide how close you will need to run to your CP - lower if the route had a nett gain, or higher if it had a nett loss.  But again - I'm not the Head Coaching honcho so I will ask....

[Vetplant]

That's actually an interesting question which I'm going to ask the Coach tonight - what approach would Dinamic use if an athlete came to them and said they wanted to run a Marathon pb? - would they look at the overall gradient of the route and then adapt the Power values on the day to suit?

 

I do more of the donkey work so I actually don't know what the answer would be - my guess is though, that you would do your run test to establish Critical Power, and train as per normal on zones calculated as a % of CP, but then look at the race route and use a gut feel (or experience) to decide how close you will need to run to your CP - lower if the route had a nett gain, or higher if it had a nett loss.  But again - I'm not the Head Coaching honcho so I will ask....

My thinking is you can run your race on your Power targets regardless of the terrain. To my mind the limiting factor is your cardiovascular system which limits you to a certain number of Watts. Whether you run those Watts downhill or uphill, those are the most watts you can run at sustainably.

 

What will need to be adjusted though, is the expected finish time.

 

Longer time for a race with a Nett gain, shorter time for a race with a Nett Loss of elevation.

 

BUT. What is interesting, is how little this actually changes in reality. The Up Run for Comrades has a record which is only 6 minutes slower than the Down run of 5h18. That is only 1.8% slower, for an altitude difference of 600m between start and finish.

 

My "gut" would have expected a much bigger difference.

[Dinamic]

There is the key question.

 

A cycling power meter has a strain gauge. This measures physical force which is then translated into watts.

 

A running power meter, in this case stryd, uses accelerometers and some fancy algorithms to calculate a power number. Its not actually measuring power like a cycling power meter does.

 

The there is a difference. A watt is a watt in cycling....its a strain gauge measuring the force you are creating. This isn't the same with running (yet)

 

Edited to add:

Or at least there is not widely accepted accurate measure of power yet in running. I think thats the biggest difference with cycling now. 

 

And because DC is so good here is some more info for you.

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2019/06/testing-in-the-wind-tunnel-with-stryds-new-running-power-meter.html

Hi there  In March there was a study published in the European Journal of Sports Science which looked at different running powermeter options.  They concluded that with the stryd in particular, " the running power measurement error is very limited, so this external load variable can be confidently used to monitor performance changes for medium to high level athletes." 

[Pieter-za]

BUT. What is interesting, is how little this actually changes in reality. The Up Run for Comrades has a record which is only 6 minutes slower than the Down run of 5h18. That is only 1.8% slower, for an altitude difference of 600m between start and finish.

Normailsed to the longer distance of the down run the 6' might become eg ~12'?

 

The pace differences were:

2008 Up record 3:44/km  86.94 Km

2016 Down record 3:34/km 89.2 Km

Edited June 26, 2020 by Pieter-za

[Dinamic]

How would the stryde work on trails?

 

With very different running patterns and foot movements?

 

It would be pretty cool to see data on technical trails vs road

One of the biggest markets for STRYD is in Germany and trail runners have been amongst the biggest users. 

[Dinamic]

Ah - thanks Shaper, excellent info and advice - let me do some more reading and learning 

Can I also recommend The secret of Running by Hans Van Dijk and Ron Van Megan.  Bit dry but great research.

[Vetplant]

Normailsed to the longer distance of the down run the 6' might become eg ~12'?

True, forgot about that.

 

Even then, 3.6% difference feels like a small difference. That is a 13s difference in pace on a 6min/km target pace between running the Up vs running Down.

 

But these are the records, not normal human beings  . 

 

To those that have done multiple Comrades? How big is the difference between your Up and Down Run PR's? What I remember people saying is that they can't fully utilise the "Down" aspect of it due to the loading on the joints. so for a long event that then probably offsets the elevation gains.

[Andrew Steer]

Shameless punt... some running bargains on our clearance sale.
More of our cool long sleeve Visi training tops loading as well... perfect for training at the moment

https://weardirect.co.za/product-category/running/

[Pieter-za]

True, forgot about that.

 

Even then, 3.6% difference feels like a small difference. That is a 13s difference in pace on a 6min/km target pace between running the Up vs running Down

I looked at the 2006 results, not 2008's.  (Edited post with correct stats).

 

That makes it even less, only 10s difference!

Edited June 26, 2020 by Pieter-za

[Vetplant]

I looked at the 2006 results, not 2008's.  (Edited post with correct stats).

 

That makes it even less, only 10s difference!

Look, let's be honest.

 

On a 5k or 10k event, I would absolutely smash my PR if it was downhill vs Flat or uphill. Maybe even on a 21k.

 

But on these longer events, I think our gains from elevation changes are negated by the toll on the body.

 

Would still like to hear the Comrades PR differences for Up vs Down runs.

[Pieter-za]

Would still like to hear the Comrades PR differences for Up vs Down runs.

For mere mortals?  6 min slower for me on the Up.

[Frosty]

So, I commented yesterday that I would be keen to try a run using the Garmin data field. I never got to run, for reasons posted below, but I have since found an app on the Apple Watch (Power2Run) which Is keen to try in parallel with my Garmin. So if you see someone running with two devices on, it’s me, not DCRainmaker.

 

As for the reason not to run, I had to change plans as I got the news from my Mom that my Dad has passed away. We knew it was coming and we said our goodbyes on Saturday. My next run, like last night’s Zwift ride, might just empty the tank.

[shaper]

Sorry to hear G, in our thoughts, you and your family!

[Chris_]

So, I commented yesterday that I would be keen to try a run using the Garmin data field. I never got to run, for reasons posted below, but I have since found an app on the Apple Watch (Power2Run) which Is keen to try in parallel with my Garmin. So if you see someone running with two devices on, it’s me, not DCRainmaker.

 

As for the reason not to run, I had to change plans as I got the news from my Mom that my Dad has passed away. We knew it was coming and we said our goodbyes on Saturday. My next run, like last night’s Zwift ride, might just empty the tank.

 

Sorry man

[Vetplant]

So, I commented yesterday that I would be keen to try a run using the Garmin data field. I never got to run, for reasons posted below, but I have since found an app on the Apple Watch (Power2Run) which Is keen to try in parallel with my Garmin. So if you see someone running with two devices on, it’s me, not DCRainmaker.

 

As for the reason not to run, I had to change plans as I got the news from my Mom that my Dad has passed away. We knew it was coming and we said our goodbyes on Saturday. My next run, like last night’s Zwift ride, might just empty the tank.

 

Condolences.

Edited June 26, 2020 by Swift&Aero

[Jehosefat]

I have tried to explain it as best I can, you can disagree, but having run with power for over 2 years, I can tell you it works, Andy will also say the same.  We do not run to pace but power, pace varies.  Constant power is basically trying to flatten the course.  You can agree to disagree.  

 

Why do you think RD Murray (triathlete) is now running to power and smashing 5km records?  Go look at his IG and Strava and you will see his runs have power recorded.  IIRC the recent 5km PB, his power was over 400w

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that "power" isn't a good training tool. I'm just saying that calling it "power" is not technically accurate and it should rather be called something like "normalised pace".

 

What you have not done is actually answer the questions that I asked in my previous post. I will ask the main one again so you don't have to refer back:

Why, if the same power will give you the same average pace regardless of how flat or hilly the course is, have all the marathon world records been set on flat courses and not hilly ones?