Cyclists with a "Running" Problem

[b-rad]

I didn't know 'average' joes were privvy to this much data for running.

 

It looks like a lot to get lost in. I'm sure it's pretty cool.

 

Being a luddite, I am again in awe of the attention to detail some you you go to for training.

 

I can't run a 17:17 5km but im somewhere between 18 and 19 minutes and ran 13 peaks on a whim on Friday and was back training Monday.

 

I'm not saying 'don't enjoy the metrics and data', I think it's cool. I'm just saying that it's not as important as data sometimes makes itself out to be. 

 

I also don't know stride length is a comparable thing, much like which side you breathe in swimming. It will depend on a lot of different personal and external factors.

 

I do believe in basic metrics like time, splits, finishing 3km in a marathon/half marathon and how quickly one recovers.

 

Again, luddite and the views of a hacker who is far from elite but has a lot of miles in his legs and some decent times in the past.

 

It's super interesting for me to read though. But at the same time makes me grateful I'm not a micro numbers person.

Agreed 100%. Running is a simple sport and should be kept that way as much a possible.

Let's not baffle ourselves with all sorts of data.

At the end of the day it's about you and the road/trail/track etc. To see improvement it's a slow steady build up over time. Consistency is so important. Numbers don't change this fact much.

[Edgar]

I believe that if you are doing the other stuff correctly (training/diet etc) then the metrics and data do become important. You are eeking out that last 5 % to get to your limit. Stride length/cadence is relative to the individual for sure, that comes down to the understanding your own body and limits.

 

lance at 90 rpm vs jan at 75rpm and on and on. 

 

There is a definite correlation at a elite/sub elite level with regards cadence and stride length (relative to physiology). So why not look at it along with the other aspects in trying to improve? If you don't want to improve (just going out to run) by all means ignore it and carry on.  This is largely skewed towards non ultra road distance, it is unlikely to be as relative for ultra and trail as running form is very different. 

[tjommies3]

My input is useless but I'll still mention it as it probably applies to lots of people. My running isn't towards any goal other than health and fitness. So if I finish my session and I'm still comfy to run the next day, then I have done well. All the numbers are just numbers, I will try to beat my previous times on a repeated route but it doesn't matter if I don't. Around 20 years+ ago, HR training was the in thing but we all mostly just jump on to using new tech because others are using it. Each stat has a place and different things could be important to each of us but going on feel is still the most important to me. I just leave at a certain time, tell my wife to expect me in an estimated time and if I'm a little late, it's because I'm taking strain and walking the rest of the way. She knows the route and can easily pick me up if necessary. Life can be THAT simple :-)

[Ronniek]

I'm 42. Not sure how accurately Garmin works it out - but it says V02 Max 66. (I also just saw it has some ridiculous race predictor times on the next screen.)

I was hoping that I would still have time to get to that level, but seeing as we the same age I guess it’s game over for me [emoji23].

[Barry Stuart]

That race predictor is a laugh.

We all need someone in our life who believes in us the way our Garmin race predictor believes in us.

[Stretch]

Agreed 100%. Running is a simple sport and should be kept that way as much a possible.

Let's not baffle ourselves with all sorts of data.

At the end of the day it's about you and the road/trail/track etc. To see improvement it's a slow steady build up over time. Consistency is so important. Numbers don't change this fact much.

 

to be fair..its easy for you to say that with some sub 3's under your belt....I need to focus on everything just to get my PB below a 3:10....and then a 3:05......and then....all this with father time chasing me and no marathons to run 

[SwissVan]

must be pretty accurate really.

 

just need to measure distance and cadence correctly and it's a simple sum

 

Distance being the key, so if a little gps watch does not measure the distance consistently accurate... then what?

 

Another example, run out in the open and a wrist based gps works pretty well, run in a forest, amongst tall buildings or anywhere the sat signal is disturbed and then your distance ends up being disturbed as well.

 

anyway a fuss about a minor issue, carry on 

[SwissVan]

Maybe some of these other metrics you just need it to be consistent. Even if its consistently wrong. So as long as your own watch/device keeps giving you (incorrect) data, if its always relative maybe thats good enough to work with seeing longer term progressions etc.

 

Wrist-based heart rate on the other hand, as I keep seeing myself (when my HRM battery dies), and often read about, is inconsistently wrong. Which is just the worst of both worlds. And basically useless.

 

Yep, i think if you take your HR training serious a chest strap is the only accurate way to measure HR

Wrist based things measure blood flow, chest straps measure signals from your heart.

[Wayne Potgieter]

My logic on this...

 

Remember that coach that believed that if you got 1% better each day, over a year you would be a superhero (or something like that)?

 

Tracking the stats means that I can look for small measurable areas to improve daily and that equates to a larger improvement over time.

 

There is a fine line between monitoring for improvement and obsessing though.

 

As a "newer" runner, measuring my performance while using a coach for a program is a good way to improve. I ran socially (jogging) for years without much thought to any of this and my running reflected that. I did the same stuff, so the result was the same.

[b-rad]

Agreed 100%. Running is a simple sport and should be kept that way as much a possible.

Let's not baffle ourselves with all sorts of data.

At the end of the day it's about you and the road/trail/track etc. To see improvement it's a slow steady build up over time. Consistency is so important. Numbers don't change this fact much.

To add a small note to my post. I'm not saying the data isn't valuable. It can be and can be a valuable tool for improvement. But it shouldn't necessarily be the primary focus when one is starting off and becoming more familiar with regular running. Becoming more in tune with your body and learning what it's going through can be done largely without all the data. Finding enjoyment in running is more important in my view (in the same breath though, like some have said, maybe that enjoyment is found in the data and there's nothing at all wrong with that).

A very valid point was made by Wayne about that fine line between monitoring data for improvement vs obsessing over it.

[Jewbacca]

To add a small note to my post. I'm not saying the data isn't valuable. It can be and can be a valuable tool for improvement. But it shouldn't necessarily be the primary focus when one is starting off and becoming more familiar with regular running. Becoming more in tune with your body and learning what it's going through can be done largely without all the data. Finding enjoyment in running is more important in my view (in the same breath though, like some have said, maybe that enjoyment is found in the data and there's nothing at all wrong with that).

A very valid point was made by Wayne about that fine line between monitoring data for improvement vs obsessing over it.

I see it exactly like this.

 

I got to a sub3 using a stop watch, a black log book, lamp post fartlekking and a 5km and 10km loop measured with the car odometer. I used to only take a watch (normal digital stop watch) on board at 21km (it would have started with the gun) so I could then check the half split, judge how I felt and make a decision to kick on or not from there.

 

It seems strange but running on feel is important. If you have a bad patch but obsess over splits and a time chart you will often not get out of the bad patch as you will burn matches to stay with the chart instead of keep them in the bank for a good kick.

 

Even now as a 'plodder' I still try to make sure the last 3km of any race are my fastest

[Edgar]

Just think how fast you could have gone with a little more focus and some super shoes. 

 

 

I see it exactly like this.

 

I got to a sub3 using a stop watch, a black log book, lamp post fartlekking and a 5km and 10km loop measured with the car odometer. I used to only take a watch (normal digital stop watch) on board at 21km (it would have started with the gun) so I could then check the half split, judge how I felt and make a decision to kick on or not from there.

 

It seems strange but running on feel is important. If you have a bad patch but obsess over splits and a time chart you will often not get out of the bad patch as you will burn matches to stay with the chart instead of keep them in the bank for a good kick.

 

Even now as a 'plodder' I still try to make sure the last 3km of any race are my fastest

[DJuice]

Just think how fast you could have gone with a little more focus and some super shoes. 

Those super shoes are intriguing. 

 

Racing days are long gone, even regular training days, but told my SO, if I ever need to chase a time, I will need to spend $ on some fancy shoes.

[Edgar]

The super shoes are certainly beneficial and unbelievably comfortable (brand agnostic) They make you want to run fast, if Barry ditched his Nimbus 10's for a pair of super shoes that sub 18 would be a given. 

 

Those super shoes are intriguing. 

 

Racing days are long gone, even regular training days, but told my SO, if I ever need to chase a time, I will need to spend $ on some fancy shoes.

[Stretch]

 

 

.

 

Even now as a 'plodder' I still try to make sure the last 3km of any race are my fastest

And this is still my problem.. My last 3 are always my slowest in a marathon. Looking forward to the next one to remedy this and run a PB

[Jewbacca]

Just think how fast you could have gone with a little more focus and some super shoes. 

hahaha I had plenty of focus, just no gadgets!

 

But ja, I often think 'maybe I should get fast again this year' then I go to a few track days and remember how much hard work it takes over and above just running and decide I'm more than happy to plod out a 3:30 hahahaha