Since I started doing some of my runs on the treadmill, what I notice is that If I don’t drink enough, my HR starts to increase. On a 1.5 hour 18 km treadmill run at a constant pace, if I drink around 750ml, my HR stays pretty flat, if I don’t drink, it goes up by 10bpm by the end
1 Like
Good point, I did all mine in a warm packed gym with no fan.
I think heat is certainly playing a part
1 Like
Happier with this one, thought I’d be more tired after yesterday’s hard 4 mile run off a 2*20 @ SS turbo. I did stop at one point to chat to a mate, but was back up to HR within 30 secs.
16/02 48:25 @ 137 reasonably flat course, decent conditions.
4 Likes
Right, how are you kids taking your resting HR?
I just use the value off my watch for the previous week. (I don’t wear it overnight)
However, someone mentioned “resting” as lying down…
…I’ve just had a lie down and focussed on breathing and got it down to 48bpm.
And that’s four cups of coffee in.
Might be another 4bpm in there 
1 Like
You need to buy an Oura so you can wear it whilst sleping.
I see lower HR’s sat on the sofa than the “lowest overnight etc. from the watch”, does it really matter what you choose, it’s just a number?
1 Like
I can wear my watch whilst sleeping, too.
I’ve previously worn an old school Garmin HR strap to bed and just recorded that on a watch.
Yeah, I know it’s just a number, but it’ll buy me a few more BPM for the challenge 
true, but that wouldn’t give you the excuse to buy new stuff.
1 Like
I thought that myself… but the reality is the lower you can get your RHR reading, the lower you 75% becomes!
RHR 60 MaxHR 180 gives 150
RHR 50 MaxHR 180 gives 147.5
So in fact you want a nice high RHR (and Max)!
1 Like
What what what!!!
That’s annoying.
Hmm. Did the 10km hilly route again. Avg 2bpm higher but was 34s slower 
2 Likes
Right, got my “new” zones from my lower “resting” HR now.
Not massively different, 143-157bpm.
About 1-2bpm different.
Seems to fit in with my idea (RPE) of “aerobic”…as in, lower end is what I’d do an IM at, top end is HIM.
That’s interesting. Any science behind that, or just feel?
Most of the science says to start your IM run at the lower end of Z2, or a similar 75% of your MaxHR (not the 75% we are doing here, just a straight 75% * MHR)
You can then start to increase that HR over the last 10km.
The aim is to be able to run whilst consuming calories…although I’ve never executed a “fast” IM run, I did execute a great trail run in my second IM.
For 70.3, I’ve done loads of that rough distance and just “know” the following;
Swim at a moderate pace, find some feet and swim straight!
Bike. Steady that HR to 155bpm and start drinking within 20mins. That should be 75% of FTP, which is my race plan 
Run. Keep that HR at 155bpm and push to keep it there. Cant take much food on at that pace. I’ve not had a bad run at 70.3 using this strategy.
Younger brother from another mother!
I’d be finding a lot slower feet in the wet stuff,but same principal, hr / nutrition is identical bike wise.
Run Hold 155 till the last 5k then hit the jets if it’s gone right or die a thousand deaths if it hasn’t.
70.3 plan of champions !.. ish
1 Like
Tired legs today & fighting a brisk, frustrating SW wind for most of the first half. Same route as 02/02, so should be happy with time on reflection.
18/02 48:49 @ 140 flat course, brisk SW wind
4 Likes
Being as I am only bck running a few weeks I haven’t taken part in this but followed with interest. Reading @Poet’s comment about having a higher HR and this thread rewards low HR rather than a combination of pace and HR. I was wondering whether run efficiency would put a slightly different slant on this? Free Training Peaks gives an efficiency number, I don’t think free Strava does. It is easy enough to workout though (KpH x 1000/60)/HR is rhe calculation I use. TrainingPeaks uses normalised graded pace to take into account hills but you could use that to find the speed for NGP. I don’t bother so flatter runs always score better.
1 Like
Speed per heart beat? I haven’t seen an efficiency number or graded pace (in the free version anyway)
Erm???
Is it???
And yes, I can deffo run 31s for one kilometre.
What you talking about!
Paid version (Garmin something old XT), no foot pod, but the Garmin 920(?)XT does cadence itself
Run efficiency of 2.02 
top bombing @funkster.