Slow and steady

Moving slowly through the UK countryside

New Year’s baseline and floods

10 Comments

Back again after the Christmas break. Quite a few stair circuits done over the last couple of weeks, but barely any running, until today.

I got out and did a mile at a very gentle jog (15 min 36 s) and about a mile walking. Then I redid the 3-minute step test, but got a much less impressive recovery rate than last time – 102 instead of the seventies. But when I looked at the graph, I realised that I’d started at a much higher heart-rate rate (not long after I’d finished the mile run) so hardly surprising it was a slower recovery. Anyway, that’s my baseline for this year. It shouldn’t be too hard to improve on this.  And, just for the record, my resting heart-rate is about 68 first thing in the morning.

Step test

3 minute step test and one minute recovery

A quick edit (after reading this blog by fitfor365 ) – my Garmin-recorded runs for 2013 came to 68 runs, 116 miles in 28 hr 48 min, average speed 4 mph, average heart rate 147.  Which isn’t much by most runners standards, but is probably a lot more than most mid-50s women’s standards, so it’ll do me fine.  I wonder if I’ll manage more this year?  Plus, no injuries beyond occasional aches.  It would be good to do a Parkrun or two, but I’ll see how I go.  For now, improving my mile run pace will do, with the intention of upping my exercise time towards 30 minutes per day by the time the 5×50 challenge begins at the end of March.

Everywhere in England has had a lot of rain recently – here’s what our nearest stream looks like at the moment.  It’s usually only a metre or two wide.  Fortunately it hasn’t got high enough to get into anyone’s house this time.

Flooding under the bridge

Flooding under the bridge

Advertisements

Author: Hedwigia

Gardener, wildlife geek, and very slow runner.

10 thoughts on “New Year’s baseline and floods

  1. I keep meaning to take my RHR in the morning, will have to do that.

    • If you use a monitor, it’s a good excuse to have a good long lie-in, so it goes back down after the palaver of putting the monitor on! Much simpler to just count the pulse for a minute of course, but not as much fun. 🙂

  2. Yep, I`ve got to get into that whole heart rate monitor stuff this year. And maybe even begin to understand all that training in the proper heart zones stuff.

    Love the teal colour on your blog!

    • Happy new year! Maybe don’t bother too much about the heart rate stuff though – you run way, way further than me already!

      It’s fun though – but the zones stuff is over-rated – you can tell how hard you’re working without needing a monitor, and the hassle of working out what your max rate is supposed to be really isn’t worth the effort I think! I just like playing with graphs. 🙂

  3. It’s good to have some numbers to look back on isn’t it ? If your average HR during training is 147 that must be in the ‘maximum training effect’ bracket – I love that phrase when in comes up on the garmin connect, it’s like a pat on the back saying ‘you have done your best!

    • Yes, I love numbers to play with!

      I don’t get that phrase pop up though… Maybe I have different settings (or it might be linked to the Garmin type?) My Garmin connect training zone settings just shows 5 heart rate zones, though I don’t think it’s set up right anyway, because ‘resting heart rate’ is zero!

      Anyway, I just go as fast as feels comfortable (which means – mostly very slowly!)

      • I have to admit my software on the garmin connect page has been playing up a bit recently so I haven’t used it as much. I have a forerunner 610 and you can set hr training zones by putting in a minimum and maximum hr. You can either guesstimate max hr (220 minus age) or work it put doing some interval type work. Anyway where the average hr is listed next to this there is a training band number ie 1to5 and next to it a blue info button. If you click the button it tells you the training effect, 1 minimal effect, 5 is over training , 4 maximal effect etc. now I have read more about running I think they are supposed to tie in with ‘steady runs’ tempo runs’ ‘speed intervals ‘ etc. So the fact that I’m so pleased with myself for getting lots of ‘4’s is probably erroneous as I suspect that I should be doing lots of 3s with the odd 4. Hey ho!

      • Hi, just a note to let you known that I have nominated you for a ‘lighthouse’ award. Please see by blog for more details. Best wishes, julie

      • Thank you very much! I will investigate further at the weekend. 🙂

  4. No blue button for me! Maybe my garmin being a 110 makes a difference.

    i spent ages trying to work out what would be a sensible hr max (220-age gives me 166, and I’ve quite often gone over that, but am still here!) It’s currently using 180, but can’t remember if I put that in myself (based on quite often going up to mid 170s and once to 190 – but that might just have been a garmin wobble, like my max speed of 120mph, and the altitude graphs that often show leaps of several metres into the air!

    When I was doing a fair bit of running last year I’d got the feel of steady and tempo runs – maybe I’ll rediscover them in a few weeks? I think the hr graphs are satisfying to look at and play with, but don’t really make all that much difference to my running – other than motivating me to go and collect more data! Plus something to chat about of course…

    The key point really though is that any run is a good run (and even ten minutes of yoga or Tai Chi is a lot better than an hour online). 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s