Translating HR Zones across Sports( eg Running to Skiing)
- This topic has 3 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have worked with my Evoke coach to dial-in my HR Zones while running. for example, running multiple 1hr drift tests, I know my AeT HR is 145-150. By running many sessions of L3 intervals, I know that when running my L3 is about 155-160. I have done these running sessions enough times to be confident in those zones. I can run for hours on mixed terrain in AeT, etc.
BUT, when I train for Nordic racing, either Classic or Skate, I cannot maintain the L3 HR over the course of an interval session. either 4 min or 8 min L3 intervals, with 4 to 8 reps. By the 2nd half of the session my data shows that I am fading…unable to achieve and maintain a HR in the L3 zone. I know that my ski Economy is underdeveloped.
So my question is: given that I have vastly different Run and Ski economies, does it make sense to use HR zones established while running in Ski training sessions? if not, how do I revise the HR zones from running to apply to skiing ? or do I just grind it out until my ski economy improves to a point where I can properly use my running HR zones? and in this scenario I am talking about running and skiing at the same altitude, about 6,000ft.
Those with greater knowledge might correct me, but as far as I understand your aerobic capacity is defined by the local muscles used in the activity of interest and not by the heart. The heart rate (and HR drift) is simply an effect of the work performed by the local muscles. Consequently, the aerobic capacity – and therefore HR drift and HR zones differs between different sports/activities. For myself, my aerobic capacity (upper Z2 HR ) is 137 bpm in running, 132 bpm in uphill walking on treadmill and 122 bpm on a bike.
Again, someone may correct me, but if you would like to improve the skiing I think you should be careful in doing what may be Z3 in skiing – since the accumulation of fatigue will have a negative effect on the technique. Better to go easier with good technique on longer sessions, and complement with shorter intervals and more like ME training to build strength.
Brian:
Bjorn is correct. All your metabolic markers like Aet and AnT are going to be sport specific.
I have seen your exact situation occur hundreds of time and it’s why I advocate for muscular endurance training. The BIGGEST limiting factor to maintain submaximal intensity like Z3/4 or AnT work is going to be local muscular fatigue, even for elites. You have picked up up on this as you see your HR drop from rep to rep in those workouts. That’s not because you heart can’t keep up with muscular demand. It is because as the muscles fatigue and motor units drop out of the recruitment pool, the muscle, doing less work needs less oxygen so the heart rate slows. The heart responds to the muscle not the other way around.
Now, you can develop ME with Z3-4 work. That has been the traditional way and works very well for the very fit elites. But that method imposes a significant global fatigue. Specific ME workouts like no poles uphill skating trash your legs and build ME fast they don’t impose nearly the global fatigue load.
Scott
Hello, this is a real interesting topic and I wonder how it might apply to my situation. I mostly go “running” up the Scottish mountains. Usually all the uphill through roughness/steepness is walking and only the downhill is running.
During the week I mostly run in Glasgow which has some rolling hills but nothing more. On Tuesdays I can do a few laps up the mini mountain in the middle of Edinburgh from my office.
Is this enough specific work for what I really want to do during the week or would incorporating the stairmaster be beneficial?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
