To train to heart rate or not?

This is a debate that's regularly being discussed in various circles. 

A few weeks ago I read an article which stated that athletes (in that coaches opinion) should avoid training using heart rate, and he gave some valid points against using heart rate to train with. 

However, whilst I totally agree that using heart rate to train with isn't totally infallible and any number of things can skew the "true" figure of the heart rate, in terms of BPM, for example, if you're ill, fatigued, stressed etc they're all ailments that can (and probably will) affect your heart rate and will often be noticeable through a change in your usual heart rate. However, in my opinion, through regular testing, using the same test parameters and the same environment that the test is undertaken in, I think that fairly accurate heart rate zones can be achieved, especially for running. Training to heart rate can be applied to lots of sports, with varying degrees of accuracy etc. But for the purposes of this post, I'm going to focus on running. 

In the club that I coach at our members carry out varying and specific tests at the end of each 6 week block of training, so that we can tweak HR Zones (specifically for running) and so that we can, over time, gain an accurate interpretation of each members heart rate values. Which we will then use to establish their specific training zones.

Obviously, not all athletes have the latest Garmin etc but for those that have, it can be all too easy to run along the canal, on a long run, with your eyes constantly looking at your watch every 4 steps, making sure that you don't stray from your predetermined training zone. But, I've found that by basing the effort that I want to run a particular set of intervals at, on the zones that I have established for my own training, I can achieve consistent efforts. 

This changes slightly when doing longer runs because we'll all probably experience something called cardiac drift. Cardiac Drift "refers to the natural increase in heart rate that occurs when running with little or no change in pace. Many runners mistakenly assume that if they keep their runs at a consistent pace, their heart rate will remain relatively constant as well" when, in fact, your pace will remain constant, but your heart rate will "drift" upwards. It's a totally natural occurrence, but one that athletes running and training for longer distances need to be aware of. 

I often say to our members that they should try to learn how it "feels" to run at a particular heart rate / zone. They can then use this to gauge how hard they're pushing during a session, without the total reliance on using a hrm. However, where I think using heart rate really helps is if we're doing a, eg. 10 x 800m intervals session at threshold, as we progress through the session and fatigue really kicks in, the mind can play tricks and whilst you think you're running at threshold and still pushing as hard, when we check the data after it's uploaded some people find that they've often dropped off quite a bit. Not just in terms of pace, which is totally understandable, but in terms of effort as well. By keeping one eye on heart rate during the session, you can ensure that you're running at the desired effort for each interval and are, therefore, able to focus on pushing the body in order to improve performances.

A few years ago when a coach first introduced me to training with heart rate, I honestly felt like it transformed my run training. All of a sudden I could actually see a scale of what sort of efforts were required for any particular session and whilst other methods were also used, I've found training with heart rate to be incredibly beneficial.

As I mentioned earlier though, training to heart rate is far from infallible, so I try to use varying methods to gauge my own training, these are (predominantly) heart rate as well as using the borg scale, or RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion) methods. I'm also playing about with the Jack Daniels VDOT formula as well. That said I think that by carrying out regular testing and combining it with other methods, that training to heart rate has some fantastic benefits. 

Being triathletes and having (for the majority) the desire to have all the latest bits of tech, together with the advances being made in heart rate watches, I think that training to heart rate is something that's going to become more and more prevalent in training sessions, particularly for athletes that are newer to the sport and as long as it's done properly, with regular testing and with a knowledge of how to gauge efforts when not using heart rate, I think it's a fantastic method of training. 

In summary, I think there's absolutely a place for training with heart rate, but it isn't the be all and end all of how to train and it's often a case of an athlete finding what suits them best.

If you'd like to speak more about your goals and ambitions and how I can help you on your triathlon journey, click on the link below which will take you to my coaching Facebook page, where I can be contacted through

Certa Cito Tri Coaching

Periodisation

Periodisation, what is it?

You might have heard coaches talk about periodisation, but what is is it? 

Periodisation: "is the systematic planning of athletic or physical training. The aim is to reach the best possible performance in the most important competition of the year. It involves a progressive cycling of various aspects of a training program during a specific period".

No athlete who wants to be at their peak for a particular race can train continuously and to the typically high intensities that we see during the peak or race phase, all year round without picking up injuries, at the very least. Or, in the worst case scenario, developing overtraining syndrome (something I'll cover at a later date).

Therefore it's essential that we break down our training into "cycles" or timescales that we can use to develop our fitness and gradually increase the amount of intensity and volume that we put into each session. These phases are called the Macro, Micro and Meso cycles.

In a nutshell, the Macro cycle can be viewed as your long term goal, ie. if you say that you want to complete a particular distance race in two years, your build up to that point could be deemed to be the Macro phase and will consist of varied, structured and progressive training and recovery until that point.
The Meso cycle is a much shorter period of time, usually up to a couple of months in length and may form the build phase of the training plan and could consist of two or three training "blocks". 
The Micro cycle is shorter still and can be anything from a few days, up to a couple of weeks and I would say that, at the most, this would form a single block of training, but can be even less than that.

At the club where I'm currently coaching we use these different phases in the plans that we deliver to our members. Most of our members will have a specific "A race" that they're working towards. eg. For the members that are doing Ironman UK in July, their Macro phase will be from the time that they signed up, to the day of the race or from the time that they make the decision that they want to complete an iron distance race within a certain time frame. The Meso cycles will be each of the 6 week blocks of training that we currently do, followed by a seventh week of testing and recovery to see their progression and to allow their bodies to recover from the stresses that it's been exposed to during the training block. Their Micro phase will be the weekly sessions that gradually progress as we move towards their goal.

If you've signed up to a particular race, or you've got ambitions to get to a level of fitness on or before a certain date, it's important that you think about periodisation and break down your training into manageable chunks. If you went out and looked at what training for an Ironman entails or if you're a novice and want to get to a standard that you can compete in your first race at, it can often be very overwhelming. But if you break it down into bitesize pieces, it's much less daunting and is easier to manage your training plans, as well as much more manageable physically and will help prevent overtraining, reduce the risk of injury and should help you get the best possible results.

Another, probably more common, way that you might have heard of these phases referred to is the base, build, race and recovery phases. Normally I will typically plan these phases over the course of a 12 month plan.

So, in the most basic of terms, we prepare, then we build, then peak for a particular race / series of races, then recover properly, before building again.

If we look at a typical macro cycle over the course of a 12 month period, it would probably look something like this:

In the graph above you can see how there is a gradual build throughout the year, until we get past the race / peak phase and then we taper off again and recover. Obviously, if you're going to be doing an endurance event in March, for example if you were thinking of racing abroad, then you'd adapt the plan so that your peak / race phase of training coincides with the race.

As with all training plans, consistency is key and if you don't train consistently you're not going to get all the benefits of a structured and progressive plan.

If you'd like to speak more about your goals and ambitions and how I can help you on your triathlon journey, click on the link below which will take you to my coaching Facebook page, where I can be contacted through

Certa Cito Tri Coaching