Day 51: 5mi, 42:45

I got back on the treadmill Sunday, after a longish layoff of three days. My splits:

mile 1: 8:23
mile 2: 8:11
mile 3: 8:20
mile 4: 8:43
mile 5: 9:04
HR t+1: 123
HR t+5: 92

So my pace seems to be steadier than when I first started the low HR training. I also noticed that I did not have to adjust my pace at all during the entire last mile. In previous runs, I had to keep slowing down pretty regularly - every quarter mile or so. It's only one data point, but it seems like my body is getting used to operating at this HR, and can maintain this level of exertion for longer now.

Day 47: 5.4mi, 46:30

Today I ran outside for the first time in weeks. A sunny, 50 degree day in London, so even though my knee was bothering me, I couldn't pass up a nice, long run around the parks. Not much data today, but here's my route:
http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=721631

My heartrate was a little harder to control running outside than on the treadmill. I managed to average 138bpm, but peaked at 149. I'm looking forward to a mile test to see if there is any improvement in my time. I think this is week four of low HR training, so may be a bit early. I am aiming for the end of next week (1st wknd March), if my travel schedule allows.

Day 45: 6mi, 53:34

Still some knee pain today, but it was bearable and wasn't increasing, so I did a good long run on the treadmill. I couldn't let a long weekend go by without at least one decent length run. My splits, after a 5 minute warmup on the bike:

mile 1: 9:15
mile 2: 8:40
mile 3: 8:29
mile 4: 8:36
mile 5: 8:54
mile 6: 9:10

HR t+1: 125
HR t+5: 98

Flying to London tomorrow night, so unlikely I will get in a run, but should be able to do at least 5 on Wednesday.

Day 44: 10mi bike, 35:00

Yesterday, I thought I would skate on a frozen pond instead of run. About ten minutes in, my left skate went through the ice and stopped dead. My right skate and the rest of me kept going, and the brunt of the impact of me hitting the ice was taken by the inside of my right knee. So my run today lasted only a few minutes, with increasing pain on each footfall. I switched to the bike, and managed to get my HR up towards my max 137bpm towards the end. Will try another run tomorrow, but this feels like it may take a day or two more to clear.

Day 42: 5mi, 44:49

I stayed within my 137 bpm range very consistently on this run. Even though I felt tired Friday afternoon, keeping my HR low made this run last night very comfortable. Every time I started feeling fatigued, my HR would rise, so I had to slow down. My splits:

mile 1: 8:33
mile 2: 8:20
mile 3: 8:55
mile 4: 9:16
mile 5: 9:45
t+1 HR: 126
t+5 HR: 89

Day 41: 3mi, 25:02

The coolrunning.com discussion forum on low HR training tells me to stick with a target HR of 142, or even 137 (180-43), regardless of what my HR monitor says. So I went back on the treadmill this morning to do the same 3 mile time test at the lower HR of 137-8. My splits:

mile 1: 7:58
mile 2: 8:00
mile 3: 9:04

I think I will continue with the low HR program for another two weeks, then do a mile test.

Day 40: 3mi, 22:58

I was tired this evening, so thought I see how long 3 miles would take with my HR under 152bpm. Felt pretty good, but I am still uncertain about whether 152 is the right number. Felt a little lactic acid buildup around mile 1.5, when I first reached peak HR and was running a 6:48 pace. I'll visit the coolrunning discussion forum and see if I can get some advice. My splits:
mile 1: 7:29
mile 2: 7:27
mile 3: 8:03
ave HR: 140
t+1 HR: 136
t+5 HR: 106

Day 39: 5mi, 41:49

An interesting workout today, which was actually faster than it looks. I got a HR monitor today (Polar RS200, if anyone is interested), and after doing the tests that come with the monitor, it gave me a target HR training zone of 116 to 152bpm. This is a higher max than I have been working with (141 or so) the last few times out, and it made a big difference in my pace. My splits:

mile 1: 10:42
mile 2: 7:30
mile 3: 7:30
mile 4: 7:51
mile 5: 8:16

My HR at t+1 was 136, and at t+5 was 106. My average HR during the run was 136.

The HR monitor figures out my target zones by doing a 5 minute test where I start out walking slowly and end up at a jog, so the first five minutes of my run didn't cover much ground as it included three minutes of walking. So I feel like it was really a 38-39 minute 5 mile pace. Was a lot easier monitoring my pace, as the treadmill picks up the signal from the transmitter, and the new target max of 152 was much easier to stay within and fine tune by slowing down a little.

So now the question is, which is the appropriate target HR - 142 or 152? I think I will go with the HR monitor's calculations, since it took a lot of personal information (age, weight, height, activity level, resting HR, etc.) to calculate the training zone. It also felt like a moderately difficult workout, maybe a 6 out of 10, which seems about right for aerobic training. So I'll go with that for awhile and see how it works.

Day 38: 4mi, 34:20

After four days off, I was expecting that the adductor muscle pain might have abated, but it did not. Another low HR day, so I didn't have a lot of pain, but I didn't feel any improvement either. As for the run, my splits were:
mile 1: 8:30
mile 2: 8:10
mile 3: 8:10
mile 4: 9:30
As in some other low HR runs, I kept my HR below 140 steadily for awhile, but then it spiked to 150 at mile 3 and refused to come down. I need a HR monitor to help me track it more readily (I'm still using the handholds on the treadmill about every 1/4 mile or so, which is not exactly a comfortable way to run). My HR at t+1 was 138 and 98 at t+5.

Day 33; 4mi, 33:40

Day 2 of my low HR program. more stable HR today - kept it at 137-140 between miles 1 and 3.9. For some reason, my HR spiked to 151 with an eighth of a mile to go. My HR at t+1 was 139, and 96 at t+5. My splits:
mile 1: 8:30
mile 2: 8:00
mile 3: 8:20
mile 4: 8:50

Day 32: 5mi, 44:00 [Low HR Day 1]

I spent some time last night reading up on low HR training. Basically, the idea is to stay under aerobic threshold while training to improve aerobic capacity. While this is generally targeted at improving distance running times, the mile is roughly half aerobic, and I am persuaded by the arguments I have read that I will benefit as well in my mile quest. Plus, I was planning to ease off for a couple of weeks anyway. For more info on low HR training, check out this page and the links on it:
http://formationflier.spaces.live.com/

The low HR guys say you need to do only low HR runs for 12 weeks. I am not planning to stay with the program that long, but I reserve the right to stick with it if I see improvement. For the mile, however, I will have to bring back the intervals and high intensity runs at some point; that is inescapable.

So tonight, even though I don't have a heart rate monitor yet, I did the five mile test suggested here: http://www.rrca.org/resources/articles/slowdown.html In this run, you keep your HR under the aerobic threshold the whole time, adjusting your pace to do this. Then you record the mile times, and track this through the training program.

There are different formulas for the aerobic threshold HR. I used 185-43 [my age] which gives 142. Another formula uses 180-age, so I round it down to a target HR of 140bpm. I did not do much warmup prior to running, so took a while to get up to the HR. I started around 8:30 pace, moving gradually through 8:00 to about 7:30. My HR hit 141 around 1.25 miles in. I managed to keep it at that level by notching down the pace gradually until 2.50 miles, when my HR spiked to 151bpm. I had a hard time getting it back down. Had to back off all the way to ten minute miles, and took over a mile for my HR to fall, which it then did sharply. I picked up the pace again, the HR stayed around 130, before spiking back to 150. I managed to get it back down only at the end of the run. At t+1, my HR was 133, and at t+5, I was at 100. My mile splits:

mile 1: 8:15
mile 2: 7:50
mile 3: 8:35
mile 4: 10:00
mile 5: 9:20

It was a pain to have to use the handholds on the machine to get my HR. I don't fully trust it either, although I did check my pulse manually once, and the machine was about right. It should be easier once I get a wearable HR monitor.

Day 31: 2mi, 17:00

An easy night. A little lifting, then 15 minutes on the bike, then 2 miles on the treadmill.
Tomorrow, I'm thinking 4 miles in 30-32 minutes. Indoors again. It's about 100 below with the windchill here at the moment.

Day 30: 5mi, 42:00

More mileage at a moderate pace. First mile in 9:00, then 8:30, 8:30, 8:15 and finally a 7:45. HR was 133 at t+1 and 99 at t+5. No major pains. Did some laps in the pool as part of my warmdown.

Will try to get in a run at least four of the next five days, as I will be in London this weekend and unlikely to run. Will do between 3-5 miles each run, but no high intensity.

Day 29: Mile: 5:57

Slower than I expected, even with my various excuses. My splits:

1:22
1:33
1:32
1:30

The track was covered in ice when I went by in the morning. I went back up early afternoon, and it was mostly clear, but there were plenty of big puddles, and the parts that were not clear were dangerously slippery. During my second warm-up lap, I decided to get my ice scraper out of the car and try to clear the layer of ice in turn 1, which was still in the shade. I scraped away for about fifteen minutes and made a pretty good dent in it. I finished my warm-up, stretched and got started.

Besides having to run around the puddles (all in lane 1) and slow down near the ice patch, there was a stiff wind to contend with on the backstretch and turns 3 & 4. The wind would have benefited me on the home stretch and turns 1-2, except that this part of the track is sheltered by a hill, so not much help there. My adductor problem was firing up during lap 1, but as I eased off the pace, it wasn't too bad.

All in all, I didn't push too hard, but if I take away all my excuses and went all out, I probably wouldn't have been more than 5-10 seconds faster. That's probably where I should be, but isn't where I had hoped to be. What it means is that there is a long, long road ahead to get to sub-five.

I still plan to do easy mileage for the next couple of weeks to allow my adductor to recuperate. My medium term goals are to get to 5:30 by end March, 5:15 by end June, and 5:00 by end-Sep. Those don't feel all that realistic right now, but I'll keep them as targets until I need to change them.

Day 28: 2mi, 17:30

Just wanted to turn the legs over tonight. HR 114 at t+1, 80 at t+5. Even at this pace had some muscle pain in the adductor area.

Still planning a mile on the track tomorrow, weather permitting (some snow in the forecast). Best guess, assuming no major muscle problems, is somewhere between 5:30 and 6. My program: A light stretch first, then run a mile or so warm-up (2min, 1:50, 1:45, and 1:40 or so for the 400s), then a full stretch. In the mile, I'll try to go out in 1:20, then a couple of 1:25s, then see if I can run the last one a little faster. That would bring me in between 5:30 and 5:35, but I'll likely be a couple of seconds behind these times each lap. For cooldown, I'll jog a couple of laps.

And I'll take a little inspiration from Gail Devers, who at age 40, won the women's 60m hurdles at the Millrose games tonight. Adidas says impossible is nothing; I say age is nothing.

Day 27: 5mi, 42:00

A moderately easy 5 miles on the treadmill. HR at t+1 was 132, and 102 at t+5. The muscle pain in my upper left thigh persists. I think I have a pulled adductor muscle. I think I did it back in October, and haven't properly rested it. I will do another easy run tomorrow, and still plan a timed mile this weekend, but I think after that I will kill the intervals/speed training for two weeks to see if I can resolve this. I'm going to continue the distance work as long as the pain improves.