Why don't I have a Zone 1 or 2 while running?

[CheryG]

This has been a persistent issue for me. Currently up to 25mpw, "long" runs of 8 miles, I'm in the middle of a training program and so for the first time in my life have actually been doing speed workouts and am loving it.  These numbers have remained fairly constant over the past few years, including when I'm really throwing down the miles up to the marathon distance.


RHR around 50
Max HR, not tested but monitoring peaks during long hull sprints- high 190s


A downhill easy pace for me will be in the 140s, on the flat 153 or so.


No HR calculator will put my easy runs in zone 1 or 2, and to be honest they also probably fail the talk test.


Why?

[DrT(weekendwrAcur)]

I don’t see any issues, those look consistent with most of the calculators and formulas I’ve seen and used.

One observation is that your max HR is probably somewhat higher than what you’ve observed, but not by enough to skew your zones much.

I use the Training Peaks zones and have for decades across several sports. Training Peaks references anaerobic threshold HR (not Max HR) because it’s much easier to test and more useful for setting zones.

My phone app (Zones) references from Max HR and I’ve set it accordingly to track closely to Training Peaks.

If your Max is what you report then your zones are close to mine. If it’s 5% higher, either way those easy runs you mentioned are still zone 2 (or z1) runs

[DrT(weekendwrAcur)]

[CheryG]

Thank you!! Hmmm. I'll have to go into my TP and change my settings I guess. It has my threshold calculated at 167 does that sound right compared to yours?

Polar disagrees with the TP zones...
https://www.polar.com/blog/running-heart-rate-zones-basics/

[CheryG]

Ok, if I toggle the AT up it makes the zones more applicable. I don't do much speed work so I probably haven't triggered TP to calculate it properly.

[DrT(weekendwrAcur)]

Looks like Polar is using the Karvonen zones also referenced in the Stryd description I posted. And I’ve never “liked” that zone breakdown, for me it just never tracked closely to my training or how it “felt”. Similar to what you wrote.
The Training Peaks guys know their and I’ve always liked their analysis.
But at the end of the day, your zones should reflect how your body feels and responds in each training zone, and your best bet is to dial that in for you as closely as possible.

But for me, other than some minor drift in anaerobic threshold HR due to fitness or altitude, the TP formulas have been spot on for me, personally.

Now, that said, I have to say that i prefer to train to power, while monitoring HR (instead of training directly to HR), because HR can also sometimes be finicky, and also lags effort by 30-60 seconds.

But most importantly learn what each of your zones “feels” like so you don’t have to keep looking at your device constantly;)

[CheryG]

After 4 weeks of following a structured program with the somewhat vague goal of running quality miles vs pursuing quantity and the goal of long distance, I think the biggest lesson for me has been feel.  I didn't realize how much I was overtraining and how different my legs feel when at least trying to better adhere to an 80/20ish format.

It's just a nagging thing to have the zones on my Suunto app in particular look like I'm killing myself. TP, which I adore, was definitely better.

[CheryG]

And again, thank you! I feel like I've had so many questions about running answered lately and I'm stoked about it.