Little River 10 mile trail run…

Posted this on Dailymile and FB, but thought I’d put it up here too…

16F at the start, but my gear selection was pretty good and I wasn’t too cold and quickly warmed up to a nice temp. I love my buff! Used it as balaclava to start and then just covered the ears after the 1st couple miles.

I had hoped to break 9:00 pace but this is a very technical course. About 5 miles is on a tight mountain bike single track, and it’s really hard to get any speed there. (See the Garmin link below to see what I mean about the 2nd half of the course!)

Considering this was my 1st running race over 7 miles in several years, I am pleased as I was strong throughout even though I was pushing hard. (I have done adventure races that have had longer foot sections, and orienteering courses where I have been “running” longer times, but this was my 1st running race this long…)

The garmin data is here.

Here is a screen shot from the google earth import:

And here is my heart rate… This shows I really could not have gone a whole lot faster.  I was in the 165-175 range and that 175 is definitely pushing anaerobic.  I have not done a max heart rate test in a while, but I would think it is only 178 or so.  So the fact that I was above 165 for so long is a sign my vo2 max is doing pretty good.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Little River 10 mile trail run…

  1. seanb724 Post author

    I need to do a max heart rate test, but I have not seen my HR over 175 in a few years. Based on 220 – age, which I know is not very accurate, I would be 181. A few years back 220-age was way off for me — always showing a max HR too high, but now it seems closer.

    I’ve always had a high LT and been able to go high for a long period… However I agree, looking at the numbers, 98% of max for that long would be impressive. 🙂 But even at a max of 185 I was at 95% of max.

    I have thought of doing one of those human perf tests. There’s a college about 30 minutes from here that I should try.

    Reply
  2. Ed

    At first I missed the fact that this was a race and not a normal workout, so the higher effort makes much more sense to me now. 🙂

    And looking at the graph more closely, you did have quite a bit of variation. While you were peaking near 175, it looks like your average is probably quite a bit lower, so yes, I guess I do believe your max could be near 178.

    Reply
  3. seanb724 Post author

    I wish I could post HR vs. elevation, as that seems to be the biggest correlation in this race. My average HR was 167 according to garmin… That still puts average at 94% of max for the race. I think that is within possible, and I am happy if I was able to hold that. 🙂

    Reply
  4. George Linney

    One more thing, I thought about wearing my HR monitor but I didin’t want to be distracted by one more thing during the race. I was disciplining myself that the only readout on the Garmin I would look at was the race clock. Sometimes I get distracted by too many other fields. I still could have worn and just not looked at those fields during the race. Next time I will wear it.

    Reply
  5. Pingback: Run at the Rock. « 2sparrows

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