Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 73

Thread: Couch to 169K..... or bust

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by Travs View Post
    Are you still planning for the long race (was it something like 100 miles in July...?)
    If I can yeah. But itís all about eating the elephant in bite sized portions. I was really worried for a short while that I wouldnít even be able to walk in the hills again. Then I could, which was a win, and now I can run in the hills which is a win, win. Iím still though two or three wins short of being able to do the LL100 at the end of July

    Next up itís about being able to run longer distances. And run faster. If I can do both of those then that will be fantastic and I can straight away put them to the test next month - Iím down for the Ulswater Way trail 20 race on 5th June (20 miles) and then the Lakeland 5 Passes on 25th (33 miles)

    Plenty of scope for car crashes yet

  2. #52
    Master Travs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    NE Lakes/Coventry
    Posts
    4,107
    Yes that Lakes 5 Passes looks a cracking route, but (and i'm pretty sure the debate has already been had on here), Ascend Events' prices seem to have rocketed.... i'll be doing Great Lakes that weekend instead.

    Best of luck...

  3. #53
    Master Hank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lancaster
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Fellbeast View Post
    I'm now planning to really push the envelope with something a fair bit longer this coming weekend and I reckon that may be a make or breaker
    About 6 weeks to the 5 Passes I reckon. You could add 3 miles a week to your long run and be ready to hit that rather than rolling the dice this weekend. (Spoken as someone on the comeback from injury and the 5 Passes will be farthest I've run in a long time.)
    Geoff Clarke
    Lancaster Runners

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    684
    So its now 12 full weeks since I started this thread and, coincidentally, my Garmin app charts my VO2 max over a 12 week period. Yeah I know VO2 max as measured by an app isn't going to be blindingly accurate, even though nowadays I wear my HR chest strap all of the time when exercising, but as a way of measuring relative fitness its really good I'd say. Especially good in fact as I'm now according to Garmin in the top 10% for my age and have a fitness age of 33


  5. #55
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Over Haddon
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Fellbeast View Post
    So its now 12 full weeks since I started this thread and, coincidentally, my Garmin app charts my VO2 max over a 12 week period. Yeah I know VO2 max as measured by an app isn't going to be blindingly accurate, even though nowadays I wear my HR chest strap all of the time when exercising, but as a way of measuring relative fitness its really good I'd say. Especially good in fact as I'm now according to Garmin in the top 10% for my age and have a fitness age of 33

    I think you should now return to the Senior male category in future Fell Races, Fellbeast!

    On a more serious note, congratulations on your VO2 Max results. I have never worn a HR monitor but would like to think that mine would be similarly much lower than my real age.

    Unfortunately I think this and similar results says more about the general fitness of the nation and confirms that we live in a country full of fat, lazy lardy arses!
    Visibility good except in Hill Fog

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    684
    Yes Iím now as fit and an average, slightly fat 33 year old couch potato bloke 😊

  7. #57
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ambleside
    Posts
    3,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Fellbeast View Post
    So its now 12 full weeks since I started this thread and, coincidentally, my Garmin app charts my VO2 max over a 12 week period. Yeah I know VO2 max as measured by an app isn't going to be blindingly accurate, even though nowadays I wear my HR chest strap all of the time when exercising, but as a way of measuring relative fitness its really good I'd say. Especially good in fact as I'm now according to Garmin in the top 10% for my age and have a fitness age of 33

    I have not looked at how Garmin estimates VO2 Max but I suspect it just makes an estimate from activity level and heart rate. At VO2 Max heart rate has levelled out at its maximum and O2 consumption no longer rises, despite an increase in activity - something that cannot be kept up for long. Of course Garmin cannot measure O2 consumption. It also wants to make people feel positive about their exercising. If people are "coming back" after an injury I suspect Garmin would portray this as an increase in VO2 Max. But well done! Mine has gone from 40 to 44 in 6 months - I keep trying to push it up to no avail.

  8. #58
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ambleside
    Posts
    3,987
    I found this:

    For Garmin to calculate the athletes VO2 Max it collects the following data from each user:

    1 – Age and personal background is recorded
    2 – Exercise is started with data collected from heart rate and speed.
    3 – The data collected from the activity is segmented into different heart rate scales based on the user’s background information.

    4 – During the activity reliability is measured based on continuous activity (stopping etc)
    5 – The most credible data segments are then used to estimate the aerobic fitness level through heart rate and speed data.

    VO2 MAX GARMIN CALCULATION

    Speed data is then taken from reliable segments and used to estimate a VO2 Max score. This is taken from 20-30 second periods using one of the VO2 calculations below:

    Walking and Pole Walking: Theoretical VO2 (ml/kg/min)=1.78*speed*16.67[tan(inclination)+0.073]
    Running on a Level Ground: Theoretical VO2 (ml/kg/min)=3.5 speed
    Running in a Hilly Terrain: Theoretical VO2 (ml/kg/min)=3.33*speed+15*tan(inclination)*speed+3.5
    Cycling: Theoretical VO2 (ml/kg/min)=(12.35*Power+300)/person’s weight
    Rowing (Indoor): Theoretical VO2 (ml/kg/min)=(14.72*Power+250.39)/person’s weight

    Unit of speed = kilometers per hour (km/h)
    Unit of inclination = degrees)(į)
    Unit of power = watts (W)
    Unit of weight = kilograms (kg)
    Last edited by Mike T; 20-05-2021 at 05:36 AM.

  9. #59
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ambleside
    Posts
    3,987
    I like the simplicity of multiplying running speed on level ground by 3.5. So for my 10 km PB of 40 minutes = 15 km per hour x 3.5 = 52.5. This agrees with the VO2 Max charts I have seen.

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    684
    Thatís great Mike. Garminís VO2 max for sure is good for measuring relative fitness and Iím now finding I have to go harder to get any gains. Iím currently looking to improve my anaerobic scores on the Garmin app but, broadly speaking, to do that I did to get my heart rate into zone five, which means pushing it above 165bpm for me.

    So hill climbs on the bike, faster running (knee permitting) and high intensity gym stuff - none of which are particularly pleasant experiences
    Last edited by Fellbeast; 20-05-2021 at 08:07 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •