Back once again for everything you wanted to know about running but were afraid to ask.
Rules of the Road:
This is inspired by eric_twinge’s fine work in r/fitness.
Upvote either good or stupid questions. Sort questions by new so that they get some love.
To the more experienced runnitors, if something is a good question or answer, add it to the FAQ.
Post your question – stupid or otherwise – here to get an answer – stupid or otherwise. Anyone can post a question and the community as a whole is invited and encouraged to provide an answer. Many questions get submitted late each week that don’t get a lot of action, so if your question didn’t get answered, feel free to post it again.
As always, be sure to read the FAQ first. Also, there’s a handy-dandy search bar to your right, and if you didn’t know, you can also use Google to search runnit by using the limiter “site:reddit.com r/running”.
Be sure to check back often as questions get posted throughout the day. Sort comments by “new” to be sure the newer questions get some love as well.
[Posting on behalf of /u/Percinho who is busy trying on his new tri suit that he got on Black Friday sale]
In determining my max heart rate (and the corresponding zones), is there any reason I should not just use the maximum heart rate that my watch has captured in the last, say, six months? I have hit the mid-180s a few times during short periods of running very hard, peaking at 188. But I’m 51, and the usual subtraction formulas would yield a lower MHR. It’s possible that I left a little on table on those hard runs and my real MHR is a bit higher, but I know it’s at least 188. Does this make sense?