Quick background: 52yo recreational runner. Heavier than most runners (5’9" and fluctuate between 215-222 lbs), which may be relevant here. Ran half-marathon this morning…2:02 beating 2:05 goal. Use a sports watch and have watched and used heartrate MUCH more in training for this race than ever before.
Today’s race was NOT very hilly overall (~250 ft difference between high and low points), but had rolling hills throughout. Approximate course is detailed here… https://www.mapmyrun.com/routes/view/1614097987. For my “hill” strategy, I decided to commit almost 100% to an “even perceived effort” approach, which is what I understand most experts recommend. I was also monitoring my HR to back my estimation of perceived effort. While my HR did pick up maybe 10 bpm on hills today, I kept it close to even.
The result?..I was SPEEDING by almost everybody near me going downhill, but was also getting regularly passed going up hills. On this not very hilly course, my fastest mile was 8:15 and slowest was 10:26 (with a 9:19 average).
So the question…who’s doing it wrong? Are the vast majority of runners (at least those near my pace) taking the wrong approach to hills? Am I missing something and perhaps have a better strategy available to me? Or maybe are we all “doing it right” and my extra weight simply dictates that I should use a different hill approach than other comparable, but lighter, runners?
You clearly are doing something right if you are improving your times and what you are doing feels good for you, I would not waste my time and energy focusing on what others are doing , specially if they are recreational runners
Running down hills is harder on your quads, especially if you’re heavier. If you’re more accustomed to running up hills, you’re going to faster running up hills as well. Generally it’s okay to speed up a little on the down but you’re unlikely to make up for the time you slowed down going up.
I tend to pass a lot of people even we go uphill. I’m used to running up hills. On the downhill I only a little faster, nothing crazy.
On a very hilly half I did, I was keeping with some pacers (whose job it is to keep even splits), but I lost them on a big uphill and caught them after a series of downhill sections. I am a light runner so I’m not sure that has anything to do with it. It felt like the right strategy to me, but I’m not sure if it’s actually ideal for more advanced runners.
When you say you “used heartrate”, can you tell me a bit more what that means? I’m a 53 y/o male new runner, and am overweight for my height.
Generally it means that I am watching/using my HR measurements (as told to me by my trusted Garmin watch) during training runs much more than I used to. In practice, this means:
- (Most relevant to this thread) I have an additional source of info to guide my “constant effort on hills” strategy. I think I already knew that I was previously pushing much harder up hills, but when I really focused on HR and saw how much it skyrocketed on uphills it became even more clear that perhaps my ego was encouraging me to go harder than I should.
- I’ve done more “low heart rate” training. You can find lots of info out there (including on Reddit) about this, but it goes with the general idea that most training should be relatively easy and the value comes from simply building up the mileage. A corollary of this is the idea that many runners are pushing too hard too often and put themselves at risk for injury and burnout (or for beginners, perhaps giving up running entirely because it’s hard to habitually do something that’s hard).
- It’s another source of info that guides me on days that are perhaps off-days and a sign I should take it easy. If I start a familiar run and see my HR is higher than I would expect, I usually trust the implicit message and cut down on pace or distance for that run.
- I’m sure there are other things I’m forgetting, but knowing my HR is now just a fundamental aspect of my self-monitoring when running.
The longest distance I’ve ever run is 3 miles. I did it at a pace of 10’ 30” per mile. After 2.5 miles I’m in HRZ4. I can’t get back into zone 2 without walking for a while. When I try to do “Zone 2 training” I have to run/walk/run/walk to drop back down below 3.0. — Eventually I’d like to do a 10k and longer, but currently that will put me in zone 4.5+ for anything longer than 3 miles. And i understand that I probably shouldn’t be running in zone 4 for 30-180 minutes. I’m a 53 year old male who’s been running for 2 months. — Any suggestions?
A run/walk approach for most of your runs is absolutely reasonable. Early in my most recent training cycle as I was building up mileage, I used the run/walk on all runs other than my planned-fast workouts to help me keep my HR under a specific level. Just like accepting that going up hills slow is the right approach, a run/walk mix might force swallowing the ego a bit but it’s smart. If going 10K requires a run/walk mix given your current fitness levels, I see zero problems with that.
Understand and accept that whatever your goals, this is likely to be a long-term process, but improvement absolutely will come and it feels tremendously satisfying.
You are doing it right. Most of those other folks are just running and haven’t even asked that question yet.
Running downhill is a technique thing - if you don’t have good technique it’s hard to run fast downhill without it really pounding on your legs/knees. If you have good technique, it can be a lot of fun to run fast down a hill.
It is relative, however; running down a 5% hill is fairly easy, a 10% hill is hard, and I can’t do anything steeper than that with any speed at all.
It sounds shitty, but a lot of people don’t have good pacing and it doesn’t benefit you to worry about them during a race.
Your approach seems perfectly reasonable. As long as you are protecting your body, joints especially, on the faster downhills you should be god to go. I am sure I don’t need to tell you that though.
I do the same as you — try to maintain a consistent effort. This means that on uphills, I slightly reduce my cadence and significantly reduce my stride length (more so on steep hills). This approach works well for me; without it, I’d tire myself out too much on uphills.
On downhills, I try to glide down, lengthening my stride a bit but not speeding up too much. (In my early running days, I pounded too hard down some hills during a race, tore my medial meniscus, had surgery, and missed years of running.)
As you’ve noticed, many runners don’t follow the even-effort strategy. Maybe that’s because different approaches work well for different people (and yes, your weight gives you more of a reason than most runners to slow on the uphills). But another reason may be that runners in your pace group don’t tend to be highly educated about running strategies. (Just taking a guess here.)
P.S. If you’re 52 and 5’9” and 220, and you’re running a half marathon in just over 2:00, you’re doing a fantastic job!
You beat your goal time solidly. You did not bonk. The plan worked for you.
But I know what you mean about even pace vs even effort.
I’m a Colorado runner (United States, region that’s very mountainous with high elevation). Lots of experience on hills and changing topography. I might be abnormal, but I aim to keep a constant pace regardless of if I’m going uphill or downhill. Sure, the uphills will be harder. The downhills easier. But generally, it all washes out.