cheater watcher.... wrote:
If you were a watch mule and your mission was to duplicate the running of another runner, the easiest thing to do is pace. Cadence would be a bit more difficult. But the hardest thing to mimic would be heart rate. If you look at the graph of yesterday's run you see a distinct difference in the graph with data lines after mile 37. It most certainly looks like something changed at mile 37 and continued to the end of the run. It looks exactly as you might think a watch mule taking over would look. The heart rate is the biggest deviation. Cadence changes. The pace changes as well but the Strava graph makes pace more difficult to pick up. It won't let you isolate small portions of the run to drill down.
This is very interesting. The last part of the run is indeed a very different profile in terms of effort. Longer periods of running compared to the first part of the run which is on and off.
Something must have changed. WG could have started slowly, on off walking and then in the second part made more of an effort. Second half drops slowly making this slightly easier but not a massive help for tired legs. This increase in performance in the second part seems to go against what you expect. It seems the wrong way round. You start hard and then go to on and off as you tire.
The HR simply makes no sense in this second half, it just fails to match the efforts on the graphs. Really odd.