At a recent health check, the doc told me my resting heart rate was 37 beats per minute. I was always under the impression that this was a GOOD thing, but recently my times for the 10 K have been about a minute slower than last year (38 to 39).
Does having a low resting heart rate aversly affect running, or is this all in my head?
A low RHR is generally associated with strong cardiovascular function. This is not a bad thing. I would elsewhere for the reason behind your slower times. Good luck.
runmad wrote:
At a recent health check, the doc told me my resting heart rate was 37 beats per minute. I was always under the impression that this was a GOOD thing, but recently my times for the 10 K have been about a minute slower than last year (38 to 39).
Does having a low resting heart rate aversly affect running, or is this all in my head?
the previous poster is absolutely correct. a low heart rate is further proof that you have a strong cardio system; and in no way does it mean anything detrimental such as heart disease or anyting of that nature.
as far as your times are concerned, this 1 minute deficit that your have achieved in the past the year could only be caused by age, seeing as though you are indeed past your peak years in racing (most likely, although peaking again is possible; but not probable) so dont worry; this 1 minute shouldnt affect you that much (competitive wise)
and, depending on your bodies unique system, shouldnt drop to +40:00 for 10k in a for a few more years.
also, just to concluded and illiminate any possiblilty of cardio health problems, im sure the doctor already asked if you were experiencing any chest pains or weezing; if not, you have nothing to worry my friend. your low heart rate that was noted in the doctors office probably just occured because you were being very calm, and taking deep breaths like your supposed to when doctors are doing test on you.
personally, i have never gotten my heart rate any lower than 39; but i am much younger.
my suggestion to you is that it wouldnt hurt for you to start doing some type of heart rate training. WEAR A MONITOR, especially on max hr days and recovery days; this will ensure that you arent overworking your heart and will probably lead you back to better race times. as i said, its still possible for you to run fast (even peak, not sure what your past times/pr was) but i dont recommend peaking for you right now.
doing a heartrate training regimen, at your age, will only be beneficial to your overall health and wellness; and only improvise your running career.
the430miler wrote:
this 1 minute deficit that your have achieved in the past the year could only be caused by age, seeing as though you are indeed past your peak years ... i am much younger...at your age
How do you know what his age is? He never shared that information.
pardon me for suggesting his approximate age; but i can tell by the context of his post that he is older. no-offense to the the o.p. if i am wrong, but the following things happened to lead me to inference of him being a middle aged person...
1. him going to see a doctor, and actually worrying about his overall health/ hearthealth. i dont know any adolescents who do this, beacuse they would have no sufficient need to do this.
2. the older you are, the slower your heart rate is. also, physiology has also proven to us that the older you are, the lower you maximum heartrate is (220-your age)
3. his overall 10k time. many middle age (35-50) year old people tend to run these type of borderline sub-40 times.
the430miler wrote:
1. him going to see a doctor, and actually worrying about his overall health/ hearthealth. i dont know any adolescents who do this, beacuse they would have no sufficient need to do this.
It sounded like a routine check-up to me. Even adolescents do that once a year.
the430miler wrote:2. the older you are, the slower your heart rate is. also, physiology has also proven to us that the older you are, the lower you maximum heartrate is (220-your age)
You're out of the loop on this one. No serious student of cardiovascular physiology uses that lame formula for maxHR. Individual heart rates vary way too much to make that forumula acceptable for training purposes.
the430miler wrote:3. his overall 10k time. many middle age (35-50) year old people tend to run these type of borderline sub-40 times.
Yikes! Take a look at some race results please. You'll see quite a variance of ages represented with these times. And a lot of folks in your specified age range are running much slower -- and, yes, some faster, too -- than that.
Low resting HR will not (on its own) have a negative effect on performance. Look rather to recent training...
the430miler wrote:
El G's training is 98% anaeorbic, he's practically a sprinter
I'm sorry, but I don't think anyone should take your advice after you said this.
LactateAcid wrote:
the430miler wrote:El G's training is 98% anaeorbic, he's practically a sprinter
I'm sorry, but I don't think anyone should take your advice after you said this.
aside from numerous spelling errors in your false post that edited my theory of el g's regimen, he should still be taking my advice because i never said his training was "98% ANAORBIC (as you like to spell it)"
do you perhaps mean to spell the word "anaerobic"??
you were probably the one arguing with me in the beginning about how he "doesnt have to do any speed work"
amature, how many referrences do i need to provide to convince you that the mile is an equally aerobic/anaerobic race???
i have already provided many references about the physiological attributes that the mile coincides; including mcmillian, frank horwill, daniels, lydiard, etc....
so just forget it, i hope you keep believing the mile is a completly aerobic race and this is proibably the reasoning for you running such slow times in it.
i changed my mind, im not that mean. i'll go ahead and provide you 1 more link, and maybe eventually you'll start running decent mile times instead of bashing others because you are jealuos of their times and cant except that there is serious flaw in your theory of the physiological makeup of the mile.
http://www.serpentine.org.uk/advice/coach/fh15.phpOh yes, I am seriously jealous of someone who can run a 4:30 mile! Wow, you are the best with your 4:30 mile! That is why I must come to this message board to be jealous of your times because I think of the mile as aerobic... You see right through me. Maybe the next mile I run I should break out the blocks!
Please. A 4:30 mile isn't that great, get over yourself kid.
Thanks to one and all for the post so far... to add a bit of additional information...
* I'm 47 years old.
* The health check was an annual thing.
* I've been running competively since junior high school, so about 34 years.
* I run about 60~70 kilometers/week, with usually one session of 10x400m or 4x1000m per week.
Please keep the posts coming.
Have you lost a lot of weight over the past couple of years? Losing weight will certainly bring your RHR down, which is normally a good thing. However, if you lose too much weight, or perhaps lose too much muscle, then a lower RHR may be accompanied by a drop in performance.
Rorke's Drift wrote:
Have you lost a lot of weight over the past couple of years? Losing weight will certainly bring your RHR down, which is normally a good thing. However, if you lose too much weight, or perhaps lose too much muscle, then a lower RHR may be accompanied by a drop in performance.
No... the weight has stayed about the same, plus or minus 2 kilograms.
Again, thanks everyone for the input. I'm beginning to think it's a matter of the natural aging process and not doing the correct type of training.
Back to the drawing board...