I am in pretty dang good shape in the middle of training for IM 70.3 galveston for my 3rd time with no race. Im putting in 3 rides per week (2 spin classes + 1 long ride 60+ mi @ 19.3 ish MPH), plus 2 runs (7 mi + 12 to 14 mi run) and a brick run after the long ride. Also swimming 2 x week @ 2400 m each.

The problem i am having is my heart rate is climbing pretty high on the brick run, about 15 to 20 bpm higher (into zone 4 and judt touching zone 5 before i begin walking) than just my normal runs (zone 3) at the same or slightly lower pace.

Anyone have some good advice for me to lower it during a brick run or triathlon? Is this normal? It appears to be my biggest challenge for triathlon....

Yea that may be the case, not what i want to hear though..ha ha... Im trying to run my "zone 3" pace, but i cant seem to keep it down. Maybe that is normal and im just ignorant...?

One idea i have is im not drinking enough water throughout the day. Im working to increase that.

Could be nutrition too. Over or under

Hincemm said:

---

Without sounding like a smart ass, the best advice is too slow down. And it's totally normal.

---

+1

Other recommendation is doing a run focus block at some point after the race. Running 5-6 days / week will do wonders for your overall running HR. Look up the BarryP training plan (I've talked about it on here before). Game changer.

Great thread on MAF training. See my post on page two detailing the same run on the same 70.3 course one year apart.

https://texags.com/forums/48/topics/2657006/1

If you have time, and it can fit into your training schedule, I'd do a loooong brick just before a rest week. Like bump your bike time by 25% and your run time by 50% but slow waaaaaaay down. If my HR starts doing that, I'll do a really slow long workout. When training for a hundred miler, I'll do a long 50k+ but keep my HR on the low end of zone 3. Your body isn't handling the run after bike like you want it to, so, given everything else is ok (otherwise healthy, hydrated, etc.), you're simply fatigued, especially after the bike. The longer slow bike will help get you fatigued without the stress of moving faster, and the longer slow run will get you used to running after a tiring bike. Then recover during the rest week and I'm 99% certain your HR will drop a touch. Now if it's much more than 10bpm higher than normal, there may be something else going on, but I'm guessing this would help quite a bit. The other option would be to take a much lighter down week, but I've had mixed results with that, again, given everything else is ok.

Good suggestion. I have debated between increased MAF type training, or more intense stuff at higher HR.

Unfortunately im way behind in my training. I had a pretty tough cough / sinus infection for 3 weeks then freeze week took another....before all that i was ahead by a week or so. Not sure i have much time for a rest week as my 14 week plan has become about 9 weeks.

Since i have a really good base im getting back up to speed pretty quick (swim / bike) as i only slowed a bit in between the previous 2 IM 70.3 that were postponed. This issue was occurring before the sickness though so that isnt it. It really showed up 1 time last spring and then came in stronger in the fall as i was getting close to the Nov race.

I have picked up about 30 secs on my mile time on routine runs, but that occured as temps came down with a minimal impact on my HR (maybe up a few). I think what i will do is keep my 7 mi runs at a good pace. Set the long runs at a slower pace to maintain low HR and same for the bricks, plus increase my daily water intake.

You're in far better shape than I have ever been but I don't see any intervals in your training schedule (except perhaps the spin classes). I used to run at Memorial Park and watched the marathon coaches take their clients to the short track for sprints and intervals about once a week.

Based on my nutrition coach while I was training for my Ironman. If my heart rate rises during workout it is because I am low on fuel. Sounds like you need to add 200-300 calories be hour of running to fuel yourself. The fuel you intake on hour 1 will be available hour 2 since it will take a little bit for your body to digest. For me this was a liquid/gu item that would do it.

Yea, i agree on the intervals. Spin class does a pretty good job with those, so i guess i was hoping that was enough. Maybe not though. I originally was doing running intervals as an additional running day, but decided i needed a rest day more to be ready for the long stuff fri / sat. I now have 2 rest days: sun / wed.

I need to re-check my nutrition. Right now im taking about 50 oz of water / tailwind with 2.5 scoops in each bottle, plus a cliff blok every 10 miles and then 1 bar (cliff / granola/etc) during the 60 ish mi ride. Ive thought abiut adding a waffle and or gel.

If any of yall are on the texags strava group, you can find me. Last name is zollinger

Are you sure your zones are right? I can do Lincoln-Douglass debates in zone 4; Garmin thinks I'm about to keel over.

94chem said:

---

Are you sure your zones are right? I can do Lincoln-Douglass debates in zone 4; Garmin thinks I'm about to keel over.

---

So what's the debate?

That is a good point. I am 42, almost 43. A few years back i got my HR to 200 in a soccer game, so ive always used that # as my peak and then assumed each zone was a range of 20 bpm down from that.

In reality, i can run / bike forever at a HR of up to 160 ish. So ive always thought of 160 to 165 as my top of zone 3. My goal has been to complete a triathlon below that #. When doing medium and long runs, ive always tried to hold it flat right there.

However, when combining with a long bike ride beforehand, even running a pace of even to even + 1 min / mi, the HR wants to climb up to 180. I could do 165 - 170 for a half marathon, but not much more than that. Right now when i get over 180 ill stop and walk, but it doesnt take long to get right back there.

agcivengineer said:

---

That is a good point. I am 42, almost 43. A few years back i got my HR to 200 in a soccer game, so ive always used that # as my peak and then assumed each zone was a range of 20 bpm down from that.

In reality, i can run / bike forever at a HR of up to 160 ish. So ive always thought of 160 to 165 as my top of zone 3. My goal has been to complete a triathlon below that #. When doing medium and long runs, ive always tried to hold it flat right there.

However, when combining with a long bike ride beforehand, even running a pace of even to even + 1 min / mi, the HR wants to climb up to 180. I could do 165 - 170 for a half marathon, but not much more than that. Right now when i get over 180 ill stop and walk, but it doesnt take long to get right back there.

---

Max HR isn't the highest you can get it, max HR is the highest you can theoretically get ypur HR before you start causing heart damage. That's why it's typically based on age.

Also, I didn't read the entire thread, but based on your OP: 1) Quit the spin classes, they do very little to improve your real world biking, you need to be riding outside or on the trainer on your actual bike 3 times a week. 2) you aren't running enough. You should have a min of 3 dedicated run days. Interval, tempo, long. And that doesn't include your OTB mileage.

I won't comment on the swimming since you're right in the window most triathletes train in and most triathletes don't agree with my opinion on swim volume. Personally, when doing a build, I'm at a minimum of 10,000m per week for a 70.3 and closer to 16,000m per week for an Ironman build; but I'm a swimmer, and personally believe the overall fitness you gain from the extra water time does a lot more than just make you faster in the water.

Interesting feedback. I appreciate it. I think we tend to do what we like best. My favorite is to ride so i do that the most.

I do agree that i need to run more, especially at a lower HR as that is probably the biggest answer to my question. I do think the spin class helps as its designed for outdoor riders / triathletes and ive definitely seen it improve my overall strength on the bike...riding outside might be better though, i have debated that question as well.

Your fitness is not what you think it is and you are starting off too fast. Focus on negative splits on the run and progressively letting your heart raise during it. For a half I would try to stay in zone 3 during the first part of the run and if I felt good would allow myself to go into zone 4 during the second. Sometimes the heat would do this by itself and my pace would stay the same.

It sounds like you are new, it takes years to get "good" triathlon fitness. Be consistent if you want to continue, if you have time I would add another swim, easy run, and maybe another bike per week. More than anything I think another 2400m swim (I would actually try to do 2x3000m swims and 1x2000-2500m swim a week) since it builds you fitness more than the others and almost requires no recovery.

And something I very strongly recommend, do at least 1 run or bike a week with no electronics and go by feel.

Hincemm said:

---

94chem said:

---

Are you sure your zones are right? I can do Lincoln-Douglass debates in zone 4; Garmin thinks I'm about to keel over.

---

So what's the debate?

---

Whether or not to slow down, duh.

Thanks for your feedback! Yea my intensity and consistency has dramatically improved the past 2 years with my current schedule for the past 1.5 yrs. Ive done a few sprints/ oly tge past 5 years, but just started 70.3 last spring and then trained for 2 that were postponed.

Adding more training is a good question. It would mean going to 6 days instead of 5, and im probably able to do so. Last year at this time i wouldnt have been able to physicially.

Typically I would train 7 days a week except for recovery week. If you can't do that physically then your workouts are too intense. People don't realize consistency is more important than intensity in triathlon, the "sprints" still take an hour.

CPAAg said:

---

...If my heart rate rises during workout it is because I am low on fuel. Sounds like you need to add 200-300 calories be hour of running to fuel yourself. The fuel you intake on hour 1 will be available hour 2 since it will take a little bit for your body to digest. For me this was a liquid/gu item that would do it.

---

This.

Elevated HR is a response to low fuel and/or training fatigue. I don't factor brick runs into anything other than gauging my fueling routine during a long ride.

And if you haven't done one in 6mo, I would recommend conducting a running threshold field test to reset your HR zones.

Back when I was training for my Ironman. There was liquid supplement called perpetuim (sp?) that I would mix into my water bottles. It has enough calories in it to help fuel me during long training.

For running you can't take in enough calories through liquid drinks etc. but my nutritionist had me take in more calories on bike to help supplement fuel for run. Bike was 400-500 calories per hour of fuel.

Nutritionist I used - https://www.linkedin.com/in/evepearson

It's a half, your body had enough fuel to do one with with no additional calories. The issue with the OP is fitness and pace. I did a half that was so cold I couldn't use my hands until the later part of the bike so I may have gotten 300 calories total the entire race.

P.U.T.U said:

---

It's a half, your body had enough fuel to do one with with no additional calories. The issue with the OP is fitness and pace. I did a half that was so cold I couldn't use my hands until the later part of the bike so I may have gotten 300 calories total the entire race.

---

Trying to do a 6-8 hour race without taking in any fuel sounds like a terrific way to bonk really hard. You can do it, but it is going to be a really slow and miserable race.

Crazy Ag 97 said:

---

agcivengineer said:

---

That is a good point. I am 42, almost 43. A few years back i got my HR to 200 in a soccer game, so ive always used that # as my peak and then assumed each zone was a range of 20 bpm down from that.

In reality, i can run / bike forever at a HR of up to 160 ish. So ive always thought of 160 to 165 as my top of zone 3. My goal has been to complete a triathlon below that #. When doing medium and long runs, ive always tried to hold it flat right there.

However, when combining with a long bike ride beforehand, even running a pace of even to even + 1 min / mi, the HR wants to climb up to 180. I could do 165 - 170 for a half marathon, but not much more than that. Right now when i get over 180 ill stop and walk, but it doesnt take long to get right back there.

---

Max HR isn't the highest you can get it, max HR is the highest you can theoretically get ypur HR before you start causing heart damage. That's why it's typically based on age.

Also, I didn't read the entire thread, but based on your OP: 1) Quit the spin classes, they do very little to improve your real world biking, you need to be riding outside or on the trainer on your actual bike 3 times a week. 2) you aren't running enough. You should have a min of 3 dedicated run days. Interval, tempo, long. And that doesn't include your OTB mileage.

I won't comment on the swimming since you're right in the window most triathletes train in and most triathletes don't agree with my opinion on swim volume. Personally, when doing a build, I'm at a minimum of 10,000m per week for a 70.3 and closer to 16,000m per week for an Ironman build; but I'm a swimmer, and personally believe the overall fitness you gain from the extra water time does a lot more than just make you faster in the water.

---

Strongly disagree on quitting the spin classes. A well designed spinning profile can be every bit as beneficial as a workout on a trainer. If you are riding with instructors that know what they are doing and aren't having you do all kinds of dance moves and other nonsense, they can be just as effective as riding alone on a trainer.

Yea, ive been a loyal spin class attender for the past 2 years or so. Its a "Power" class so its specifically focused on triathletes and outdoor riders. My buddies who i ride with outdoors have noticed a significant increase in my power and endurance over the past 1.5 years.

I have debated as to whether or not riding outdoors or on the spin bike is better for me.

Our triathlon team used to rent the bike area at 24 hour fitness to do some training, I have never liked a spin class but the coach made a way to do intervals fun. You just have to find the right class.

txags92 said:

---

P.U.T.U said:

---

It's a half, your body had enough fuel to do one with with no additional calories. The issue with the OP is fitness and pace. I did a half that was so cold I couldn't use my hands until the later part of the bike so I may have gotten 300 calories total the entire race.

---

Trying to do a 6-8 hour race without taking in any fuel sounds like a terrific way to bonk really hard. You can do it, but it is going to be a really slow and miserable race.

---

I had no choice, I could not feel my hands for half the race since it was 36F starting the race. My point was fitness and pace is more important than what kind of specific fuel. Just stick with what you train with. At the end of the day I barely noticed a difference between all of the different kinds I tried. I wanted to get used to several types of fuels just in case.

You have 2000 calories worth of glucose on a normal day and most people during a half will be zone 2-3 with some elite amateurs going into zone 4 later in the race (southern races are different since you have thermal heart rate creep when it gets warmer than 70). 200 calories an hour on the bike should be plenty.

Pace and fitness is what matters most, triathlons are simple but not easy. Put in the work, get a coach or track with something like TSS, and plan accordingly. There is an abundance of articles about training plans and how to work the fitness/fatigue balance. With most athletes having a good idea of your heart rate zones makes race plans so much easier. For 70.3s build up to a heart rate for set distances and ditch the heart rate during the last half of the run if you feel good.

I say this from experience, that race where I maybe got 300 calories I was the amateur winner and I think 5th overall with around 30 pros. I just knew my fitness and pace for that race which was extremely hilly.

I was really referring to your first statement that your body has enough to do a half with no fuel. Technically, that is accurate, but it would be a miserable effort to do it that way. Those 200-300 calories per hour on the bike will make a world of different in how difficult it feels and how hard you can go.

I totally get that for your cold race experience it was out of necessity. But didn't want somebody to read the first part and think they should go into a half IM planning for no carb intake during the race.

I never said that, was just pointing out to the people saying it could be nutrition when you could look at the work the person is putting in and know that it is fitness. The first response nailed it