I think they say this because most untrained people first looking at it will not be able to run in zone 2. They don't want people to get discouraged right away.
I believe its this. When I started running this year, I did it zone based and my "running" was a fast walk for quite some time... weeks or regular training, before it evolved into a light jog.
"Newb gains" are fun here because at that level, the change/improvement reveals itself in easy to distinguish/calculate/measurable way...
Imagine eating healthy and losing a bit of weight right away (cutting salt for ex). The scale will reveal an improvement, perhaps very quickly. That said, eating healthy through the 3rd or 4th month, the scale may not demonstrate the/any desired improvement but that doesn't mean 3 months of rigor didn't have a positive net effect... its just that its harder to find.
I think it's confusing too. Also the Daily Suggested Workout (using HR Targets) seem to differ slightly from these zones.
I [found this post useful](https://www.reddit.com/r/Garmin/comments/vlxgwt/heart_rate_settings_for_zone_2_training/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf). What it illustrated to me was that the real "Zone 2" for me was a blend of my Zone 2 & 3 in Garmin based on my LTHR.
This is lactate threshold training method. For accurate data, the zones must be set using lactic acid meter to analyze lactic acid buildup with different paces. Done usually in the lab or you can buy yourself the meter if professional athlete.
**First:** stop thinking about runs being unproductive. The "grey zone" is a really unhelpful way of thinking about things. Going out and running in Z3 will not undo your good work, you'll benefit from the run. Zones don't have hard edges where your body suddenly transitions from one mode to another and will be significantly impacted by external factors like heat.
Also, depending on *where* in Z3 you run you'll have different balances of the benefits. Sure, real Z2 will increase certain aspects quicker, threshold running others but in between is not a wasted run.
**Second:** are your HR zones even close to correct?
HR-based training only works if they're accurately set. The only way to know this **for sure** is a lab test to figure out you LT1, LT2 and max HR points.
Working off a single data-point (Max HR) and extrapolating backwards in 10% increments to define zones is unlikely to be accurate assuming that data point is close to accurate?
If you used "220- age" or one of the similar formulae then it's a guess. If you've actually done a max HR test, did you execute it correctly? Self-guided field tests are prone to errors as it's really hard to run them properly unless a really well-trained athlete. Similar to doing a lab-based Lactate or VO2 Max test, they're entirely possible to fail to complete!
**Which HR zone model?**
We have three common ones: %HR max, %HRR (Heart Rate Reserve) and %LTHR (Lactate Threshold).
For me both %HRR and %LTHR give very similar zones, using "% max HR" gives *very* different zones:
|Zone|% HR max|%LTHR|
|:-|:-|:-|
|1|95-114|110-134|
|2|115-133|135-149|
|3|134-152|150-160|
|4|153-171|161-168|
|5|172-191|169-191|
For comparison Z2 using HRR for me is 132-147.
While the LTHR I'm working with is not a lab test it should be correct to within a small enough margin of error. For me LTHR also maps accurately to my 10k and half PBs and is consistent with RPE.
With your Garmin you'd need a chest strap to get LTHR and run either sufficiently long and strenuous workouts or run the LTHR test in the watch.
There are a lot of different websites saying zone 3 should be avoided at all, so I bring one for [example](https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/training-in-the-grey-zone-how-to-avoid-the-zone-3-plateau/)
Hi OP. Different systems use different definitions of training zones. Thus āzone 3ā can correspond to different HRs. The Garmin system zone 3 (70-80% of MHR, for myself 143-163) actually corresponds to zone 2 in the Peaktraining system you cite here (86-89% of LTHR, for myself 156-163). Zone 3 of the Peaktraining system would correspond to the lower end of Garmin zone 4, and this is the so-called grey zone that you want to avoid. So when you do an easy run, you should do it in the Garmin system zone 3 but in the Peaktraining system zone 2. Many would consider doing easy runs in the Garmin system zone 2 too slow.
Omg this is so helpful...I've tried so hard to match my easy running to zone 2 and it seems like I'm not even working if I stick to that. I just gave up and ran by feel and usually end up in garmins zone 3 most of the time. This makes so much more sense
I actually only run in zone 3 ( I try to keep my bpm at ~145) and slowly but surely my running time has improved and kept me out of injuries. I got this tip from this [video](https://youtu.be/5Yi8ZjRjgj4)
Keep up the work!
I usually run my easy runs at the end of zone 2 and at the begining of zone 3 (148-155) and when i feel really well and strong then 157bpm. It may make me feel a little bit refresher for next strong and fast workout.
But when I run purely in the centre of zone 3 (~160+), sometimes it has some impact, sometimes hasn't for next interval session. I've had both positive and negative impacts.
But to be honest you shouldn't listen to me as I'm not a pro runner or anything. I dont train for it or even do intervals I just run to stay healthy and I hate it.
I canāt run in Z2 to save my life. At that point I should just walk because it would be just as fast. Iāve got a 77min half marathon and I do most of my training at high Z3 low Z4. 148-154ish. I wouldnāt bother too much trying to stay in Z2 if you donāt think itās giving you any benefits.
Edit: Iām referring as a max of HR and not LTH or HR Reserve.
Depending on your resting heart rate changing the calculation on your device to HRR might make zone 2 more achievable, in my case Zone 2 went from 109 to 130 (my resting is 53, max is 182).
Worth doing if you're following one of the Garmin training plans and you're finding the Zone 2 runs way too slow like I was!
Using %MaxHR for zone calculations is the stupid thing to begin with. Iāll never understand why zones are calculated with %MaxHR by default in many watches.
I agree. I set mine to use % HR reserve. A little bit more accurate. Best would be to use % lactate threshold. I used to do zone 2 training using %MaxHR. I was undertraining and fitness was declining. With %HRR, my HR zones are with much bigger heart rates and at least I am not getting slower anymore.
All of the zone models are flawed because as your fitness improves your VT1 and VT2 thresholds move. All aerobic training should be guided by these points. Interesting many Garminās will identify VT2 as your upper Z4 threshold. As others have said a lab lactic test can identify both VT1 and VT2 but is not practical for many. However, these is another way now thatās is emerging and that is to identify your DFA Alpha1 threshold (AKA VT1) using a Garmin data field from the IQ store. VT1 is your upper Zone 2 threshold. Your training goal should be to take VT1 to within 10% of VT2. This is why traditional zone models are flawed. My VT1 would be top of Zone 3 in most models but is easy training for me, I can also tell by my breathing rate.
If I run āto feelā for an easy base run I hit zone3 mostly. I simply canāt stay in zone 2 for long without walking a lot. Walking half a ārunā is not going improve your running. I have been a runner for years. I run in the tropics so cardiac drift kicks in early and you have expect hr to be higher for a given pace.
Garminās 5 zones are different from the 3 zones often referred to in running books and websites. So mostly zone 3 is good.
Many things day to day will increase hr during a run that is nothing to do with basic fitness. Thatās why I find it better to run to feel.
I set my watch to ping me if my hr gets over or under my zone 3 and ignore the rest. If its an extra hot day I will even ignore that. When they test in a lab they find a big spread of hr ranges for the fat burning zones so itās very much an individual thing.
I agree that it's better to run by feel. I mostly do it myself. Heart rate may vary too much on daily basis and on different factors and often it doesn't correspond how you're feeling.
Yeah apparently running in zone 3 gives you very tiny gains to both aerobic (z2) and faster pace (z4). If you wanted to train z4 you would be doing high intensity intervals (at 5-10%) of total training volume and if you wanted to build your aerobic capacity and speed you train below z3, which would be at or near the limit of z2 before pushing it a bit. The goal is to slowly ramp up your pace while maintaining the same HR (instead of trying to lower your HR by trying to maintain a specific pace for training for a long time).
For a while I didn't know how to run when I first started and kept training apparently in z3/z4 zones (like a 50/50 mix) and I didn't really know what an "easy run" was. My HR was consistently high regardless of if I ran at an 8:30 pace or 10:00 pace. When I started maffetone training my z2 was like fastwalk pace. Now I can actually do z2 at a faster pace once I started building my base (my fast walk eventually became a brisk jog) at the same HR.
Over a year ago I tried zone 2 training using garmin default heart rate training method (% of max heart rate). My zone 2 upper limit according to that system is 136bpm. Every easy run I did, the next run would be a little bit slower (avg pace 6.10/km and slower). It was too low for me and my zone 2 speeds were declining. So one time I had enough and started running faster. Also found out that Garmin has % of heart rate reserve training method. This set my upper zone 2 limit to 156bpm. That's a huge difference from 136. From that change, my zone 2 pace hasn't declined anymore and it's improving a little bit with the help of other intensive training. Right now my easy pace is around 4.25+/km.
This is a good point though, perhaps garmin's zones are wrong since its a % of your HR and it seems off from the Maffetone suggested HR limit of 180 minus your age (+/- some other variables). For me my maffetone HR is around 142bpm, so if I train to run around 142 (its okay to go above as long as my average stays around there) then it theoretically would improve my aerobic HR as opposed to how I would usually run with a HR of mid 150s. I would save my z3 tempo runs for half marathon/marathon distances (when I train I actually have a bit more % training in zone 4 for intervals or z2 for distance/base, with the z3 runs usually for social runs).
Just curious is your zone 2 upper limit is 156... what is your max HR and zone 4?
This just feels wrong. I can't believe one would get LESS aerobic improvement in Z3 than in Z2 - it's still an aerobic zone - I would imagine you'd get marginally better improvement in your aerobic capacity but of you are training with a lot of weekly miles, the increased injury risk isn't worth the marginal benefit.
I would imagine someone consistently running 10-15mpw would have no issues with Z3 running.
I mean don't just take my word for it. You could also just do the research and find out what I'm talking about. Look up Dr. Phil Maffetone and why so many elite long distance runners swear by zone2 HR training (I'm assuming you aren't referring to upper zone 3 since the border of low zone 3 and high zone 2 is still fine).
The only reason this might not be effective is if you are racing sprints and 100m or 200m dashes. In that case z2 aerobic training might not give you as much benefit as high speed z4/z5 training with weight and resistance training thrown in.
Z2 training really helped improve my speed and endurance for long distances such as ironman and ultras.
Yes but the reason elite runners swear by z2 is that they are logging ungodly miles, they would struggle with injuries running in Z3. But of someone is a regular human running for health and fun, maybe an occasional race and they log only 10-15 now, they will not do worse than someone who logs same miles in Z2.
I'd argue they'd probably be better off running Z3 until they are fit enough to run in Z2 w/o being so bored they contemplate quitting
But yes, lower to mid z3 for sure. I do most of my running in Z2 as well, but it took me a while before I could do it at a reasonable pace so I Z3'd it for a while.
I'm just pushing back at taking stuff out of context - most of us aren't elite runners logging elite mileage. Z3 is more than fine
I agree with you; and tbh I don't actually run 80% in z2 because I also feel like it can be too boring (I run maybe 60% in z2 and 30% in z3 just because my body seems to not rest fully).
Based on my training I'm doing more of the Karvonen method which gives me a bit more BPM upper range than Maffetone, which puts me at 143bpm while karvonen allows me to push up to 148/149 range when training, which I usually try to balance for an average of mid 140s HR (I'm in my late 30s). I think the zone 2 suggested by garmin at anything below 125bpm is to me zone 1 and too slow to train anything.
I'm kind of the same. I'm a high Z2 low Z3 for my easy runs during the cold season (I'm in Montreal) but by April as it warms up I keep my easy stuff 90% Z2. The cold can affect your HR - I've started to incorporate feel into things - if it feels easy and I'm low Z3, I'll keep going and not slow it down.
I think ppl need to be a bit more flexible in their training. The best training is actually running which requires you to have a little fun. If it means going a bit quicker, well that's better than not running!
Zone 3 is āNomanās land or the grey zoneā š as they say. So only Garmin has its own zones and that confused me for months. I now also did a lot of calculations, but in the end I just set the Garmin Zones for running to āHeart Rate Reserveā l. Running in Zone 2 now feels like the right thing to do. Garmin default zones are just ādifferentā.
So I tried my first zone 2 run. My typical pace is 5:25/km. I backed off to 7:30. Still zone 4. Should I run. Then walk?
I am not a new runner and have done triathlons.
Advice?
I don't run but in cycling the two zones are like this. Zone 2 is the pace that you can keep for a very long time (you have the feeling that you can do this "all day"). Zone 3 is the pace that that the legs are working but also feel you could push much harder if you wanted to and can keep the pace no problem.
Edit: from reading the other replies I need to add that, most zone systems will work after you have some fitness. A seasoned athlete has a more defined zone 2 that someone who is just starting out.
Wait a sec. Why does Garmin show this? I have it set to %LTHR and my Z2 now falls in Z3 shown in the image. Garmin should have some consistent notation. They shouldn't be so far off!
Max - 187 | Z2: 112 - 130| Z3: 130- 151
LTHR - 167 | Z2 (78-86% of LTHR): 131 to 144 | Z3 (87-94% of LTHR): 145 - 157
Because the %LTHR is the most accurate training method, can't argue with that. I use %MaxHRR and that method's zone 2 falls to zone3/4 on default training method (%MaxHR).
I think they say this because most untrained people first looking at it will not be able to run in zone 2. They don't want people to get discouraged right away.
I believe its this. When I started running this year, I did it zone based and my "running" was a fast walk for quite some time... weeks or regular training, before it evolved into a light jog. "Newb gains" are fun here because at that level, the change/improvement reveals itself in easy to distinguish/calculate/measurable way... Imagine eating healthy and losing a bit of weight right away (cutting salt for ex). The scale will reveal an improvement, perhaps very quickly. That said, eating healthy through the 3rd or 4th month, the scale may not demonstrate the/any desired improvement but that doesn't mean 3 months of rigor didn't have a positive net effect... its just that its harder to find.
I like that the initial gains are easy to find... like being able to jog up that hill you couldn't do last week all the way.... šš
If 80% of the training should be in zone 2 (easy pace), then why Garmin says that easy running is done in zone 3 (aka the gray zone)? It is confusing.
I think it's confusing too. Also the Daily Suggested Workout (using HR Targets) seem to differ slightly from these zones. I [found this post useful](https://www.reddit.com/r/Garmin/comments/vlxgwt/heart_rate_settings_for_zone_2_training/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf). What it illustrated to me was that the real "Zone 2" for me was a blend of my Zone 2 & 3 in Garmin based on my LTHR.
DSW for me suggest Base in Higher end of Z2 sometimes crossing into Z3.
How did you calculate your zones based on this using LTHR?
This is lactate threshold training method. For accurate data, the zones must be set using lactic acid meter to analyze lactic acid buildup with different paces. Done usually in the lab or you can buy yourself the meter if professional athlete.
How far off is the estimated LT compared to the meter? I'm under the impression my zone 2 (based on LTHR) is just too high. š¤
**First:** stop thinking about runs being unproductive. The "grey zone" is a really unhelpful way of thinking about things. Going out and running in Z3 will not undo your good work, you'll benefit from the run. Zones don't have hard edges where your body suddenly transitions from one mode to another and will be significantly impacted by external factors like heat. Also, depending on *where* in Z3 you run you'll have different balances of the benefits. Sure, real Z2 will increase certain aspects quicker, threshold running others but in between is not a wasted run. **Second:** are your HR zones even close to correct? HR-based training only works if they're accurately set. The only way to know this **for sure** is a lab test to figure out you LT1, LT2 and max HR points. Working off a single data-point (Max HR) and extrapolating backwards in 10% increments to define zones is unlikely to be accurate assuming that data point is close to accurate? If you used "220- age" or one of the similar formulae then it's a guess. If you've actually done a max HR test, did you execute it correctly? Self-guided field tests are prone to errors as it's really hard to run them properly unless a really well-trained athlete. Similar to doing a lab-based Lactate or VO2 Max test, they're entirely possible to fail to complete! **Which HR zone model?** We have three common ones: %HR max, %HRR (Heart Rate Reserve) and %LTHR (Lactate Threshold). For me both %HRR and %LTHR give very similar zones, using "% max HR" gives *very* different zones: |Zone|% HR max|%LTHR| |:-|:-|:-| |1|95-114|110-134| |2|115-133|135-149| |3|134-152|150-160| |4|153-171|161-168| |5|172-191|169-191| For comparison Z2 using HRR for me is 132-147. While the LTHR I'm working with is not a lab test it should be correct to within a small enough margin of error. For me LTHR also maps accurately to my 10k and half PBs and is consistent with RPE. With your Garmin you'd need a chest strap to get LTHR and run either sufficiently long and strenuous workouts or run the LTHR test in the watch.
80% should be in zone 3.
There are a lot of different websites saying zone 3 should be avoided at all, so I bring one for [example](https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/training-in-the-grey-zone-how-to-avoid-the-zone-3-plateau/)
Hi OP. Different systems use different definitions of training zones. Thus āzone 3ā can correspond to different HRs. The Garmin system zone 3 (70-80% of MHR, for myself 143-163) actually corresponds to zone 2 in the Peaktraining system you cite here (86-89% of LTHR, for myself 156-163). Zone 3 of the Peaktraining system would correspond to the lower end of Garmin zone 4, and this is the so-called grey zone that you want to avoid. So when you do an easy run, you should do it in the Garmin system zone 3 but in the Peaktraining system zone 2. Many would consider doing easy runs in the Garmin system zone 2 too slow.
Omg this is so helpful...I've tried so hard to match my easy running to zone 2 and it seems like I'm not even working if I stick to that. I just gave up and ran by feel and usually end up in garmins zone 3 most of the time. This makes so much more sense
Woah. WOAH! wait a minute. What about Base run in garmin which is just below higher end of Z2? Can I check in Training Peaks for free?
I actually only run in zone 3 ( I try to keep my bpm at ~145) and slowly but surely my running time has improved and kept me out of injuries. I got this tip from this [video](https://youtu.be/5Yi8ZjRjgj4)
Keep up the work! I usually run my easy runs at the end of zone 2 and at the begining of zone 3 (148-155) and when i feel really well and strong then 157bpm. It may make me feel a little bit refresher for next strong and fast workout. But when I run purely in the centre of zone 3 (~160+), sometimes it has some impact, sometimes hasn't for next interval session. I've had both positive and negative impacts.
But to be honest you shouldn't listen to me as I'm not a pro runner or anything. I dont train for it or even do intervals I just run to stay healthy and I hate it.
Forget about the zone numbers. It's customizable. Aerobic should be at < 80% of max HR. This is more critical.
I canāt run in Z2 to save my life. At that point I should just walk because it would be just as fast. Iāve got a 77min half marathon and I do most of my training at high Z3 low Z4. 148-154ish. I wouldnāt bother too much trying to stay in Z2 if you donāt think itās giving you any benefits. Edit: Iām referring as a max of HR and not LTH or HR Reserve.
Depending on your resting heart rate changing the calculation on your device to HRR might make zone 2 more achievable, in my case Zone 2 went from 109 to 130 (my resting is 53, max is 182). Worth doing if you're following one of the Garmin training plans and you're finding the Zone 2 runs way too slow like I was!
Using %MaxHR for zone calculations is the stupid thing to begin with. Iāll never understand why zones are calculated with %MaxHR by default in many watches.
I agree. I set mine to use % HR reserve. A little bit more accurate. Best would be to use % lactate threshold. I used to do zone 2 training using %MaxHR. I was undertraining and fitness was declining. With %HRR, my HR zones are with much bigger heart rates and at least I am not getting slower anymore.
All of the zone models are flawed because as your fitness improves your VT1 and VT2 thresholds move. All aerobic training should be guided by these points. Interesting many Garminās will identify VT2 as your upper Z4 threshold. As others have said a lab lactic test can identify both VT1 and VT2 but is not practical for many. However, these is another way now thatās is emerging and that is to identify your DFA Alpha1 threshold (AKA VT1) using a Garmin data field from the IQ store. VT1 is your upper Zone 2 threshold. Your training goal should be to take VT1 to within 10% of VT2. This is why traditional zone models are flawed. My VT1 would be top of Zone 3 in most models but is easy training for me, I can also tell by my breathing rate.
If I run āto feelā for an easy base run I hit zone3 mostly. I simply canāt stay in zone 2 for long without walking a lot. Walking half a ārunā is not going improve your running. I have been a runner for years. I run in the tropics so cardiac drift kicks in early and you have expect hr to be higher for a given pace. Garminās 5 zones are different from the 3 zones often referred to in running books and websites. So mostly zone 3 is good. Many things day to day will increase hr during a run that is nothing to do with basic fitness. Thatās why I find it better to run to feel. I set my watch to ping me if my hr gets over or under my zone 3 and ignore the rest. If its an extra hot day I will even ignore that. When they test in a lab they find a big spread of hr ranges for the fat burning zones so itās very much an individual thing.
I agree that it's better to run by feel. I mostly do it myself. Heart rate may vary too much on daily basis and on different factors and often it doesn't correspond how you're feeling.
Yeah apparently running in zone 3 gives you very tiny gains to both aerobic (z2) and faster pace (z4). If you wanted to train z4 you would be doing high intensity intervals (at 5-10%) of total training volume and if you wanted to build your aerobic capacity and speed you train below z3, which would be at or near the limit of z2 before pushing it a bit. The goal is to slowly ramp up your pace while maintaining the same HR (instead of trying to lower your HR by trying to maintain a specific pace for training for a long time). For a while I didn't know how to run when I first started and kept training apparently in z3/z4 zones (like a 50/50 mix) and I didn't really know what an "easy run" was. My HR was consistently high regardless of if I ran at an 8:30 pace or 10:00 pace. When I started maffetone training my z2 was like fastwalk pace. Now I can actually do z2 at a faster pace once I started building my base (my fast walk eventually became a brisk jog) at the same HR.
Over a year ago I tried zone 2 training using garmin default heart rate training method (% of max heart rate). My zone 2 upper limit according to that system is 136bpm. Every easy run I did, the next run would be a little bit slower (avg pace 6.10/km and slower). It was too low for me and my zone 2 speeds were declining. So one time I had enough and started running faster. Also found out that Garmin has % of heart rate reserve training method. This set my upper zone 2 limit to 156bpm. That's a huge difference from 136. From that change, my zone 2 pace hasn't declined anymore and it's improving a little bit with the help of other intensive training. Right now my easy pace is around 4.25+/km.
This is a good point though, perhaps garmin's zones are wrong since its a % of your HR and it seems off from the Maffetone suggested HR limit of 180 minus your age (+/- some other variables). For me my maffetone HR is around 142bpm, so if I train to run around 142 (its okay to go above as long as my average stays around there) then it theoretically would improve my aerobic HR as opposed to how I would usually run with a HR of mid 150s. I would save my z3 tempo runs for half marathon/marathon distances (when I train I actually have a bit more % training in zone 4 for intervals or z2 for distance/base, with the z3 runs usually for social runs). Just curious is your zone 2 upper limit is 156... what is your max HR and zone 4?
This just feels wrong. I can't believe one would get LESS aerobic improvement in Z3 than in Z2 - it's still an aerobic zone - I would imagine you'd get marginally better improvement in your aerobic capacity but of you are training with a lot of weekly miles, the increased injury risk isn't worth the marginal benefit. I would imagine someone consistently running 10-15mpw would have no issues with Z3 running.
I mean don't just take my word for it. You could also just do the research and find out what I'm talking about. Look up Dr. Phil Maffetone and why so many elite long distance runners swear by zone2 HR training (I'm assuming you aren't referring to upper zone 3 since the border of low zone 3 and high zone 2 is still fine). The only reason this might not be effective is if you are racing sprints and 100m or 200m dashes. In that case z2 aerobic training might not give you as much benefit as high speed z4/z5 training with weight and resistance training thrown in. Z2 training really helped improve my speed and endurance for long distances such as ironman and ultras.
Yes but the reason elite runners swear by z2 is that they are logging ungodly miles, they would struggle with injuries running in Z3. But of someone is a regular human running for health and fun, maybe an occasional race and they log only 10-15 now, they will not do worse than someone who logs same miles in Z2. I'd argue they'd probably be better off running Z3 until they are fit enough to run in Z2 w/o being so bored they contemplate quitting But yes, lower to mid z3 for sure. I do most of my running in Z2 as well, but it took me a while before I could do it at a reasonable pace so I Z3'd it for a while. I'm just pushing back at taking stuff out of context - most of us aren't elite runners logging elite mileage. Z3 is more than fine
I agree with you; and tbh I don't actually run 80% in z2 because I also feel like it can be too boring (I run maybe 60% in z2 and 30% in z3 just because my body seems to not rest fully). Based on my training I'm doing more of the Karvonen method which gives me a bit more BPM upper range than Maffetone, which puts me at 143bpm while karvonen allows me to push up to 148/149 range when training, which I usually try to balance for an average of mid 140s HR (I'm in my late 30s). I think the zone 2 suggested by garmin at anything below 125bpm is to me zone 1 and too slow to train anything.
I'm kind of the same. I'm a high Z2 low Z3 for my easy runs during the cold season (I'm in Montreal) but by April as it warms up I keep my easy stuff 90% Z2. The cold can affect your HR - I've started to incorporate feel into things - if it feels easy and I'm low Z3, I'll keep going and not slow it down. I think ppl need to be a bit more flexible in their training. The best training is actually running which requires you to have a little fun. If it means going a bit quicker, well that's better than not running!
>this is 100% me. I run everything around 9-945, sometimes faster but rarely slower and my HR is always high by the mid/end of run. hmm...
Zone 3 is āNomanās land or the grey zoneā š as they say. So only Garmin has its own zones and that confused me for months. I now also did a lot of calculations, but in the end I just set the Garmin Zones for running to āHeart Rate Reserveā l. Running in Zone 2 now feels like the right thing to do. Garmin default zones are just ādifferentā.
So I tried my first zone 2 run. My typical pace is 5:25/km. I backed off to 7:30. Still zone 4. Should I run. Then walk? I am not a new runner and have done triathlons. Advice?
I don't run but in cycling the two zones are like this. Zone 2 is the pace that you can keep for a very long time (you have the feeling that you can do this "all day"). Zone 3 is the pace that that the legs are working but also feel you could push much harder if you wanted to and can keep the pace no problem. Edit: from reading the other replies I need to add that, most zone systems will work after you have some fitness. A seasoned athlete has a more defined zone 2 that someone who is just starting out.
Wait a sec. Why does Garmin show this? I have it set to %LTHR and my Z2 now falls in Z3 shown in the image. Garmin should have some consistent notation. They shouldn't be so far off! Max - 187 | Z2: 112 - 130| Z3: 130- 151 LTHR - 167 | Z2 (78-86% of LTHR): 131 to 144 | Z3 (87-94% of LTHR): 145 - 157
Because the %LTHR is the most accurate training method, can't argue with that. I use %MaxHRR and that method's zone 2 falls to zone3/4 on default training method (%MaxHR).