Flat AeT test – too hard pace

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #41477

    Angelos
    Participant

    Hello, I’m training for mountaineering and trail running. I’m recovering (have recovered ?) from ADS. Due to the COVID situation I don’t have access to a treadmill or steady-grade hill so, I tried to do the AeT test on a flat road.

    I reached the expected heart rate and maintained a steady pace through the test but it was pretty fast for me and felt hard (I don’t train at flats, except of some super easy recovery runs). I guess that it isn’t how an AeT test should feel but I assume that the main point is the heart rate.

    That said, I’d like to ask:
    – Is the flat-run AeT comparable with the uphill one or should we expect alterations such as between cycling and running ?
    – Does the fact that my legs were hurting towards the end of the test, affect the accuracy and reliability of the result, even though I managed to hold the pace ?
    – Does it ring any bells about my overall muscular strength and endurance ? Would you recommend to make any alterations in the way I approach strength (considering that I’m interested only in mountain activities) ? I’ve been thinking of adding some longer flat runs in my plan, in order to achieve a more holistic approach, but I do prefer the trails !


  • Keymaster
    Scott Semple on #41567

    Good questions.

    ā€“ Is the flat-run AeT comparable with the uphill one or should we expect alterations such as between cycling and running?

    I’m the same way. Almost all of my lifetime training hours have been going uphill, so I’m horribly inefficient (and weak) as a flat runner. I know several skimo racers that are similar. Doing a flat AeT test would be painful. I’ve done them in the past as lactate tests rather to avoid the duration of a drift test. That said, the heart rates I arrived at during a flat-run lactate test were the same as an uphill test.

    ā€“ Does the fact that my legs were hurting towards the end of the test, affect the accuracy and reliability of the result, even though I managed to hold the pace?

    If you managed to hold the pace and have other reference points for AeT, then the results may still be useful. In that case, the issue is leg strength. (So the test may have been much more than aerobic for your legs.)

    ā€“ Does it ring any bells about my overall muscular strength and endurance? Would you recommend to make any alterations in the way I approach strength (considering that Iā€™m interested only in mountain activities)?

    Only if you have performance goals for running (either flat or trail). If your goals are all uphill-centric, then I don’t think you need to improve your running strength endurance (i.e. “durability”). That said, doing any kind of muscular endurance work is never a bad thing provided that it’s supported by a lot of low-intensity volume.


    Participant
    Angelos on #41581

    Thanks Scott, that is really helpful !
    My heart rate drift was about 2% so, probably I could repeat the test in a faster pace. However, I don’t really think that I will. The previous one caused some muscular/tendon discomfort, I guess my form on flats is the main reason for this…

    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by  Angelos.

    Keymaster
    Scott Semple on #41600

    Also, one more thing to consider: Do you know your AnT HR? It would be a disaster to mistake your AnT HR for AeT. Read this post for more info.


    Participant
    Angelos on #41607

    That’s interesting !
    I haven’t done an AnT test for a while. The last time I tested it (3 months ago), it was something like 170 bpm and since then I haven’t even try to reach that high (I’m focusing on aerobic capacity).
    My current AeT (or what I was testing 2 days ago) was near 150 bpm. I could easily talk and breath from the nose for a while (I’m not very good at nose breathing though) . Also, I can train near 140-150 bpm for hours so, considering that I’m not a very experienced athlete, I guess that I’m going aerobically. I don’t really have data about decoupling or something but I can say that if my legs were not hurting I could go push quite a bit.

    As an extra hint, I’m 23 years old so these numbers are pretty close to the MAF ones (although it might not be a good example for comparison).


    Keymaster
    Scott Semple on #41612

    Okay, great. It sounds like those two threshold heart rates are the ones to use (150 & 170).

    Ignore the MAF formula. It’s only (perhaps) useful for folks that can’t or won’t test their actual thresholds. If you’re testing, then it’s useless (as all generic formulas are).

Viewing 5 replies - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.