How to increase "low aerobic" load?

4730146 said:

My heart rate zones are calculated via my lactate threshold. I am going to assume the zones are correct. If anything, they're set a bit low: I can easily push my heart rate higher than what Garmin considers my max heart rate based on LT.

so your zones are not set up correctly if your MaxHR is not set up....

with running it's a bit easier to find your Vo2max zone etc. assuming you run in decent shoes on decent surface (tarmac). Load focus is based on heart rate (and in case of running also based on pace) and of course there are zones, but not your zones (not set by you, which could be very off or strangely set).

however, if you want training based on heart rate, first you need to set up your MaxHR correctly.

also remember that training based on heart rate is not soo much accurate, as HR can be different any day, stress, bad sleep, coffee or temperature affects it a lot.

for example, recently i've returned from holidays and now i'm exposed to temps +10*C higher than last 6 weeks. I did road climb (bike) with my max power during 15 mins. My avg HR on first day was 10BPS higher !! than usual on that climb, however i didn't produce more power. According to garmin, my Load (it's based on HR, not power) was more 2x higher !!

however load based on power (TSS) was only 6% higher (that's why i compared these 2 activities, they are quite on pair), and that's why you don't use HR for a proper training (at least on a bike)

I don't disagree that it "should" work as you're describing. But aside from some slight influence made from distance travelled, it definitely doesn't. I can 100% guarantee you as I spent best part of a year testing different things. I even asked Garmin direct and was told to increase my zone 2 heart rate limit. 

As mentioned above, you will find that if you easy walk jog for one hour at 130bpm and cover 4 miles for example, you'll get lower amount of low aerobic load than if you did 130bpm cycling for 1 hour due to the increased distance travelled. To me, this also makes no sense as typically, for me anyway cycling is much lower impact on my body than jogging would be. 

I found when I switched to the % hr, everything was roughly inline. I'm quite fit and can achieve a much higher max hr than the theoretical and switching to the % of max hr really seemed to dial in all the zones, including 4 and 5 which made training using the plan much more effective. 

8562512 said:

I'm quite fit and can achieve a much higher max hr than the theoretical and switching to the % of max hr really seemed to dial in all the zones, including 4 and 5 which made training using the plan much more effective. 

i don't undestand this line completely. MaxHR doesn't depend on fitness, it's just an individual value. You CANNOT guess it.

For example, according to popular formula, my maxHR should be 179. however i reached last year on few occasions 203bpm. You can't base your training on some guessed values, like this 'mine' above, which equates to 88% of my REAL maxHR !! massive difference !

I don't experiment or track that load too much. I prefer high intensity sports :) and for me cycling is more intense, coz i can keep 80-90% for longer than running (i'm not a running fan, but i can do 10 or 20k)

8562512 said:

My conclusion after solving this issue is that the zones are not correct as a default. The fix for me was to set my heart rate zones using % of max, rather than the default.

That is quite possible. The way zones are setup by default may make sense for general fitness but for running they are too low. I setup my zones based on lactate threshold test, so my zone 2 is relatively high and ends at 143 or 144.

No you're right, it's not totally dependent on fitness. The general rule that will be the default on most apps and devices is your max Hr is 220 - your age and then all the zones are calculated out from that. But it makes no sense to do this as the idea of your max reducing by 1 every year it very generic and based on statistics. It only applies if your fitness declines with age. Equally, some people just have very different physiology naturally, my wife for example who has done little in the way of cardio over her lifetime will hit well over 200 on a run.

For this reason, the % of max seems to work better as it calculates it out based on your actual max HR that's been recorded on Garmin and will adjust over time if this increases. 

I don't think using an app it's every going to be close to perfect. But for me at least, using % of max got it close to what "feels" like the correct zones, and produced better results in terms of increased fitness and avoiding injury. 

True as for the widget but as I mentioned below, from my experience both zone 2 AND zone 3 runs/bike rides give you low aerobic load (blue and green zone). Zone 4 gives high aerobic, and zone 5 anaerobic. Works for me. Zones set as % of maxHR.

this is a simplification.

you can mix (dilute...) your high intense training with a lot of low...and you will finish with low aerobic points...

can you guess what kind of exercise is it ?

it's 287 Low Aerobic (according to Garmin)

First time since March my load focus is balanced.

In August I did some slow trekking with my 4yo son, with HR in zone 1 and some mornings did trail running with HR in zone 4.

Last 2 weeks did some interval trainings with HR in zone 4 and 5

Miky said:

Last 2 weeks did some interval trainings with HR in zone 4 and 5

In which zone you was during rest between intervals? Probably also this activity increased your low aerobic load

Zone 2, but past months i did same traing and never been on target for aerobic load