Hints on increasing anaerobic training effect

You'll get more anaerobic effect from short very hard/fast/high HR intervals than sustained hard runs.

I did a run yesterday that totaled 8 miles with an average pace of 9:22/mi which typically would be an easy run for me, if done as a steady pace, but this run included two max effort intervals one 3 minutes long the other 9 minutes with bouts of walking during the recovery between the two efforts. The net result was an aerobic TE of 3.5 and anaerobic TE of 2.1 while a run of similar length and average pace that was just an easy steady pace run a few days before gave an aerobic TE 3.6 and zero for anaerobic TE.

Something like a run that totaled 5 miles with 6-8 intervals at your "5k pace" would give you a higher anaerobic than the longer less intense run you did today because each targets different physiological systems. I'm still new at having a watch with the anaerobic TE myself but I would think that even doing a few strides at the end of a normal easy run would probably up that value as well.

Did a hard 9 miler(for me) today which produced a 4.3 aerobic training effect and .02 anaerobic training effect. I have had the watch for 3 weeks- 145 miles of road running. I noted someone had posted a 3.9 anaerobic training effect. At 74, my VO2 max reflects 45. Max HR is 180. Today’s run my AVG HR- with HR strap was 145. Avg pace was 10:08. That included a first mile warm up of around 12 minutes. 5 K race pace for me is currently 8:40-8:45.
would like some input from those who do,some “serious”running. Thanks. Nick

If your max is 180 and you averaged 145 then I don’t think you got into the anaerobic zone much at all. Just look at the heart rate and the more you are in threshold and red red zone the more anaerobic.

I haven't played with anaerobic training yet (just turned my 645 on yesterday). But this part of the Running Science page gives information, and a chart on what type of workouts could result in better numbers. https://www.garmin.com/en-US/runningscience/#anaerobic-training-effect My hill repeats a few weeks ago probably would have been good for me to try it out. (I never want to see that [censored] hill again!) :eek:

I am quite new to this heart rate running stuff, but:
If you want to do anaerobic training, shouldn't you start by finding your lactate threshold heart rate (which I suppose the 645 can do on its own?) and then train somewhere around this heart rate?

Thanks for the feedback. I truly marvel, how back in the early 80’s,when I was in my early 40’s, had 17:46 5K PR/ 36:28 10K, without any of the stuff we have now. I pinch myself to remind me that I must be doing something right as I close in on 89,000 miles. I wonder if I had access to this stuff what my times might have been. My thinking is I probably would have pushed too much, got injured and quit running.
Hey, keep running, it works. Nick

Funny isn't it? Back in that same time frame I was in the low-to-mid 18:00 range for my 3 mile PFT runs and my "training" consisted of running when I was told to run and spending as much time as I could manage at the dancehall drinking beer and chasing women.

When your body is called to action, the demand for energy is immediate. The demand is now (it's go time), but it takes a while before your aerobic energy system ramps up to capacity. In the meantime, the energy you need is being produced anaerobically. If the increase in intensity is gradual, then the better chance your aerobic energy system has to ramp up to meet the need.

I have been wondering why my heart rate is 10-20 bpm too high during the first 5-10 minutes of a slow run at a constant pace.

Is the explanation in the above quote? Is it because the aerobic system can't ramp up fast enough, so the anaerobic system takes over for the first 5-10 minutes, requiring a higher heart rate to do the same amount of work?

Not really. I'm not quite sure what you mean, but what I was talking about is actually kind of the opposite situation - where your HR would be below your effort and is working to catch up.

I will try to explain more thoroughly:
Let us say that I - after a long warm up - can run at 8 minutes/kilometer with a heart rate of 130 BPM.
If I go out on a run, skip the warm up, and go directly to running at 8 minutes/kilometer (which for most people would be the warm up), the heart rate will ramp up very fast, stabilize around 150 BPM, keep constant there for 5-10 minutes and then drop to the 130 BPM for the rest of the run.

I can see from posts in running forums that this behaviour is quite usual.

Ah, I see... yes. Yes, for sure, you're right.

The benefit of 'warming up' is largely due to the fact that it gives your aerobic energy system a chance to get up to speed to meet your performance demands. By skipping step, you're calling on your anaerobic energy system... hard. And it'll take a while to sort out and stabilize.

Not sure that, big picture, it's a good idea (tm) to skip your warm up to crank up your AnTE score. But from a 'how things work' perspective, yeah. That'll do 'er. ;-)