People tend to become passionate one way or the other, either believing that you should always train to heart rate or always train to R.P.E. Neither camp is right! To believe one way is the right and only way is to only look at the positives provided by one style of training and compare this to all the negatives of the other and vice versa.
A far better approach is to be aware of the positives and negatives of each approach. With this information at hand you can then design training sets and a training program to utilise the benefits of each approach and keep their downfalls to a minimum.
The main positives of training to heart rate are that it allows an easy and reliable training metric of the stress and required intensity of a run set. This allows training intensity over time to be easily calculated to help determine run load. However it has two main downfalls.
- It’s biggest downfall is that it can create an over reliance on heart rate, runners become obsessed with the number.
- While the other downfall is that H.R. can be affected by external factors, in particular caffeine and adrenaline. As a result over the first two hours of an ultra marathon H.R. does not become an accurate way to determine your effort.
The positives of R.P.E. are that it is allows the runner more freedom and a more natural experience with how they run. Back in the age of the cave man, we simply ran, no gadgets, no hang-ups, RUN! I would argue that the enjoyment from this carefree nature still has a very important part in the training program, for this purpose I call such a run a Soul Run (no gadgets running for the pure enjoyment of it).
Training by R.P.E. is a smaller step away from this ideal than training to H.R., but we are still moving from this ‘ideal’ of running solely for the love of it to ‘training’. When we are training we are looking for an improvement in fitness or to improve what we can achieve. To help foster this improvement (as discussed in part 1) we need a common language.
One of the biggest benefits of R.P.E. is that with no heart rate to look at you cannot become obsessed with the number.
Finally training to R.P.E. allows a runner to take into account how they are feeling on the day. If efforts are detailed at an easy, medium, hard and very hard level. The runner naturally takes into account how they feel on the day as well as the length of interval that is prescribed. For instance, if they had to complete 6×4 minute very hard efforts they would choose an appropriate pace for these, likewise if they were required to complete one 30 minute very hard effort they would choose a suitable pace for this. While these paces will likely be different, the runner will be running very hard for each.
The drawback of R.P.E. is that it can be influenced by our emotions. This often leads to runners running at a pace that is too hard for their easy runs and too easy for their hard runs.
The largest downfall that I see with R.P.E. when training beginner to intermediate runners is that many do not yet know or understand what they are capable of. This can lead to underperforming. Being able to identify when this is occurring and help the runner develop their understanding of intensity zones is more easily achieved through the use of H.R.
This leads to the question, ‘What is the ideal solution?’ The ideal solution is to use both simultaneously. Use heart rate to develop your awareness of R.P.E. Once this understanding is developed you can challenge yourself to run without looking at your heart rate. It is great to do this with your H.R. monitor on but not looking at the data. Then at the conclusion of the set, look back in reflection.
As a general rule, I find that for a beginner or intermediate runner utilizing heart rate is vitally important in allowing them to develop their understanding of R.P.E. Once this understanding is developed they are moving from being an intermediate runner towards an advanced runner, one who has now internalized this knowledge, developed their understanding and can now run to either metric.
Run, smile and have fun.
Nick Muxlow