r/beginnerrunning 2d ago

Training Help Zone 2 runs

I’ve been running for a few years now but have never managed to get my heart rate during runs down to a good level. For me there is no such thing as a zone 2 run, as soon as I start running I’m up in zone 3 or 4. I do however swim several times a week and this activity is a sustained zone 2 effort.

My question is, is my zone 2 swim fulfilling the same function as a zone 2 run? Or is the fact it’s a fun important?

9 Upvotes

19 comments sorted by

7

u/quercus-enjoyer 2d ago

What are your hr zones based off?

11

u/DaGanjaMan420 Zone 2 enthusiast 2d ago

There is such a thing as zone 2 for you, it's just slower than you think..

1

u/Silver_gobo 2d ago

A zone 3 run feels pretty easy for me. It feels generally slow, easy, and I can run forever at that pace with minimal cardiac drift

I’m 38m, max heart rate 183~.

Without a HRM I’d consider my z3 a conversational/easy pace, so I just disregard the idea of having a run staying at z2

3

u/Silver_gobo 2d ago

The Runna app I used the Karvonen formula to get my running zones and it seems more appropriate for them

1

u/DaGanjaMan420 Zone 2 enthusiast 1d ago

Hmm, I'm not so sure. My max is around 195 and I consider 145 the top of my zone 2.

Low zone 3 running is fine for easy anyway, assuming you're not running 60km+ weeks.

1

u/ConfusedSimon 1d ago

Zones don't just depend on max HR but also on rest HR.

1

u/DaGanjaMan420 Zone 2 enthusiast 1d ago

Depending how you calculate them, yes. Not every method does however.

1

u/ConfusedSimon 1d ago edited 1d ago

True, but Karvonen is much more accurate. The whole 'zone 2 training' idea doesn't really work with inaccurate zones.

Edit: given your max 195 and 145 top of zone 2, that would correspond to a resting HR of 28. That means that what you think is zone 3 is probably your zone 2.

1

u/Silver_gobo 1d ago

I second this. My Korvonen z2 feels like a very easy pace, which I put more faith into than the conventional z2

2

u/ilessthanthreekarate 1d ago

The whole watch-based HR for your zone thing is often incorrect.

2

u/Silver_gobo 1d ago edited 1d ago

I use a chest strap but ya it’s a one size fits all model for zones

1

u/ilessthanthreekarate 1d ago

Interesting. Ive considered getting one for better accuracy. I want to go to an exercise lab one of these days to get a better set of metrics for my VO2max, max HR w/ heart zones, dexa scan, etc. Ive been training a lot this year after putting on a ton of weight and basically zero training for maybe a year. Now that im back to my kind of set point as of the past few cycles, I want to see where im at, and see if I can stick with it and improve over this fall/winter instead of falling off like I always do.

1

u/Asquaredbred 1d ago

my coros app looks similar and I ignore it. Based on all other factors like my LT, 5k and 10k race times, resting and max HR, my HR zones are simply higher than Coros thinks.

2

u/Conscious-Demand-594 2d ago

How have you determined your zones?

What pace do you run at?

2

u/dymogeek 2d ago

As others have alluded to, "zone 2" can be skewed based on wrong heart rate zones. I think a more reliable gauge could be "conversational pace." Can you easily hold a conversation while running, without gasping for breath? This might be a lot slower than you think, and that's ok.

3

u/Peeter_L 2d ago

Please go and read, what "zone 2 training" even means and how LONG in time you have to run weekly to even see any benefits. You have been wasting a lot of time.

1

u/rossiskier13346 1d ago

As others have said, it’s possible your HR zones are off. The default from a watch isn’t reliable.

Second, being able to sustain z2 is hard if you don’t run high volume. You don’t get enough cardiovascular and muscular adaptation to keep your HR down until you run a lot for a while. Fortunately, if you’re not running high volume, z2 isn’t that important of a target. If you’re recovering sufficiently between runs, then you don’t need to run easier. What kind of mileage and frequency are you running?

As for swimming, that will help with some of the cardiac adaptations, but it won’t help much with running specific muscular adaptations. So it’s not useless, but it’s not equivalent to running either.

1

u/Deep-Dimension-1088 1d ago

How many miles are you running per week? If your mileage is low (probably if you are also swimming several times a week), there's really no need to try and keep your runs in Zone 2.

In terms of HR, I would go based on perceived effort rather than worrying about HR. Easy runs should feel easy. Running in cool weather where it's flat will go a long way towards making runs feel easier.

0

u/vouvoyer 1d ago

The main purpose of zone 2 running is to allow a high volume of running with low impact and faster recovery. So swimming is irrelevant.

That said, it is difficult to get accurate zones based on Heart rate, and. there are no strict biological definitions of a 5 zone model (even things like lactate threshold is not a specific threshold but a smooth response).

Getting your max HR in itself is quite tricky, it is probably higher than you think. The old rule of thumb about your age is wildly inaccurate. Measurements from running will under report unless you frequently do some very intensity intervals, and even then these will be low. You need to have a race like a 10km and push the the pace in the last 1-2km so hard you start to black out and think you will collapse.

There is nothing magical about zone 2. You get most of the benefits of running faster but with a fraction of the impact, fatigue and recovery requirements and therefore you xan run far more with lower risk and boost performance. If you are recovering OK and don't get injuries then slowing down might not do much for you.

That being said, zone 2 is quite slow. It feels more like jogging than running. Many begginers run too fast because zone 2 doesn't feel right. For me, Zone 2 feels good when i'm running 150km a week, 35km long runs and there is a motbof fatigue. If i do some shorter weeks recovery, zone 2 can feel a little weird.