The researcher said the endurance test is very individual, meaning there is no standard to measure my performance against. She mentioned an interesting point - some people who had a higher VO2 max actually DID NOT last as long on the endurance test (different workload?). I will be very curious to see how I do when I go back in a month. I have to repeat the VO2 max test (which I did on Mon.) with the tube and head thingie and then a couple of days later, do another endurance test (like today). One little issue - my 50 miler is 4 days before I go back for the VO2 max test. That was the only time we could do it so hopefully, I'll be okay to do it.
Other readings/measurements: I don't freely give my weight to anyone (and I won't here either :P) but I got a really good body fat measurement - 15.4%! My jaw dropped. I told her I wasn't complaining but that it sounded low. She said the calipers sometimes give a lower/more favorable reading, as opposed to bioelectrical impedance analysis, which can give a higher less/favorable reading. I had the bioelectrical impedance analysis done last year at the YMCA and it was 20% so I'm probably somewhere in between. Perfectly fine with me, as I was fretting that the number would be over 20%.
I asked if she got my max HR on Mon. and she said it was 163. Sounds rather low. Today it was 166. Don't know what to make of that, except that it's a different activity from running so perhaps I perceived it as being harder because I'm not used to using different leg muscles.
Now for the doctor report (sorry for the dissertation here, guys). So the dr. mentioned the dreaded 'A' word - arthritis! Apparently, I have arthritis in my big toe. My range of motion is about 20%. She said the hills have probably aggravated it, along with the extra mileage I've been putting in. And I'm only running 50 something miles/week. Most ultrarunners are running 70 mile weeks! Anyway, she prescribed anti-inflammatory medication and "aggressive physical therapy." She said if it is bothering me, she can give me a cortisone shot a week before the 50. I'm semi-distraught. It could certainly be worse but no doubt, this is going to be one of those nagging, pain in the ass injuries to try to stay on top of. Arthritis is a progressive disease and the running is further injuring the joint. Despite that, she said surgery was not needed nor recommended and she didn't have a particularly bleak outlook on my running career. I picked up the medication tonight and I'm icing my foot as I type this. Tomorrow I will put in a call to the chiro. (my preference over physical therapy). Hopefully, I can keep the soreness at a minimum and make it through my 2 big ultra events.
Thanks for reading!
Tray
Great write-up. That's quite a workout. You did well.
ReplyDeleteYour foot report could have been a lot worse.
See you Saturday.
I read your endurance test report and (also agree) it was a well written recap.That initial test (the one where you warmed up for 5 minutes and then "endured" 70 rpms for 10 minutes FOLLOWED BY the increased tension at the same reps for 8 MORE minutes sounded pretty exhausting.
ReplyDeleteThe tension factor... I was wondering if this was not only an endurance test but (because of that raised resistance involved) also a strength test. I suppose it takes strength to do any of this stuff, but it's interesting to wonder how strength plays into all this endurance testing.
It will be interesting to see how the 50 miler influences the test 4 days later.
The 15.4% does sound pretty respectable!
I used to wear a POLAR hear monitor watch several years ago and I had my MAX target heart rate range set to 163 bpm. The 166 you got reminds me of how "maxed out" I was beginning to feel when reaching that point. So, at that level, your workout sounded pretty "solid." Not bad!!