"Sensory Data"

[Nick Miller]

I want to know what people think about heart rate monitors/using technology to read your body vs. listening to "sensory data".

Today on my workout I didn't wear a watch, something that I a doing more and more frequently. Wetmore did yell our splits occasionally, but the majority I did off of feel. He consistently harps about listening to "sensory data", which I am beginning to really believe in. It doesn't matter how good your watch/heart rate monitor is, it is never going to beat the feedback your own body will give you. There are so many factors that play into how your body is feeling that it is absurd to go off info. that a piece of metal is giving you. I think that these tools can be useful at particular times, but are typically unnecessary since your body is perfectly good indicator. Additionally, I believe that if you become too accustomed to some sort of technological feedback, you will not run to your full potential due to "submission to numbers". For example: it is very easy to neglect how your body feels after looking at your heart rate reading. You can become a slave to numbers, not allowing yourself to really do what is best on a day to day basis (since heart rate to exertion ratio consistenly changes). I am a believer that the "sensory data" method will beat any technology 100% of the time.

[Sasha Pachev]

Nick - I fully agree. Instruments should be used for observation and refining the intuition, and never for guidance. You should always run by how you feel.

[Ted Leblow]

I am in full agreement here as well. I own a Garmin and even upgraded to a heart rate monitor but I use it much differently than most. During the vast majority of my runs and workouts I do not look at the watch at all or very rarely. During harder workouts I will look at splits to see where I'm at but this is because I do not have a coach yelling splits. The splits allow you to have some input into the "sensory data" at that given speed or effort. I do not use the heart rate data during a workout at all and usually do not look at it while I am running. I use this data during post workout analysis. By looking at the data afterwards it allows me to monitor my fitness over time and other such data. In a sense the watch is my coach who is recording my data and providing the feedback after workouts and over time. It tells me how my training is progressing and if what I am doing is working. We truly need to learn how our bodies feel and run that way as well. The trap of technology one can easily fall into is to let the data limit ones capability, especially in a race situation. If you determine that X heart rate is your max for a certain pace or race such as a marathon and use this data to race by and say back off because your heart rate is 5 beats to high even though you are feeling great you are most likely hurting your performance. Learning how the body feels and being able to listen to it are much more important than what ones watch or monitor is telling them. But in order to learn this we do need some input from some source be it a coach giving splits and feedback or for many a watch and heart rate monitor such as the Gamin 305.

[Craig Green]

It would be interesting to see if that could be applied to racing as well.

[Paul Petersen]

I agree very much. I got a good lesson on it during my workout yesterday, when I focused on my garmin pace readings and splits rather than listening to my body and responding to the conditions (heat, wind). It cost me my workout, and was a bit humbling. Live and learn though. I think a gps or foot pod is a great tool, as it gives us feedback and makes sure we run the "full distance", but it should not drive the workout.

For St. George, I intend to wear a normal sports watch, not my garmin.

[Cody Draper]

I agree that Sensory data is beter to listen to than the metal device.  I am what Jon calls a GPS slave, but am proud.  I do realize that I am also shooting myself in the foot if I rely too much on the feedback fro this device.  I am gradually trying run more by feel and check the Garmin to see how close I got.  My HR monitor has been used similar to how Ted uses it, as a post workout check to see fitness level gain.  I also use it in races when I am feeling like I have nothing left, but am not hitting my usual heart rates.  If that happens I manage to dig deeper and go faster as I feel like I have "proof" that I can run faster.  So many pros and cons...

[Chad]

I use the Garmin mainly to develop stronger wrists and forearms. It's great for pace data; I never use the heart monitor.

[Dustin Ence]

I think it is very important to learn how to listen to the body and to learn how to run by feel.  I have always felt pretty confident in my ability to feel and understand what pace I'm running at, but I must admit I have really enjoyed having the Garmin on certain days.  When I was in college I would run many of my workouts without a watch and actually would be the pace setter on many intervals.  Those were fun days, we had one guy who would wear a watch and just run crazy splits, one repeat way ahead of everybody, then die and be behind everybody for three, then back in the lead on the last few.  Many times the coach would tell him to go with the group that was not wearing the watch, yet were hitting all their splits right on pace, it is just funny to think back to those days.

[adam]

Anybody ever used tape to cover their watch on a long hard workout so as not to look at the splits? I used to do this on longer runs when I would want to just get through the first hour and then concentrate on the next few miles at a hard pace. When I would rip the tape away to see how I had done for the first part I was always suprised by how quickly I had gone through it. I think it helps when you are more focused on the feel of the run and you get into a natural form.