# EPOC levels



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

srwilson commented on my EPOC level of 312 in a recent race









and I've been trying to understand its significance. In a 20km race 3 weeks ago, I reached 470 EPOC.









and in a 4 hour training run a couple of weeks ago, I reached 258









Reading Suunto's old t6 training guide, it talks of typical values of 40-150 and looking through others' moves in Movescount, many have much lower values.

I understand it's affected by HR and % of max, i.e. intensity, and the 470 EPOC was 1:44 at 90% max, whereas the other 2 were 6:20 and 4:00 at about 85% max.

It's related to PTE, but I don't know where the Ambit classifies the zone relationship with PTE and EPOC, something you could easily see in the old Suunto Training manager software. In Movescount, it seems the bar chart breaks the EPOC range into 5 seemingly random brackets and assigns time in each zone, but for different moves, the ranges vary.

I've set my activity class to 7.5, which generally keeps me out of PTE 5.0, but I still get PTE 5 for many runs, including all the above 3.

Last Saturday's race gave me a TRIMP score in Sporttracks of 950, which also seems pretty high.

I'd be interested to hear others' comments on their own readings. I'd like to understand if my values are excessively high or not and what's influencing them.


----------



## or_watching (Nov 13, 2008)

Hi.
You might want to read these documents if you haven't already.
They provide some technical insight into EPOC, and some additional info on interpreting it.

I also think I have high TRIMP and EPOC numbers compared to other folks. I always just figured it's because i'm designed to be a couch potato and not a runner. I can get ~800 TRIMP and 400+ EPOC in four hours. For me, that's a suffering factor of 100%.

EPOC "has a physiological basis" they say. In that it's supposed to be an estimate of how much extra oxygen you'll need to recover. Something like a disturbance in your body's homeostasis force field. But since it's only based HR and R-R data, and not some kind of actual blood test, it is at the end of the day an estimate. You can see a correlation graph to actual blood work in the white paper.
TRIMP, while also based on HR data, it just some kind of arbitrary dimension-less scale. It doesn't need R-R data, just time in zone.

But both are suppose to show how much training and how much punishment you've done to your body. (My wording).

http://www.firstbeat.net/files/white_paper_epoc.pdf
https://www.watchuseek.com/f374/white-papers-vo2-energy-epoc-pte-energy-calculation-757347.html


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

or_watching said:


> You might want to read these documents if you haven't already.
> They provide some technical insight into EPOC, and some additional info on interpreting it.


Thanks, they look like morning rather than nighttime reading



or_watching said:


> I also think I have high TRIMP and EPOC numbers compared to other folks. I always just figured it's because i'm designed to be a couch potato and not a runner. I can get ~800 TRIMP and 400+ EPOC in four hours. For me, that's a suffering factor of 100%.
> 
> EPOC "has a physiological basis" they say. In that it's supposed to be an estimate of how much extra oxygen you'll need to recover. Something like a disturbance in your body's homeostasis force field. But since it's only based HR and R-R data, and not some kind of actual blood test, it is at the end of the day an estimate. You can see a correlation graph to actual blood work in the white paper.
> TRIMP, while also based on HR data, it just some kind of arbitrary dimension-less scale. It doesn't need R-R data, just time in zone.
> ...


These estimates are useful when looking at your own data and valuable for comparison, but it's interesting to understand the science behind it to try to understand why they vary so much with others. I think I'll get up early tomorrow


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

There's something not right here. How high does your heart rate go as a % of your MHR? My EPOC levels are typically 80 to 130 unless I'm in the PTE 4.3 and above range. My % of MRH would be up to say 90/92% with an average of 82-84% MHR. Have hit PTE of 5 only once with an EPOC of over 190. Averaged over 86% of MHR for 50 mins spin class and my highest HR was 98% MHR. I'm 53 and have an activity level of 7.5 set though I could be bordering on 8. I know I don't do enough high intensity training so I'm not surprised I don't often hit above 130 EPOC or greater than 4.3 PTE. 

Your figures don't look right at all.

if you hit 5 or close to it you should be training at the hardest levels and that seems to be above 95% of your MHR for a sustained period. If you're not training that hard and still seeing high 4s and regular 5s either your activity level in too high, your MHR is not set correctly or maybe weight and age are not right. It could be all of the above. HR zones may also impact on this.


----------



## srwilson (Jun 16, 2012)

I'm with eeun on this. If you are hitting a 5 on a regular bases, and it's not that difficult to do, then, something is not set right, quite possibly MHR is set to low. I think a lot of folk just go with one of the MHR estimation calculations, which for me was not very close. If I set my MHR to the 'standard' MHR = 220 - Age value I would be 'Overreaching' every time I went out the door. This calculation would have me set my MHR to 166. On a run last week where I was pushing a bit I averaged 161bpm and topped out at 186. And 186 is not my Max either.

I can hit a PTE of 5 but it takes just about everything I can give it, and it's very hard to maintain once I've hit it.

On a side note: I also use Firstbeat Athlete. You can import your Movecount moves straight from the program. This company is where I think Suunto got most of their science around Heart Rate Variability, EPOC, and PTE (they wrote the white papers). It has a few more whistles and bells, like training coach, and automatic setting of your Metmax values. It will also suggest to you when you should change your Activity Level. Another thing it shows you is the % error in the Heart Rate data. I found this very interesting and helpful to look at when determining a PTE score. Actually I use this program to set my MHR because of this feature.

HR collection artifact errors can affect the EPOC and therefore the PTE.

While I think Suunto got most of their smarts from the Firstbeat folks their calculations don't align perfectly. From what I can tell, Movecount gives you lower EPOC values than Firstbeat.

If you're interested in the science of it all, then I suggest you take a look at that program and read their stuff.

Later ;-)


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

FWIW here's my one any only 5.0 PTE.

My MHR is 172 and my RHR is 40 (it's dropped from 46 when I last measured it 18 months ago). MHR was measured whilst performing a series of ramped sprints on a treadmill in the gym. I have only hit this once 'in the real-world' though I regularly hit 162 to 169.

As you can see from below, I hit 168 bpm or 98% of my MHR and average 150 bpm (87% over the 51 minutes). EPOC reached a peak of 200 (had thought 190 was my highest). You can also see how much time I spent in the 'very hard' and 'maximal' zones. My HR zones were established in a VO2max test I did in January. I honestly don't think I could have worked any harder. Dropping the peak HR for the move has a big affect on EPOC and PTE, for example on another move, a drop in peak HR to 156 with an average of 146 lowered peak EPOC to 152 and PTE to 4.4. Another example of peak HR at 158 but a lower average of 143 dropped peak EPOC to 128 and PTE to 4.1. Time in 'Maximal' was 27 secs and 0 secs respectively compared to my PTE 5 move of over 8 mins.














​

I'm pretty confident that my settings are close to being correct based on RPE, though sometimes I think I've worked really hard for example when I did my Lactate Threshold test which was 20 mins warmup, 5 mins ramped effort and then 30 minutes working as hard as I could sustain for that 30 mins but the numbers tell a different story. I peaked my HR at 149 and my average was 144 for the last 20 mins of the test yet my peak EPOC was only 103 and PTE 3.4. The test was bloody hard.

Hope this proves useful/interesting.​


----------



## or_watching (Nov 13, 2008)

srwilson said:


> If you are hitting a 5 on a regular bases, and it's not that difficult to do, then, something is not set right, quite possibly MHR is set to low.
> 
> I can hit a PTE of 5 but it takes just about everything I can give it, and it's very hard to maintain once I've hit it.


I think this is the crux of it for me.
Every run is hard, so hitting high PTE and EPOC is easy. 

For my body, there's not such thing as an easy run. I exaggerate a little... but compared to a 'real runner', it's the truth. Running shoes & PTE <2.0 is a fiction to me.

(i'm reasonably confident that my HR setting are accurate... fyi my HRmax is already 14bpm higher than the 220-Age and 11 higher than 208-0.7*Age)... yep you can figure out my age by doing some Algebra... 

If I want a low HR/VO2/whatever, I need to walk or stay on the couch.


----------



## martowl (Dec 31, 2010)

I am with eeun and srwilson on this as well. I have about 8yrs road bike racing experience and about 3 ultra running now. I used the T6 and T6c for road racing and the EPOC and VO2 Max values agreed well with what I determined from my power meter on my bike for power analysis and my effort in races. For running, the intensity is generally less unless I am doing a tempo run. It is very, very hard for me to hit a 5.0 and rarely happens. My EPOC maxes out in the 120 to 130 range. My VO2 max is between 48-50, which is good for a 56 year old. When I was bike racing my max HR was somewhere in the 190s and now the highest I have hit in the last year is 183 or 184. So 220- my age is way, way off. I do not recommend using any of those estimates. I usually take my highest HR for the year, add 5 bpm and call that my max unless I get closer than 5 bpm to the max. I have my activity class set at 7.5 but that may be a bit low for me. I can easily do a recovery run with PTE below 2.0 or at 2.0 if I stay off of the hills. It is hard for me to get my HR above 120 when running downhill unless I run fast enough to try to kill myself (I run trails).

So I think that you or_watching have your max HR too low probably by a lot, and that goes for bowesmana too. Bowesmana, looking at your HR graphs you seem to be able to maintain in the mid 160s for quite some time. This may be close to your threshold HR. When bike racing my lactate threshold HR was 168, I could do a 40km time trial at this HR, if I went 4-5 bpm above that it got really, really hard. At that time I had my max HR set at 192 to 194, I cannot remember exactly. I would suggest your max HR is at that level or higher, there is no way you can maintain above your lactate threshold for long periods of time, it is simply not possible and your lactate threshold should be at 80-85% of your max HR.

From what I see of eeun's data, it looks pretty accurate to me and his settings are similar to mine, I think we probably have similar max HR and lactate thresholds. Races can give you good estimates of these parameters, especially if you are not willing to let folks pull ahead.

Here are my body metric settings


----------



## srwilson (Jun 16, 2012)

Yeah when I made my comment about difficulty it was not about how easily we can/could top out, it was about the difficulty or ease we can maintain a very high intensity level. 

If you are reaching a level 5 or 4 PTE without breaking a sweat then something is wrong. That's what I was saying. 

If I were to set my MHR by using any of the known formulas that would be the case for me personally; 4s & 5s without a sweat. Those 'something' - your age simply do not work for me. My max is set 29bpm more than one of the popular formula methods. And that makes a huge difference in the outcome of EPOC calculations and PTE. 

Believe me when I hit a 5 I don't have to question if it was a 5; I know it was a 5 because I am spent!


----------



## or_watching (Nov 13, 2008)

martowl said:


> It is hard for me to get my HR above 120 when running downhill unless I run fast enough to try to kill myself (I run trails).
> 
> , , there is no way you can maintain above your lactate threshold for long periods of time, it is simply not possible and your lactate threshold should be at 80-85% of your max HR.


Fyi, at my slowest jog, my HR is >125 in less than 0.5 miles.

In several years I've only got within 1-2 of my max a couple times, regardless of sprints or literally being cross-eyed. but sure, i can raise it up by 5-10 to get these indicators down.

But then that just kind of ignores the fact that I think as-is the PTE values DO reflect how hard my running really is. My body tells me there is no such thing as a long (>8mi) easy run (feeling wise).

I did notice that FB's PTE values are meaningfully lower than Movescount. But I only did the trial and could view a few runs. So... Maybe I just need to use FB's numbers.

Final question... What do you consider a "long time" when judging the impossibility of being above my lactate threshod (80-85%)? 10min, 30min? 2hr?

I'll bump my Max up by 5 and see what happens to the numbers. If my PTE's go down maybe my legs won't hurt so much.


----------



## srwilson (Jun 16, 2012)

or_watching said:


> What do you consider a "long time" when judging the impossibility of being above my lactate threshold (80-85%)? 10min, 30min? 2hr?


From what I've read 'At' your lactate threshold, about 60 mins for very fit athletes and around 30 mins or so for the less fit. 'Above' your threshold... less ;0)

OR, if you feel the numbers you are getting are a good representation of your effort then that is all that matters.

This came up once before but I think the Maximum Heart Rate you can achieve in a particular activity might not always be the same. My max 'achievable' HR for Running is higher than my max achievable HR in Biking. I don't have good biking legs. My legs simply cannot keep up with cardiovascular system. They give out long before my heart and lungs do. On the other hand I can run pretty fast and my running legs are not what gets taxed when running, it's my heart and lungs. My legs say give me more, and the heart and lungs say nope, that's all there is.

I could be all wrong and what do I know? So if it feels good to ya and you think it good then no need to modify a thing.


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

The LT test runs for 30 mins after a proper 20 min warm up follower by a 5 min ramp to get the body ready for the intensity of the test. You then try to work as hard as possible at a steady sustainable level. You take your average HR only from the last 20 minutes. Mine was 144 bpm or 84% of MHR and 72% of VO2max. I believe you should in theory be able to hold at or just below your LT for at least an hour or maybe longer if you're fit. You can train your body to work for longer at LT and also push your LT to higher levels - all part of Team Skye's marginal gains. 

Although your true MHR is one figure that slowly declines with age, your functional maximum will vary for different sport disciplines as will your LT. LT is very trainable and a good measure of improving fitness where as VO2max is largely genetic and not very trainable.


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

eeun said:


> There's something not right here. How high does your heart rate go as a % of your MHR? My EPOC levels are typically 80 to 130 unless I'm in the PTE 4.3 and above range. My % of MRH would be up to say 90/92% with an average of 82-84% MHR. Have hit PTE of 5 only once with an EPOC of over 190. Averaged over 86% of MHR for 50 mins spin class and my highest HR was 98% MHR. I'm 53 and have an activity level of 7.5 set though I could be bordering on 8. I know I don't do enough high intensity training so I'm not surprised I don't often hit above 130 EPOC or greater than 4.3 PTE.
> 
> Your figures don't look right at all.
> 
> if you hit 5 or close to it you should be training at the hardest levels and that seems to be above 95% of your MHR for a sustained period. If you're not training that hard and still seeing high 4s and regular 5s either your activity level in too high, your MHR is not set correctly or maybe weight and age are not right. It could be all of the above. HR zones may also impact on this.


My weight/height/age are all correct. My MHR is set at 178, which was established in a lactic acid threshold test. I rarely get into the 170s, generally when it does occur, it happens in the first couple of minutes of a race when it's already elevated with the adrenalin. At the start line on Saturday standing still it was 100. I know when I get above 166 I am suffering. I did have my activity class at 7 as I was hitting PTE 5 often.

EPOC is also a factor of duration and I now only get to 5 on the longer or harder runs. In the EPOC 470, it was 1:44 @ 85%, so double the duration of your 50 minutes.

Interesting what you say about zones. Do you know if the zones in Movescount have any bearing on their calculations?



srwilson said:


> I'm with eeun on this. If you are hitting a 5 on a regular bases, and it's not that difficult to do, then, something is not set right, quite possibly MHR is set to low. I think a lot of folk just go with one of the MHR estimation calculations, which for me was not very close. If I set my MHR to the 'standard' MHR = 220 - Age value I would be 'Overreaching' every time I went out the door. This calculation would have me set my MHR to 166. On a run last week where I was pushing a bit I averaged 161bpm and topped out at 186. And 186 is not my Max either.


Suunto's training guide talks about 210 - 0.65 * age and it specifically says that it will give a higher reading for older people, but that gives me what I have, i.e. 178.



srwilson said:


> If you're interested in the science of it all, then I suggest you take a look at that program and read their stuff. Later ;-)


Yes, I'll look at that.



eeun said:


> FWIW here's my one any only 5.0 PTE.
> 
> My MHR is 172 and my RHR is 40 (it's dropped from 46 when I last measured it 18 months ago). MHR was measured whilst performing a series of ramped sprints on a treadmill in the gym. I have only hit this once 'in the real-world' though I regularly hit 162 to 169.
> 
> As you can see from below, I hit 168 bpm or 98% of my MHR and average 150 bpm (87% over the 51 minutes). EPOC reached a peak of 200 (had thought 190 was my highest). You can also see how much time I spent in the 'very hard' and 'maximal' zones. My HR zones were established in a VO2max test I did in January. I honestly don't think I could have worked any harder. Dropping the peak HR for the move has a big affect on EPOC and PTE, for example on another move, a drop in peak HR to 156 with an average of 146 lowered peak EPOC to 152 and PTE to 4.4. Another example of peak HR at 158 but a lower average of 143 dropped peak EPOC to 128 and PTE to 4.1. Time in 'Maximal' was 27 secs and 0 secs respectively compared to my PTE 5 move of over 8 mins.


That's interesting, as comparing your numbers to my 1:44 race









if you did double your duration, you'd end up with smilar EPOC to my 470. I hit 174 (98%) in the graph, but the above pic says 177. My average 161 is 90% for 104 minutes. Yours is 87% for 51 minutes. Both graphs show virtual linear growth in EPOC. Suunto's training guide says



Suunto Training Guide said:


> Because EPOC increases relatively faster at a high heart rate than at a low heart rate...


so perhaps the 470 is not so far out after all.

Interesting!


----------



## srwilson (Jun 16, 2012)

Hmmm, I just noticed that you can't set your MET value any longer on Movescount. It is automatically set by selecting an activity level and you're not given a way to readjust it. It's like saying 'well, you're 6 feet tall so you get a size 9 shoe'. What's up with that?!?


----------



## martowl (Dec 31, 2010)

srwilson said:


> From what I've read 'At' your lactate threshold, about 60 mins for very fit athletes and around 30 mins or so for the less fit. 'Above' your threshold... less ;0)
> 
> I could be all wrong and what do I know? So if it feels good to ya and you think it good then no need to modify a thing.


srwilson has the idea here and remember these are soft numbers but I agree 60 min at lactate threshold is about it if you are fit, I would say very fit. So play around with the numbers, I would suggest a run with a 15 min interval at the max pace you can sustain for that time will give you a good estimate of LTR. I have a good idea of mine from the races I have done. Getting the MaxHR and activity class set correctly is important for your training levels.


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

martowl said:


> I am with eeun and srwilson on this as well. I have about 8yrs road bike racing experience and about 3 ultra running now. I used the T6 and T6c for road racing and the EPOC and VO2 Max values agreed well with what I determined from my power meter on my bike for power analysis and my effort in races. For running, the intensity is generally less unless I am doing a tempo run. It is very, very hard for me to hit a 5.0 and rarely happens. My EPOC maxes out in the 120 to 130 range. My VO2 max is between 48-50, which is good for a 56 year old. When I was bike racing my max HR was somewhere in the 190s and now the highest I have hit in the last year is 183 or 184. So 220- my age is way, way off. I do not recommend using any of those estimates. I usually take my highest HR for the year, add 5 bpm and call that my max unless I get closer than 5 bpm to the max. I have my activity class set at 7.5 but that may be a bit low for me. I can easily do a recovery run with PTE below 2.0 or at 2.0 if I stay off of the hills. It is hard for me to get my HR above 120 when running downhill unless I run fast enough to try to kill myself (I run trails).


That's a good VO2 Max value for your age, I'm around 41-42 for a 51 year old. I did my lactate threshold test last year. It was different to eeun's in that it was a 4 minutes on, 1 minute off, each time the speed increased by 1.5km/h, starting at 10 km/h. I managed 30 minutes with a final speed of 17.5 km/h and max HR of 178. My LT was quite low at the time (79%) and he compared me with someone same age/hr/speed/time, but higher LT and said he will beat me in every race. As a result, the chap gave me these zones.









I've done a lot of work to increase the LT over the last year though.



martowl said:


> So I think that you or_watching have your max HR too low probably by a lot, and that goes for bowesmana too. Bowesmana, looking at your HR graphs you seem to be able to maintain in the mid 160s for quite some time. This may be close to your threshold HR. When bike racing my lactate threshold HR was 168, I could do a 40km time trial at this HR, if I went 4-5 bpm above that it got really, really hard. At that time I had my max HR set at 192 to 194, I cannot remember exactly. I would suggest your max HR is at that level or higher, there is no way you can maintain above your lactate threshold for long periods of time, it is simply not possible and your lactate threshold should be at 80-85% of your max HR.


My aerobic threshold was put at 158-166 and I know that when I hit 167 I really struggle and it just feels bad, so keeping under 167 is "comfortable". I can keep up a 145+ average HR for hours and still keep under 5.0. Perhaps I do need to up my max HR by a few and see what effect that has.


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

srwilson said:


> From what I've read 'At' your lactate threshold, about 60 mins for very fit athletes and around 30 mins or so for the less fit. 'Above' your threshold... less ;0)


On the trails and hills, there are frequent 'walking' phases where HR can drop sufficiently for some recovery. Does that affect the time able to spend "at" the LT if you regularly dip out of it for short periods?


----------



## or_watching (Nov 13, 2008)

Thanks for all the input. 

Now I'm giving up on an app for EPOC, and am working on one for Daily Affirmations for when my PTE goes too high but I'm still running slow.


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

One point I should have mentioned is that I'm currently around 45 lbs overweight which skews things outside the gym quite a bit. My VO2 max at current weight was measured at 36 but the guy told me its hammered down because of my weight and it would be around 45 at my 'fighting weight'. So I'm pretty fit under it all. 

I don't know if that affects my other stats though as they were done mostly on a spin bike my weight has much less of an impact. Out in the field, my Achilles heel is climbing any kind of gradient where pushing that extra weight takes its toll on energy and speed. 

Some of you may recall some tests I did around changing my activity level which I had set too high initially then too low. My experience is that its pretty accurate so look to get that right and you should alter it if your activity levels for the previous month go up or down. I don't think altering the Metz manually is the best option. Currently mine should be 10.3 according to my VO2max at my current weight but that would be way below my current activity level. My setting of 7.5 puts my Metz at 13.5 or a VO2max of 47.25. Of course, I input my correct weight into Movescount and I don't know how the figures will be affected by a lower weight. I'm guessing my PTE will rise as the assumption will be that a higher weight uses more energy that a lower weight. But I may be wrong. Hopefully we'll get to see the effect.


----------



## srwilson (Jun 16, 2012)

bowesmana said:


> On the trails and hills, there are frequent 'walking' phases where HR can drop sufficiently for some recovery. Does that affect the time able to spend "at" the LT if you regularly dip out of it for short periods?


While I couldn't say for sure I would say that resting or allowing the HR to drop would extend your time.

Oh and I was going to say you and I are very close to having the same body parameters, the same height & I think I'm 1kg less in weight, RHR basically the same, but my MHR is quite a bit higher. I've tested it several times and can still get into the high 180s and low 190s. I'm 54.

You said


> I can keep up a 145+ average HR for hours


 same here.

OK Later...


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

srwilson said:


> While I couldn't say for sure I would say that resting or allowing the HR to drop would extend your time.


When we talk about working at or close to LT (in this context at least) I believe we are talking about maintaining a constant pace/effort. For example, in a cycling time trial, the ideal situation would be to sit at your LT or thereabouts for the duration of the TT thereby minimising the chance of burnout. The best cyclist have a high LT of 90 to 95% of MHR and can sustain that over long periods whilst also maintaining a high power output. I can maintain my LT HR (84% MHR) for about an hour but unfortunately towards the end of that period I will see a drop off in power output. Same with runners who will sit at their LT for ages, perhaps even for a whole marathon distance.

If you are not maintaining a constant LT effort level then the whole LT discussion becomes irrelevant other than above LT you will start to accumulate more lactate than your body can cope with and you then start to slow. Of course, highly trained athletes can cope with high lactate better than us mere mortals. So it you work at that level but then take a rest, I would guess you could continue that cycle indefinitely.


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

Thanks for all the comments. I'll up my MHR setting by a few and see how that plays out. I might up the activity class to 8 as I'm doing well over the 5-7 hours a week now.


----------



## srwilson (Jun 16, 2012)

bowesmana said:


> I'm doing well over the 5-7 hours a week now.


Dang!!! You guys are killin' it! I feel like a bum...:-(


----------



## martowl (Dec 31, 2010)

bowesmana said:


> Thanks for all the comments. I'll up my MHR setting by a few and see how that plays out. I might up the activity class to 8 as I'm doing well over the 5-7 hours a week now.


I just hit a 5.0 yesterday, and although the run was very hard...I don't think it was a 5.0. I also average 10-15h per week so I am going to move my class to 8 as well. Here is the link to the move and I pasted a screenshot below.


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

martowl said:


> I just hit a 5.0 yesterday, and although the run was very hard...I don't think it was a 5.0. I also average 10-15h per week so I am going to move my class to 8 as well. Here is the link to the move and I pasted a screenshot below.


It doesn't really look like a 5, but you were at maximal for over 10% of the run and that ramps up EPOC/PTE faster than the other zones. Perhaps the formulas used to make all these calculations are not so suited to ultra running, where spending several hours on training runs is quite normal. If you look at your Quad Rock, you only hit 4.2, but your average HR was higher, but you spent very little time in very hard and maximal, less than 5% of the time in both.

Another interesting discrepancy along the lines of eeun's discovery is the VO2 max of 39 in the headline figures, but 27 in the graph. Those bar chart figures jump around all over the place. If you click one of the bars, it changes values, select another unit and click again on the bars - odd things happen.


----------



## Gerald Zhang-Schmidt (Oct 30, 2011)

Wish I remembered/understood better what the background of these calculations was, but there certainly *is* a point where they are not so suited for ultrarunning - which is why there are both EPOC peaks / PTE and recovery times.

PTE / peak EPOC is, if I understood correctly, more about the peak impulse the cardiovascular system is getting (as calculated as EPOC - excess post-exercise oxygen consumption), meaning the same "impulse" can be gained from HIIT or from an ultra.
On the other hand, there is the load as e.g. from low-intensity but long exercise, which is reflected more in the recovery time.

You guys really make me want to 1) learn more again, 2) go out more (and hope I still don't overdo it), and 3) go for some lactate testing again...


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

martowl said:


> I just hit a 5.0 yesterday, and although the run was very hard...I don't think it was a 5.0. I also average 10-15h per week so I am going to move my class to 8 as well. Here is the link to the move and I pasted a screenshot below.


Having slept on this and compared yours and my figures, I have another thought or two.


You are very light in weight which I am guessing means that any elevated HR would be directly attributed to working very hard and not artificially affected by 'excess weight' (I'll come to this later)
Clearly you work hard and spend a fair bit of time in Zone 5, though much less than I do when I hit a PTE of 5 (16%) though as this is a peak effort once you hit 5 for 'long enough' it ain't going any higher. If I spent 90% in Zone 5 it would be the same so maybe 10% is enough to hit 5, maybe even less
Your HR zones I think are a little off (when compared to mine or to Movescount's default settings)

Your figures: Z1 >61% Z2 >81% Z3 >87% Z4 >91% Z5 92%>
My figures: Z1 >60% Z2 >73% Z3 >83% Z4 >92% Z5 93%>

What this could mean is that if your zones were as mine are (and they are close for Z1, Z4 and Z5 but not Z2 and Z3) you could be working in Zone 3 and 4 where at present you are in Zone 2 - anything below 148bpm (and over 112) will be in Zone 2. My zones were given to me following my VO2max test. How did you get your zone figures?
I think your activity level is too low as you suggest

Whilst I don't think there will be a big impact on PTE, changing your zones could make it look like you are working harder (which I believe you are anyway) than it seems at present.

Back to the weight thing. Shifting excess body weight takes energy and I'm pretty confident 'count's against' PTE figures. There is likely (I believe) a negative impact on PTE as 'it' assumed my higher HR is associated with my excess weigh 'shifting'. My excess weight would therefore have a big impact 'out in the field' but not in spin classes. I'm guessing that at your weight with my level of activity in a spin class I'd be hitting 5s or close to pretty regularly as long as I am hitting Zone 5 for long enough.

Ironically, in spin, my weight is supported and I don't need to shift it/work against it on a stationary spin bike. Despite riding really hard 'outside' I rarely hit much over 4.2 with most rides in the low to mid 3s. You see my point here?

Anyway, I'm on a mission to reduce my body weight by 45lbs so hopefully this theory will be put to the test over the next few months. Hopefully we'll see my PTE climbing - or maybe not! :-d

Finally, to (perhaps) prove a point. Here is a move I did 12 months ago when I was some 14 lbs lighter (don't ask!). This is a run I did where I hit a PTE of 4.1. EPOC was 145. I'm not so conditioned to running as cycling and since my ITB and hamstring injury I don't do much running. Compare my time in zones with yours. 28% in Zone 5, 19% in Zone 4. It was a very hard run yet still only PTE of 4.0. I think weight was a big factor here in keeping PTE down.


​


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

Just wondering... If you set your zones so that maximal is >50%, would that affect the PTE/EPOC calculation or does it use internal values for the calcs. I suspect not, because Suunto's training guide it talks about EPOC's relationship with MHR, so I am guessing that your own zones are not relevant to the calculations.


----------



## eeun (May 31, 2012)

bowesmana said:


> Just wondering... If you set your zones so that maximal is >50%, would that affect the PTE/EPOC calculation or does it use internal values for the calcs. I suspect not, because Suunto's training guide it talks about EPOC's relationship with MHR, so I am guessing that your own zones are not relevant to the calculations.


No I don't believe so, not to any great degree anyway. What it might do though is to distort the 'overall representation' of the move.


----------



## bowesmana (Apr 22, 2012)

I upped my MHR to 180 and activity class to 8, but I still ramped up to EPOC 411 today and PTE 5 in 86 minutes. It was a hard race in torrential rain running permanently in a river. Here's a link to the move

















There was a nice 3:48 "rest" in the middle when we had to help each other cross boulders under a 50m raging waterfall that came up in just a few minutes.


----------

