Went over to the neighborhood clubhouse and did 25 minutes on the Precor bike. It was not comfortable on my butt. I think my own bike will be better, after the adjustment period. I then tried the elliptical (which I’m not supposed to do) and did low resistance. HR got up higher than on the bike and I liked it a lot better. Just did 12 minutes, but I really think I can do that as long as I’m careful and don’t overdo it. So- at least it was something.
Can you row?
I’d advise against rowing for MoWC. The bulk of the work is performed with a “drive” or pushing off from the pedals using your legs.
Checking in … Speaking of rowing, that was my home workout 3 days this past week. For a variety of reasons (including no car and lousy weather) I couldn’t get to the gym, but H’s Concept II rower is right downstairs. Gives a great workout and listening to podcasts makes it all a little less boring.
I continue to meet my Apple Watch goals – it’s somewhat surprising to me how motivating it is to keep the “streak” going.
As I said elsewhere, my Apple watch things I’m dead! I did manage to close the exercise ring today and I will get my 16 hours of walking at least a minute an hour, but the Move ring is not going to get closed for awhile. I am ahead of the last few days, though, where I did absolutely no exercise.
@MomofWildChild, that Apple Watch is good for motivation but bad for forced idleness! Take care of yourself and know that the payoff is a healthy body.
After saying that lol!
It’s amazing what physical exercise does for your mental well-being. It’s not something I would usually even notice except for these long cold days of winter. Every day I get out and get even a short walk, I feel so much better. It’s really amazing
Tried to snowshoe today but didn’t get them strapped in correctly, so I took them off and walked for 38 minutes. Felt so much better afterwards.
Tomorrow I’m meeting my sil and an unknown to me group for xc skiing and maybe snowshoeing if time permits. We are taking our friends out to dinner, they just celebrated 50 years of marriage. We will try to get that check first!
@MomofWildChild - I took my Fitbit off while I was recovering from surgery. I just could not bear the fact that it showed waaay fewer steps than I wanted! Walking with crutches was a PITA, and the Fitbit made me overdo it. So off it went!! 
Harder to do with a watch… can you turn off the activities tracking features for a while or is it not an option?
Regarding stretching—-I’ve seen and studied the literature on static/dynamic stretching. As far as I can tell, I don’t think any of the studies have been done on masters runners. I bought into the “no static” stretching prior to running and ended up getting hurt. Especially hamstrings and calf’s. I start out with dynamic but gradually mix in some static stretching. I spend a good 45 minutes on dynamic and static stretching then morph into dynamic running drills prior to warmup and then finally into routine. The static studies from what I can tell have been done on 20 something bodies. My 63 year old legs are much different than 22 year old legs.
Lots and lots of newer studies on dynamic warmups vs static stretching. The current consensus is dynamic warmups emulating movements you will do during your workout/training/performance event and static stretching afterwards.
And you wanna talk about bizarre injuries, I got a pneumonia shot a month ago. Intramuscular injection in right medial deltoid. Had an enormous swelling reaction that went from the external insertion point of my right pec to my rear deltoid and from there down my tricep to my elbow. I could not abduct my tight arm past 45 degrees. Lasted for a week and left me with a shoulder impingement. Ughhhh.
I still want to wear the Apple Watch. I can still get some of the goals and it gets my text messages and stuff, too. Way back in the day when I was using Garmin Vivofit I did take it off when I was on crutches because I couldn’t get the steps and it wasn’t even really tracking right.
One thing about fitness watches and the like is that if they measure heart rate, you may find that the common formula estimates (e.g. maximum heart rate = 220 - age) can be very incorrect on an individual basis (as opposed to being a reasonable population norm).
Calculated maximum heart rate estimates are not all that accurate or reliable. There are many different formulas out there and what is rarely discussed is the profile of the cohort used to develop formula. As a general matter, you may not fall within the characteristics (age, fitness levels etc) of the cohort and these formulas also don’t take into account individual variances of heart rate response. Just as an illustration of the vagaries of these formulas, for me, 220-66=154 which is much too low. 210-1/2 my age (often recommended for fit individuals over 40) = 177. 208-(.7 x age), another popular formula, results in 162 which is also low for me (I frequently hit that on mountain bike rides). As you can see, some pretty diverse results. For me, 210- half my age most closely approximates my actual measured max at age 66.
And once you get your max hr, whether measured or calculated, what do you do with it? The old standby has been to set up your target zones based on a straight percentage of your max. But this methodology is totally out of whack until you approach 85%. Using hr is really a surrogate for % of VO2 max. It’s the % of VO2 max that gives you the desired training effect (if that were not the case, then elevated hr in the absence of physical exertion, like watching an action or scary movie, would give you a training effect, which it does not).
A straight % of your max hr does not begin to have a 1:1 linear correlation to % VO2 max until about 85%. So instead, the hr reserve method of calculating target zones is recommended which achieves a 1:1 correlation at much lower percentages. Take (max hr - resting hr) x desired % then add back in your resting hr. Compare straight % to hr reserve from 40% - 90% and you may be very surprised by the different target hr numbers at each %.
So is there a workable and reliable alternative to training based on “max hr”? Yup. There is something called ventillary thresholds which are physiological set points in your body’s actual response to cardio-respiratory demands. VT is keyed into your own body’s actual physiological response. Below VT1, your body is relying primarily on fat based energy pathways and tidal volume (depth) of your breathing to get in needed oxygen and off gas CO2. When you cross VT1 because of the exercise demands, your body can no longer produce energy quickly enough using fat based pathways and switches to greater reliance on the faster carbohydrate based pathways. Also, tidal volume is no longer sufficient to get in the O2 you need and off gas CO2 so your rate of respiration increases. As the load demands continue to increase, you will eventually hit VT2 which you would associate with going anaerobic in your energy pathways.
All of this sounds very complicated, but it’s really not. It’s very easy to determine your points of VT1 and VT2 using what is called the “talk test”. And if you wear a hr monitor when doing the testing, you can peg your VT1 and VT2 points to observable heart rates. As you get fitter, you periodically re-test to determine new VT1 and VT2 hr levels. You can then set up your training zones using hr tied into your actual physiological responses rather than some unreliable and perhaps fictional max hr.
Went over to the neighborhood clubhouse and I was the only one there today, which was nice. Did a few minutes on the elliptical and then 10 minutes on the regular bike (bike shorts today helped) and 10 on the recumbent. The recumbent vibrates side to side if you get going on it at all. I’ll try the one at work and see if it does better. Did some upper body weights after that. So- that’s it for today.
I know my max HR so I’m able to calculate my zones pretty well. I agree that the formulas as WAY off for me. My Apple watch does get a very accurate HR reading, though. (so does my Garmin GPS)
Yikes to the shaky recumbent bike! That does not sound right. Mr. B gets his old Schwinn going really fast and hard, and I have never seen any shaking!
“my clothes are fitting differently and I think I am sleeping better.” - That kind of good progress beats the number read-outs on a scale. 
Over past few years I lost about 20 pounds, and I had intended to stop food tracking once at goal (since scale and clothes would keep me in check). But I missed the nutritional tracking. I like MyNetDiary app. (I recently paid $60 for a year of the Premium, but the free and $3.99 versions were fine too). Many folks seem to really like MyFitnessPal.
The HR zone running thing is difficult for me. My max is 186… Resting low 40s and high 30s occasionally. 80% of max is 148. I’m above this level whether it’s a 9, 8, 7, or 6 minute pace. Ive also tried the low HR training plan. Lately I’ve just been running by “feel”, whether it’s a warmup, cool down, easy run or tempo run and just look at my watch at the end of the run.
@ohiooiho, if you use hrr method you get 80% = 157 (using 186-40 x .8 + 40). Does this help? And let me also suggest that 80% is not particularly worthwhile for you. Not hard enough to be of real training value for you and too hard to be a recovery zone. Kinda like a training wasteland for you - wasted time, wasted effort/energy expenditure.
Federal Holiday for me so I had a meet up with 6 other women and we ran 5 miles. Temps in the 30’s felt balmy compared to 16 degrees when we ran on Saturday!
Bought a new pair of shoes today, replaced a pair of Brooks with Asics Kayano 26. The are lighter (I call Brooks “Bricks”), and don’t seem to rub on my ankle like the Brooks do. I’ll have a good opportunity to test them this Saturday.
Which Brooks are you comparing them to? Kayano is heavier than Glycerin by just a little bit. I always thought of Kayano as a beefy, heavy shoe (which I often use in my stash) and had to stop buying them because they came up too high on the side of my foot/ankle.
Which just goes to show you that every foot is different!
@MomofWildChild Not sure I know they were 19’s bought last year. I tried on a pair of Adreneline 20’s today and they were MUCH lighter. I liked them a lot but the Asics were better on my ankle. If the Asics don’t work out I have time to return them and would likely get the Brooks 20’s.