Heart Rates, Cadence and Climbs!

wastelander

ok - time to get serious about my training I think. A couple of rides with an HR monitor show that I'm working way to hard and need to lower my HR. So - I know what I need to do, but the problem is that when I start to spin lower gears my HR increases beyond the 80%. Also, my commutes have 600ft of climbs in one direction and 200ft in the other.

My question is do I listen to my legs (I find spinning easier) or my heart (I have to keep that HR down to improve my aerobic levels) and how do I factor in the effort needed on the climbs?

Help/advice appreciated.

PhilBixby

Okay, without wishing to revisit too many recent threads, if you're new to using the HRM are you confident in your assessment of your HRmax and therefore the percentages of it that various types of riding give you? If your HRmax is wrong, use of the monitor will give you readings which "feel" wrong. My experience is that if you've got the right gearing (for example I swap my usual race 12-23 cassette for a 12-27 for winter base miles) you can twiddle your way up most climbs in the saddle without going much over 80%HRmax - you just need to take it steady. In fact taking it steady is often hard on a bike, especially if you're used to racing your own times on a regular commute.

As to whether you *should* be working on your aerobic fitness - I don't know; there are people much more experienced in training on here, who may well comment.

Phil B
Clifton CC York

wastelander

Hi Phil,

I'm confident with the use of the HRM determining max HR, etc, although perhaps a sucession of 'max-out' tests and arriving at a mean average would be a good idea. (My current max of 185 is based on me reaching near exhaustion levels on a recent climb, prior to me climbing off of the bike though it consistent with me being a 41 year old male) A small number of rides using the HRM at my 'normal' perceived effort levels have quickly revealed that for far too much (by a long way!) of the time I'm working in the 'hard'effort zone - 81-90% of max HR. As I'm looking to increase aerobic levels getting those 'base' miles while keeping in the 55-80% zone is a good starting point for me though I agree that I have a constant wish to beat me previous best times becoming, effectively, my own worst enemy.

As for a perceived need to improve aerobic capacity...a blowup on a climb over the weekend after overcoming the hardest parts - simply running out of steam - points me in that direction but I'm always open to advice and recommendation.

PhilBixby

Howdo!

You could well be right, however HRmax is hard to get precise outside of the lab. Mine's somewhere around 190, and I'm 48. I've been using Joe Friel's technique of basing HR zones on lactate threshold instead, as - on the road or turbo - it's easier to identify.

It can be hard to ease off, especially on a sunny day. Winter's a great time for putting in base miles as it's usually so miserable you can get your grumpy face on and just grind along forever. If you constantly feel like you're working too hard, then you probably are!

Phil B

chrisw12

So let me get this right, you are asking us how you can ride easier?

There's nothing wrong with working at 80% plus by the way. You'll either get used to it and become very good or as you train more, you'll start to find it difficult to get to the 80%+ zone.

wastelander

No - I was asking whether to listen to my legs re cadence and exceed my target HR, or to listen to my HRM to stay at a certain level, and how to best include the inevitable climbs that living in Yorkshire put before me each and every day whilst still trying to work at a level below 80% to increase my aerobic levels.

As for why...read http://www.bikeradar.com/road/fitness/article/health-burn-fat-better-1065 and see for yourself.

Training isn't and shouldn't be about going as fast/hard as you can for as long as you can.

Ric_Stern/RST

I wrote something, potentially of interest in this thread http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopi ... c&start=15

Ric

Ric_Stern/RST

wastelander wrote:

No - I was asking whether to listen to my legs re cadence and exceed my target HR, or to listen to my HRM to stay at a certain level, and how to best include the inevitable climbs that living in Yorkshire put before me each and every day whilst still trying to work at a level below 80% to increase my aerobic levels.

As for why...read http://www.bikeradar.com/road/fitness/article/health-burn-fat-better-1065 and see for yourself.

Training isn't and shouldn't be about going as fast/hard as you can for as long as you can.

It's not immediately apparent what your exact goals are (fat loss, or fitness development)? However, there's no need to worry about exceeding your HR zones. It's perfectly normal, and indeed very useful to go harder uphill.

I linked in my previous post (above) to my other thread message, to draw some other ideas on energy expenditure.

I'm not certain what you mean by "aerobic levels", but aerobic fitness is best trained by riding from moderately hard (what i term zone 3) to very hard (what i term zone 5).

Physiologically speaking, zone 3 is ~lactate threshold, zone 4 is TT power, while zone 5 is VO2max.

Increased mitochondrial density occurs (best) at ~ zone 4, while zone 5 helps to increase capillary density and stroke volume. An increase in mitochondrial density allows more fat to be oxidised at a given intensity (power output) than a lower mito density. However, at the end of the day greatest fat loss occurs with greatest energy expenditure and that should be done at the highest intensity you can sustain over the rides you do.

ric

wastelander

Ric - pm sent!