Training Zones, based on Heart Rate
Shadescp
Posts: 34
I'm going to try a progressive, structured training paln over the forthcoming Winter aiming for club 10s next year. I'd describe myself as an intermediate recreational cyclist (PB 26:10 for a 10 mile TT, though i've only done a few so far). Age 36.
I'm using a heart rate monitor and based on recommended road tests have found my training zones to be:
Andy Coggan - Based on Lactate Threshold HR (not Power/Wattage)
1. active recovery : <68%
2. aerobic capacity/ core endurance : 69% - 83%
3. Tempo rides : 84%-94%
4. Threshold: 95% -105%
5. V02 Max >106%
My max sustainable HR is 177; max HR is 184. These are based on actual Turbo session tests.
Thing is, Im really struggling to cycle within Zone 2. It feels way too slow for me and I would say my natural pace ( breathing easily, enjoying the view, speed around 17 mph) easily puts me in Zone 3, with a heart rate of 157.
I have had some knee probles in the past and am desperate to avoid a repeat, hence me trying to train the right way, but zone 2 just feels way to slow for me.
Any thoughts? Should I just use Zone3 as my core endurance, base training zone?
p.s. i also calculated my zones using the Peter Keen method and that seemed to "fit" me a little better.
I'm using a heart rate monitor and based on recommended road tests have found my training zones to be:
Andy Coggan - Based on Lactate Threshold HR (not Power/Wattage)
1. active recovery : <68%
2. aerobic capacity/ core endurance : 69% - 83%
3. Tempo rides : 84%-94%
4. Threshold: 95% -105%
5. V02 Max >106%
My max sustainable HR is 177; max HR is 184. These are based on actual Turbo session tests.
Thing is, Im really struggling to cycle within Zone 2. It feels way too slow for me and I would say my natural pace ( breathing easily, enjoying the view, speed around 17 mph) easily puts me in Zone 3, with a heart rate of 157.
I have had some knee probles in the past and am desperate to avoid a repeat, hence me trying to train the right way, but zone 2 just feels way to slow for me.
Any thoughts? Should I just use Zone3 as my core endurance, base training zone?
p.s. i also calculated my zones using the Peter Keen method and that seemed to "fit" me a little better.
0
Comments
-
So, if you went for a nice, steady-paced 4-hour non-stop ride with a mate, chin-wagging most of the way, you would typically come back with an av HR around 157?Shadescp wrote:Thing is, Im really struggling to cycle within Zone 2. It feels way too slow for me and I would say my natural pace ( breathing easily, enjoying the view, speed around 17 mph) easily puts me in Zone 3, with a heart rate of 157.
Ruth0 -
You're max heartbeat might well be at least ten beats higher. The 220 -age calculation is only a guesstimate based on a large population - individual variations are common and can be large.
A long steady ride at 157 would suggest a max closer to 200 than 184.
0 -
ruth - I did a ride yesterday:
3 hrs / 17 mph average/ 50 miles/ flat terrain. My average heart rate was 153.
So that's 86% of my sustainable heart rate (177) ; 81% of my Max heart rate(184)
I was on my own but could of had a halting conversation i guess. I did not have the feeling at all of pushing it, and would of needed to actually concentrate to go slower. Perhaps over 4-5 hours I'd of slowed a little.
I seem to have 3 "Zones" or levels of intensity:
Basic endurance/stamina: 148-158bpm
"Pace" ride : 160-173bpm
Threshold/time Trailling: 173- 177bpm
And though i've not tried it yet, I guess a fourth level which would be intense intervals over 177bpm.
But cycling less than 148 bpm just feels, well boring.0 -
Ut_och_cykla is right - it looks as though you've calculated your maxHR from 220-age, which is a very unreliable method. You really need to do a proper maxHR test.
But you may well have your broad training zones quite well defined - or at least accurately enough defined. The trick now is to get the best mix of intensities, durations and recovery.
Ruth0
