resting heart rate

neeb

I've always found it impossible to determine my resting heart rate as it seems to be incredibly variable. I have quite a fast heart rate anyway (40yo and max must be somewhere in the mid 190s). The thing is, I can measure it in bed in the morning but that's not usually when it's slowest, more often the lowest readings are when relaxing in the evening. It seems to vary between 53 and 65 without any obvious cause. Can I assume that the resting rate is the slowest rate I can consistently obtain at least once in any given week?

Alex_Simmons/RST

Yes but I suppose that depends on what you're doing in bed

feel

It is quite normal for your resting heart rate to be different at different times of the day. Even things like time since your last meal affect it. I suspect the electronic monitors are also not the most reliable. If your resting rate is only varying between 53 and 65 i would think that was very constant and pretty low. I can get readings that are 12 bpm apart within 3 minutes of each other :shock: mind that could be a sign of how crap my monitor is :oops:

neeb

neeb

Sorry, the laughing was directed at the post before yours!

Yup, when I say between 53 and 65 I'm ruling out times when I'm not feeling relaxed, even if I'm not doing anything. Sometimes it's over 70. But the point is I can often get it at about 53-55, so I guess that's the resting rate?

pjm-84

I'm the same as you.

Taking my resting HR in the morning doesn't really work for me either. I take mine in the evening and like you does vary , 48 - 55 (typically 50)

I'm also a 40 year old and consider my heart rate to be 195max hr although I have hit 199 in a race on the final lap this year. I have to say my vision was starting to tunnel quite badly towards the end and I had a blinding headache for 15mins afterwards so I'm going to keep to the 195 figure! I'm not sure the body is as willing as the mind.

Out of interest when I restarted serious training back in 2000 (rowing training not cycling) my max heart rate as a 33 year old was 183. I wasn't a counch potato at the time either.

neeb

Interesting that your max rate has changed - I think mine's always been high even when I haven't been particularly fit, it's the resting rate that changes (I guess that's normal). I've only just started training more seriously though, so hopefully I can get it lower.

phil s

I don't think the max changes upwards so much as the ability to tolerate the pain to reah max, i.e. the fitter you get, the harder you are prepared to push thus getting more of an idea of your body's real potential... well that's how I see it

Mike Willcox

Surely your max heart rate does not increase with training. And anyway without taking a stress test, measuring your max heart rate is difficult. For me taking a stress test is also hazardous. I don't particularly wish to exercise to exhaustion just to get some figure that is absolutely 100% accurate.

On a stationary bike in a gym my HR reached 178. My 220 - age = 162.
The highest using various methods of calculation = 168. I don't trust the reading in the gym and I don't think it's as low as 162, so I work on the assuption that it's around 170.

Does it matter? I think not.

It's all about training in zones within a range of say 8 bpm and bearing in mind the accepted heart rate drift the longer you exercise, then the accuracy of your MHR is academic.

On the other hand your resting heart rate is a good indication of well being and taken in conjunction with how you feel is a measure of your readiness to undertake hard training, particulalry after 2 or three days or more of hard riding. What's the point of taking it if you don't heed the signs?

Your ability to suffer is learnt, and can just as easily be obtained by RPE.

pjm-84

I agree although the HR I can achieve has increased over the years for some reason or another.

I've based my MHR figure on a 10km run I did a few years back where I spent the last 4km at 185 plus and the last 2km above 190, finally peaking at 195 across the line. I can't run either so it wasn't a blistering preformance

I can hit 190 - 199 whilst cycling and did so twice (190 and 191) last week on a Saturday ride although at this stage I really didn't want to be that high. (Still I won one hill sprint and lost the other)

Max hr is something that ends up being recorded as part of a ride or race. Occasionally when I feeling "knackered" and putting a big effort in I will look down and spot that my hr is in the 190s and possibly the reason why I'm feeling like I do. My CV doesn't give the same indication (unless I'm running). Sometimes I will just try to hang on and then it starts to creep up slowly.

neeb

I know very little about this subject and am just speculating, but is it possible that there could be a significant difference between your true max HR and the max you can achieve in a given activity, and that this could vary a lot between activities? So if your previous highest recorded heart rate was when you were rowing, could it be the case that to row most efficiently, your heart rate should be significantly lower than your max, even if you are going flat out? When cycling the muscular effort is more or less continuous as your two legs are always at opposite phases of the cycle, while in rowing (as opposed to kayaking for example) the effort is presumably discontinuous to some extent. Just an idea.

Mike Willcox

You may have a higher MHR for running and with rowing than you do for cycling, but for the same discipline I don't think it changes by how fit you are.

pjm-84

It's in the cycling that I can hit the max HRs.

My running poor now and I haven't rowed for a couple of years. When I did I recall hitting 185 as a new max in a head race and remember being unable to move or do much afterwards. If I jumped on the rowing ergo now I don't think I would have the strength to get anywhere near MHR but it would be interesting to find out.

neeb

I wonder how fast your heart rate can change, i.e. could it beat very slightly faster when you are pulling on the oars and slower in between strokes? If so you could be near max HR when pulling, but a bit lower when averaged over a few seconds.

pjm-84

Not when you're racing!

2km stuff is flat out and hold on, even at top level. It's very explosive but controlled. Hurts like hell but you always come through it. I used and still do count seconds to focus the mind during these times. Last weekend on the club ride I thought sod it on one and lost.

Head racing is very similar to TT as it's undertaken at a high percentage of max HR. I couldn't use HR during a head race and would run at a pace that I thought I could run at. Generally I would aim for an average of sub 2min / split 500s in a scull. The top guys were running at 1.53 /1.55 spilts. (Boats have "speedos" as well!)

If anything cycling is easier because you can freewheel. In rowing if you stop you don't go anywhere, if you don't apply the power at the catch you lose speed. You just can't hide, especially if you're the big guy!

Ric_Stern/RST

Heart rate max and Vo2max are exercise modality dependent, as well as dependent upon the training status of the athlete. For example, in trained cyclists cycling VO2max is ~ 100 - 106% of running VO2max. In untrained cyclists (e.g. someone who doesn't race) or athletes who do cross training, it's likely that HRmax and VO2max would be higher when running compared to cycling.

On the other hand, as an athlete's fitness increases their HRmax tends, on average, to decrease by ~ 5 b/min. Conversely, HRmax tends to increase upon cessation of training

Ric