HRM newb. Weird readings?

DavidTQ

OK Ive got a cheap HRM cycle computer (£12.99 lidls), Which I brought mainly out of curiosity to see what it said... Are cheap HRM known for "swinging" results??? The thing uses a chest strap with what appears to be two contact patches that somehow take the measurements and wirelessly transmits them to the cycle computer.

Been trying it out from time to time for 5 days round the house and seem to have a walking around doing stuff heart rate of 70-80 a laying out flat and relaxing heart rate of 42-43 (sure that isnt right but I do get the same figure consistantly) so I figured the heart rate meter was under reporting not picking up on all the heart beats or something then I go out wearing it on my commute for the first time today and the thing completely baffles me... Apparantly I spend 90% of my commute at over 180bpm going up to 206 highest Ive seen its possible it went higher when I was watching the road not the screen but I havent figured out how to get to the maximum heart rate reading yet... This was all my "average" commute not "pushing it" for the HRM. I cant find any "calibration" Im supposed to do apart from setting zones, which I set up using formulas Ive found on the internet... But I dont think those should be affecting the actual heart rate measured.

Im 30 next month, 5'8" 11 and half stone, count myself as "above average" fitness on the grounds that I cycle to work and back and thats more exercise than an average person, but wouldnt count myself as very fit as frankly Im just not a work out type of guy(been in a gym on maybe 3 occaisions in my life, always hated ball sports etc), my diet is not one for the superhealthy either, I happily eat chips a couple of times a week often have two dinners etc etc eating 4x as much as my wife. Fortunately the spare tyre is a sporty low profile one that dissapears under any sort of clothing

Being on a road bike Im faster than most of the other cycle commuters I pass in the morning. (ive only been overtaken by pavement riders whilst queuing since I got the road bike) I do have a habit of pushing hard when on a bike and dont seem able to "take it easy" I generally have wobbly legs when I finish the 7 mile trip... But recover very very quickly. But from what Ive read around I dont believe I was that close to my maximum heart rate. There was certainly reserve there which I use from time to time for fun on days when I feel like really pushing it, although I guess there has been a fair few times when doing so has made me feel nauseous for a short time once I got off the bike (oddly not whilst actually riding seems to hit me as soon as I stop). My commute is short at 7 miles each way but pretty hilly according to bikely I climb 1400ft vertical a day.

Comparing other peoples descriptions of what happens when they hit MHR I reckon Ive hit on two occaisions in my life (barfing ensued but had no hrm at the time to tell) Both times were during pretty extreme length and intensity periods of exercise (both times before I hit 19 ). However the figures the HRM is giving me should be well over my max heart rate which "should" be 185ish by the calculator... I spend almost my entire commute at around that figure... According to the HRM...

I dont know how these HRM's work or how reliable they are at all, but the readings dont add up with what I see around... are cheap HRM known for giving wildly inaccurate results?

As I understand it fitness CAN give a low resting heart rate, but I thought max heart rates were fairly standard just the fitter you are the more you could do at your max heart rate??

I have got some family history with athletics, my grandad is marathon running appraoching 80, My uncle goes round the world running marathons and is I believe in the "elite" group and my dad was a professional boxer, who even now despite being VERY overweight surprises the doctor with the state of his heart. At 18 I ran the london marathon without any training, in all honesty I think I "feel fitter" now than I did then although my knees are weaker now due to an alignment issue and dont think they would take that sort of punishment gladly

So is a HRM likely to be innaccurate in this manner, is there something im likely to be doing wrong creating these readings?

Bronzie

It's easy enough to check your pulse while wearing the HRM and confirm it's output that way (not while you are actually cycling of course).

See a max heart rate test here, but be warned that it's not that easy to push yourself to your absolute maximum (unless you visualise a large rottweiler chasing you while you are on your turbo trainer :P )
http://www.timetrialtraining.co.uk/S6Ma ... eTests.htm

DavidTQ

Bronzie wrote:

It's easy enough to check your pulse while wearing the HRM and confirm it's output that way

ok whats the best way to do that?

Alex_Simmons/RST

I didn't get through the whole post. Could you get to the point a bit quicker?

Have you searched the archives for a topic that's been covered ad nauseum before posting?

Have you taken your pulse at rest or after activity to see if it matches the HRM?

Finally, don't worry too much about what the HRM tells you. It only measures how frequently your heart beats.

ut_och_cykla

MHR calculators are just that calculators based on an average population. Your max may well be a lot higher closer to 200. Your resting pulse is probably correct. Averagely fit person, youngish, 40 - 50 not unusual.
I think your pulse meter is probably working ok.

Bronzie

DavidTQ wrote:

Bronzie wrote:

It's easy enough to check your pulse while wearing the HRM and confirm it's output that way

ok whats the best way to do that?

Find your pulse in your wrist or neck and use a watch to time how many beats in 15 secs and multiply by 4

DavidTQ

Bronzie wrote:

DavidTQ wrote:

Bronzie wrote:

It's easy enough to check your pulse while wearing the HRM and confirm it's output that way

ok whats the best way to do that?

Find your pulse in your wrist or neck and use a watch to time how many beats in 15 secs and multiply by 4

Hmm looks accurate enough right now, meter reading 77 at the end of counting 19 pulses in 15 seconds so thats 76 certainly not miles out. If its accurate enough now does that mean that highs and lows are likely accurate as well?

Alex Simmons

The brief version Got a cheapy new heart rate monitor which was giving what I thought were surprising readings for a cycle commuter who never trains, and never races etc etc. Resting heart rate 42-43, maximum heart rate during the journey (not at actual heart rate max) 206, 90% of the 7 mile journey spent at 180+

Seemed odd as Ive read a fair few threads where people were mentioning maximum heart rates around 180, and when I googled max heart rate calculators they were coming up with maximum figures which are around my "average commute" figures from the HRM. It was what Ive read around that made me question the HRM...

Of course last day of the work I will probably give it a fair blast to see what the most I can get out of it is

Alex_Simmons/RST

I suppose it comes down to what are you going to do with the information now you have it?

DavidTQ

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

I suppose it comes down to what are you going to do with the information now you have it?

Well I was thinking about trying to figure out these zone things, and try to optimize my commute effort a bit to get the most "fitness" I can out of it. Work out when I should be pushing harder when to back off a bit etc etc. Just to get the most I can out of my commute.

It sounds like a "scientific" way to make the most of my commute, Im far too lazy to make dedicated gym trips, but as Ive got to cover the distance to get to work it makes sense to "make the most of it." It seems to me that having a target on the heart rate monitor could be a good form of motivation.

At the end of the day I want to be able to cycle quicker and get up the hills faster, Would be nice to get my commute down to 20 minutes.

Its in the back of my head to actually do a couple of cycle events, would be nice to know before hand that I was reasonably in shape to keep up...

Alex_Simmons/RST

OK, using HR as a guide to training levels usually relies on knowing either your Maximal HR when cycling (at the end of or soon after an all out long sprint type effort aftyer a hard aerobic session) or a typical HR when time trialling (maximal steady state power). Zones are then defined as percentages of those.

There are a whole stack of example zones/levels in this post here:

http://www.cyclingforums.com/showpost.p ... ostcount=7

including Coggan (based on avg HR for a 1hr TT) and Stern (based on Max HR) HR zones amongst others (Friel et al).

However, one thing to do if the goal is to complete your ride faster is 1. work out how fast you need to ride to do that and 2. do some efforts around about that speed, gradually building up the duration over a period of weeks and combine it with longer efforts at a slightly lower speed (not noodling) but pushing out a good tempo.

Good luck!

DavidTQ

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

OK, using HR as a guide to training levels usually relies on knowing either your Maximal HR when cycling (at the end of or soon after an all out long sprint type effort aftyer a hard aerobic session) or a typical HR when time trialling (maximal steady state power). Zones are then defined as percentages of those.

There are a whole stack of example zones/levels in this post here:

http://www.cyclingforums.com/showpost.p ... ostcount=7

including Coggan (based on avg HR for a 1hr TT) and Stern (based on Max HR) HR zones amongst others (Friel et al).

However, one thing to do if the goal is to complete your ride faster is 1. work out how fast you need to ride to do that and 2. do some efforts around about that speed, gradually building up the duration over a period of weeks and combine it with longer efforts at a slightly lower speed (not noodling) but pushing out a good tempo.

Good luck!

downloaded the excel sheet will have to give that a good look over at work tomorrow

I dont suppose a "guess" at maximum heart rate based on how I felt at 210bpm on the way up a nasty hill at the end of my commute would do?

Am I likely to find a gym or something that does a VO2 max and heart rate max session at a reasonable price? No idea if thats a common service? Or is it something everyone tends to work out on their own by just trying hard?

dennisn

Do you take a beta blocker for blood pressure? I do and sometimes get some strange readings.
You might try squirting a little water where the unit touches your chest. This helps it
start monitoring right away. You can buy creams for this instead of using water. They are supposed to help give a more accurate reading(Bah-Bump cream comes to mind) but
it's not required.
I also have one monitor that gives some strange reading if I'm riding near a lot of electrical power lines.
I doubt that your pulse is 185 for any length of time. That would leave all but the best trained gasping for air.

Dennis Noward

Alex_Simmons/RST

I have a well trained mate with a Max HR of ~215. And another with a Max HR of ~ 160.

Ignore averages and get your own measure (as long as your are healthy, and not subject/prone to heart disease).

If you can consistently hit 210 or thereabouts, that will do. Being a few beats out doesn't matter that much.

After that, if training seems too easy/hard for the relative level, then it probably is.

You don't need a VO2 Max test. Just find a semi-sheltered hillclimb of at least 5-min that's got a reasonable gradient (5%+) that minimises wind impacts. Ride it like a time trial. Measure time up climb to track fitness each month.

popette

what about this for weird: on a ramp test, my HR stays pretty much constant at 125 even when I'm really struggling to maintain the same power level. Out on the road, whether I'm just coasting along or really pushing on, my HR stays wround 125. Stick me on a steep hill like yesterday, and my HR went to 232, measured on two different HR monitors. Stopped to check pulse (and I did feel crap) and HR dropped to around 130 and was measured physcially at 130. I saw the HR up over 200 a few times over the course of the ride (very hilly) and felt fine. Checked pulse again and felt one strong beat and one weak beat. I get spikes on my HR graph which I put down to interference but it happened on two different monitors and it seems I only get "interference" when I'm on a massive hill.
Getting worried. :?

Mike Willcox

popette wrote:

what about this for weird: on a ramp test, my HR stays pretty much constant at 125 even when I'm really struggling to maintain the same power level. Out on the road, whether I'm just coasting along or really pushing on, my HR stays wround 125. Stick me on a steep hill like yesterday, and my HR went to 232, measured on two different HR monitors. Stopped to check pulse (and I did feel crap) and HR dropped to around 130 and was measured physcially at 130. I saw the HR up over 200 a few times over the course of the ride (very hilly) and felt fine. Checked pulse again and felt one strong beat and one weak beat. I get spikes on my HR graph which I put down to interference but it happened on two different monitors and it seems I only get "interference" when I'm on a massive hill.
Getting worried. :?

So many posts about HR that you have to question their true worth. IMO all HRM's do is cause anxiety. All the reading does is confirm what you know already i.e. how hard you are trying. If you feel the need to adjust your effort because of the reading then you are letting it overide your instincts which are governed by your current levels of recovery and fitness.

At the end of the day your HR reflects how you feel so you might as well start to trust those feelings and train by them.

popette

Mike Willcox wrote:

popette wrote:

what about this for weird: on a ramp test, my HR stays pretty much constant at 125 even when I'm really struggling to maintain the same power level. Out on the road, whether I'm just coasting along or really pushing on, my HR stays wround 125. Stick me on a steep hill like yesterday, and my HR went to 232, measured on two different HR monitors. Stopped to check pulse (and I did feel crap) and HR dropped to around 130 and was measured physcially at 130. I saw the HR up over 200 a few times over the course of the ride (very hilly) and felt fine. Checked pulse again and felt one strong beat and one weak beat. I get spikes on my HR graph which I put down to interference but it happened on two different monitors and it seems I only get "interference" when I'm on a massive hill.
Getting worried. :?

So many posts about HR that you have to question their true worth. IMO all HRM's do is cause anxiety. All the reading does is confirm what you know already i.e. how hard you are trying. If you feel the need to adjust your effort because of the reading then you are letting it overide your instincts which are governed by your current levels of recovery and fitness.

At the end of the day your HR reflects how you feel so you might as well start to trust those feelings and train by them.

Hi Mike
on a ramp test, the HR doesn't reflect how hard I'm trying - I try really bloody hard and HR doesn't rise - the power meter does reflect my effort though

Mike Willcox

popette wrote:

Hi Mike
on a ramp test, the HR doesn't reflect how hard I'm trying - I try really bloody hard and HR doesn't rise - the power meter does reflect my effort though

So at least the power meter is working properly eh? You know showing an increase in power is really no different to changing to a higher gear and maintaining cadence levels.

robmanic1

I agree with the whole scepticism regarding the HRM's and BPM's, I checked my MRH yesterday on an indoor trainer with built-in HRM, it read as 130BPM, measuerd my resting HR this morning at 53BPM. I am 41 and consider myself above average fitness-wise for my age group. I've also extensively researched the web which has only confused me more. Lances' resting HR is commonly given as 32-34BPM so, if only for my ego, I'm using the resting HR as my measure. Bring on the Tour!

Bronzie

Robmanic1 wrote:

I checked my MRH yesterday on an indoor trainer with built-in HRM, it read as 130BPM

Were you seeing stars / ready to puke at the time? If not, you probably weren't trying hard enough.

I find it difficult to really push myself on an indoor trainer - the highest heart rates I've ever recorded have always been in a race or trying to stay with a faster rider in training - surprising how deep you can dig when you really, REALLY want to stay on a wheel.

onabike

I noticed weird readings when i first bought my HR monitor. Readings under the same conditions seemed to vary alot from day to day and I thought there was something wrong wth it.
It turned out there was nothing wrong with the monitor ; there was something wrong with my heart! I even ended up seeing a Cardiologist, and he told me that I have an "accelerated nodal rhythm" and that it is benign.
I do get some use out of my HRM , but I usually base my cycling on my perceived exertion, which works fine.
Moral of the story: too much information can be a bad thing.

popette

onabike wrote:

I noticed weird readings when i first bought my HR monitor. Readings under the same conditions seemed to vary alot from day to day and I thought there was something wrong wth it.
It turned out there was nothing wrong with the monitor ; there was something wrong with my heart! I even ended up seeing a Cardiologist, and he told me that I have an "accelerated nodal rhythm" and that it is benign.
I do get some use out of my HRM , but I usually base my cycling on my perceived exertion, which works fine.
Moral of the story: too much information can be a bad thing.

well, there you go - I saw the cardiologist and I also have something wrong with my heart. An atrial flutter. After a few more tests to make sure there isn't anything physcially wrong with my heart, I'll be on warfarin for a month and then will have my heart shocked under general. So, the monitors were right - I was at 232!
I can continue cycling but not the intense stuff on the hills and the sportives over the next few weeks will have to go. Etape is unlikely but he did give me a glimmer of hope on that one. Once I've had the treatment, I should be fine to resume full training again.
It's lucky that it's been found and I must try to remember that but I can't help feel really disappointed that something I've been training for and dreaming about for months, may now not happen. Ah well, there's always next year.

bazza59

popette - bloody hell...

glad that by using the HRM you felt the need to get checked out which allowed your condition to be diagnosed before anything nasty happened. This has to be a definite positive to using a HRM.
Sorry that your training is to be curtailed I was looking forward to reading about your exploits coming up to the etape.

Take it easy and if this year's etape is out then there is always next year to look forward to...

baz

edit for crap spelling

Bronzie

popette wrote:

Etape is unlikely

Damn Popette - really sorry to hear that. Still, at least you have discovered a potentially serious complaint before it's done any harm, and as you say, there is always next year.

Best wishes and keep us informed of your treatment.

Mike Willcox

popette wrote:

well, there you go - I saw the cardiologist and I also have something wrong with my heart. An atrial flutter. After a few more tests to make sure there isn't anything physcially wrong with my heart, I'll be on warfarin for a month and then will have my heart shocked under general. So, the monitors were right - I was at 232!
I can continue cycling but not the intense stuff on the hills and the sportives over the next few weeks will have to go. Etape is unlikely but he did give me a glimmer of hope on that one. Once I've had the treatment, I should be fine to resume full training again.
It's lucky that it's been found and I must try to remember that but I can't help feel really disappointed that something I've been training for and dreaming about for months, may now not happen. Ah well, there's always next year.

If you can still keep cycling then you should keep yourself ticking over until the tests and the treatment have been completed. I hope that it all works out for you as I know you've been training hard. Still it could have been worse. You could have had a heart attack (or two like me).

I saw my GP this morning and they are still unhappy about my high cholesterol levels, He reckons that the stats show that I will be dead within 5 years unless I take statins I said that if I took statins I'd be dead withinh 2 years so bollox to that

My first race since my MI 09/06/07 will be next week. It's a 50 mile TT. Wish me luck.

popette

thanks all and good luck with your race Mike.
I'm feeling much more positive now. I think it's about 5 weeks until the treatment can be done so within that time, I can just do my stead rides to maintain my current fitness levels. Then after treatment, I'll have a further 5 weeks to get ready for the Etape. I've been going over some massive hills at below 100% fitness so surely I'll feel better when it's all fixed. I'm going to stick to long steady rides and make a renewed effort to get the weight down so that I'm not going to have to work so hard when I do get back on the hills.
It definitely could have been worse. Even if I don't manage the Etape this year, I can enter other events later on and do the Etape next year.
Thanks again - it really means a lot.