Heart Rate Help!
Comments
-
Just for the record:
I am not "anti heart rate measurement".
I am however "anti reading things into heart rate that don't exist"
Know thy tool and understand its limitations and appropriate uses.
HR is OK for guiding sub-maximal aerobic training intensity. PE would do just as well.0 -
Hopefully Ruth has helpedwingnut1 wrote:Thanks for that I have read about these tests before!
I feel however my question hasn't been answered as yet or is it a case that my HR average will decrease further or stay static at 135-140 even though i'm pushing more watts!
One other factor with improved fitness is that our heart's stroke volume (how much blood it pumps per beat) increases with fitness as well (to a point), and so we can have the same cardiac output (volume of blood pumped per unit time) at a lower heart rate.0 -
I'd really encourage you to read up a bit on using power to help with training. It can really take lots of guesswork out of it.wingnut1 wrote:Ok I think i'm begining to understand this now! So what you are saying is as my HR average has droped due to increased fitness it now means to reach my perceived HR max now means alot more effort as apposed to being unfit and reaching it quiker and more regularly.
I can now see the HR to be pretty irrelevent with my kind of training and I should be consentrating on the watts being more accurate.
I posted some of my training earlier on and I think what I will do is note the watts produced based on that program and increase output at regular intervals!
I have never used the watts function for training on the tacx but last night after my set had a liitle play with this. I set the watts to 300 and ran at 90rpm and then increased to 100rpm, the trainer kept the watts at 300 at all times but it was easier at higher cadence.
What would be the best way to train using this function?
Does anybody else use this function on there tacx?
Be careful not to get into the chasing a new power personal best each time. That can lead you down a perilous path at times 0 -
I'm going to do a little research on this as I think this is the best way forward.
Many thanks for your help Alex!0 -
hey just got to say Wingnut that is an awesome weight loss. :shock: :shock:
Well done mate.! in one year too :roll:
I am only a mere 17.5 stone if I could lose just 2 stones and keep it off I would be a very happy bunny.0 -
Just ask questions, but it can be hard when you're not sure what to ask.wingnut1 wrote:I'm going to do a little research on this as I think this is the best way forward.
Many thanks for your help Alex!
Some very good reference materials here:
http://www.trainwithpower.net/
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/0 -
peanut wrote:hey just got to say Wingnut that is an awesome weight loss. :shock: :shock:
Well done mate.! in one year too :roll:
I am only a mere 17.5 stone if I could lose just 2 stones and keep it off I would be a very happy bunny.
Thanks very much
It's amazing what can achieved with a good diet, a good training plan and shear determination! mind you It's been over a year now without a Mcdonalds, I used to love those things 
I do have a very addictive personality and I am pretty focused or so says my wife!0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Just ask questions, but it can be hard when you're not sure what to ask.wingnut1 wrote:I'm going to do a little research on this as I think this is the best way forward.
Many thanks for your help Alex!
Some very good reference materials here:
http://www.trainwithpower.net/
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/
Thanks for that, I have had a little look and It looks very interesting. I am going to do as much research as possible on this but it does seem the way to go!0 -
Alex_simmons wrote:Three comments:
1. I've already said that HR is a handy guide for training intensities at sub-maximal levels (it's OK, not great - just OK).
PE and power are better. HR is not however a measure of fitness.
2. Crap training is crap training no matter what you use to record it with. Power meters won't pedal a bike for you. Nor will a HRM.
3. You are ascribing things to HR that simply don't exist. HR is an indicator of cardiac strain. That's about it. It is not an indicator of all those metabolic indicators you mention. But why repeat what's already been written. Here's an extract from a paper written by Charles Howe back in 2002:
Alex don't get me wrong either as being a power hater, far from it. And our second point is pretty much what i said so we are in agreement oin power as a measurement.
But rather than blindly accepting your comments, who is Charles Howe, and why should I believe him and not Mr Polar or Mr Suunto? OK it is a bit tongue in cheek but most healthly sceptical people are wary of ANY sports *science*. PE more accurate than an HR measurement..??. given the medical importance given to it (and the resulting analysis of an ECG) I just don't accept it! Spike Milligan RIP 
[/quote] 0 -
Yeah - fair question. Gotta love Spike, rest his soul. Woy Woy will never be the same without him.SteveR_100Milers wrote:Alex don't get me wrong either as being a power hater, far from it. And our second point is pretty much what i said so we are in agreement oin power as a measurement.
But rather than blindly accepting your comments, who is Charles Howe, and why should I believe him and not Mr Polar or Mr Suunto? OK it is a bit tongue in cheek but most healthly sceptical people are wary of ANY sports *science*. PE more accurate than an HR measurement..??. given the medical importance given to it (and the resulting analysis of an ECG) I just don't accept it! Spike Milligan RIP
Charles has been around power based training for at least the past 10-15 years (as has Ric Stern), has been a long time and very knowledgeable contributor to the topic and put together the original FAQ on the subject as well as started the Train with Power site I referenced in an earlier post.
I suppose I got to know his contributions over the years.
Some info on Charles can be seen in the about page here:
http://www.velodynamics.net/0 -
How about some non comercial papers?
That's just more "buy me buy me" which I did with Friel...don't see any new clothes sorry.....0 -
Huh?SteveR_100Milers wrote:How about some non comercial papers?
That's just more "buy me buy me" which I did with Friel...don't see any new clothes sorry.....
You asked who Charles was. I gave you a link to show you.0 -
OK then, let's flip it over. Sell me on heart rate. I'm with Spike and I'm not convinced.
Aside from providing some feedback on sub-maximal ride intensity, what else does knowing your heart rate do for you (as far as cycling performance goes)?
A: not much.0 -
I'm not trying to sel you anything! I just remain sceptical that HR is completely irrelevant wich was your implied comments earlier. (like reading tea leaves). I don't need convincing about power either - I wouldnt judge a cars performance by looking at the condition of the engine oil, but in order to keep it running at optimum I check it from time to time. The main point for me is that IF HR training is a waste of time, then I'll not waste £150 on fancy new HRM. So far, training by PE alone for me hasnt really worked in that the rate of improvement is painfully slow, so I need to try a different approach.
The link is to a commercial business in that is selling a product (his coaching services unless I'm mistaken), therefore his views are bound to be "riight"! What would be more interesting would be independant i.e. non commercial research on the (lack of) correlation between power, HR and *fitness*. Power on its own is no measure of fitness, only when its measured as a ratio, whereas I was under the impression that resting HR is a reasonable barometer of fitness. I am genuinely interested, but am interested in the real science of it.0 -
OK, so you ride consistently for a couple of months and resting HR drops. Lowering resting rate is pretty normal when going from a less well trained state to a better trained state (fitness improves).
But it pretty well gets down to a certain point and doesn't move much from there.
Then what?
I never said using HR in training is a waste of time.
Trying to interpret things from HR that aren't there is a waste of time.
Used as a method of managing the intesity at which you ride (a key component in training effectively), a HRM can be a useful tool. The tea leaves analogy is when you try to interpret anything more from the data.
But I'm repeating myself for the 3rd time I think.
I don't think in terms of HR based training or PE based training or power based training. It's just training.
If your performance is not improving then (assuming you are healthy) it's a problem with the training, not what tool you are using.0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:OK, so you ride consistently for a couple of months and resting HR drops. Lowering resting rate is pretty normal when going from a less well trained state to a better trained state (fitness improves).
But it pretty well gets down to a certain point and doesn't move much from there.
Then what?
I never said using HR in training is a waste of time.
Trying to interpret things from HR that aren't there is a waste of time.
Used as a method of managing the intesity at which you ride (a key component in training effectively), a HRM can be a useful tool. The tea leaves analogy is when you try to interpret anything more from the data.
But I'm repeating myself for the 3rd time I think.
I don't think in terms of HR based training or PE based training or power based training. It's just training.
If your performance is not improving then (assuming you are healthy) it's a problem with the training, not what tool you are using.
Sorry Alex, I now understand what you mean (sorry its taken so long). This answers the EPOC / ECG analysis question then (which I am sceptical of also).
Only too painfuilly aware of this fact, hence my *interest* .0 -
Must be something in how I write perhaps.SteveR_100Milers wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:OK, so you ride consistently for a couple of months and resting HR drops. Lowering resting rate is pretty normal when going from a less well trained state to a better trained state (fitness improves).
But it pretty well gets down to a certain point and doesn't move much from there.
Then what?
I never said using HR in training is a waste of time.
Trying to interpret things from HR that aren't there is a waste of time.
Used as a method of managing the intesity at which you ride (a key component in training effectively), a HRM can be a useful tool. The tea leaves analogy is when you try to interpret anything more from the data.
But I'm repeating myself for the 3rd time I think.
I don't think in terms of HR based training or PE based training or power based training. It's just training.
If your performance is not improving then (assuming you are healthy) it's a problem with the training, not what tool you are using.
Sorry Alex, I now understand what you mean (sorry its taken so long). This answers the EPOC / ECG analysis question then (which I am sceptical of also).
Only too painfuilly aware of this fact, hence my *interest* .
Also, be careful about how you judge your performance. Our own perception of fitness can vary without realising it. Just make sure you have a solid and objective benchmark.0
