Hitting Maximum Heart Rate
Comments
-
I'm amazed by such high readings. I tried my first max heart rate test 6 weeks ago and 'only' got 173. I was proper off with the fairies with the effort. And I gave myself a hernia. Don't underestimate the max HR test!0
-
Ok, I've been holding onto this for a while but I'm going to throw it out there and see how it floats...
While back I read in a running mag that if you can run up a fairly linear hill of around 800m, having had your HR at @80% at the foot of the hill, by increasing the tempo you run up at, at some point, your HR will max out. If you have a HRM that shows a graph of your efforts, you will see a point where the HR peaks and then reduces, despite your still running uphill and trying hard to go faster.
Not sure of the science behind it, but spoke to one of the Army Physical Training Corps guys at work who reckoned it could constitute a reasonably good test of your sport specific HR Max. On a bike, he recommended a slightly longer hill, as linear as possible so as to have no need for gear shifts and then increase cadence as a means of keeping the effort rising. I've done this twice now on the same hill and maxed out at 187 (I'm 31). I could see from the graph afterwards that speed was being maintained, cadence was increasing as was elevation and as was HR until 187 which then dropped despite Cad and Elev still increasing. If anything, the particular hill I used may have even got slightly steeper at the point my HR dropped so I'm fairly confident it wasn't due to the gradiant easing up. The first time I did it my HRM read 97%, hence I tried to push harder to get it to read 98 and ultimately 100. It did not and instead dropped to 96, coincedentally 187 bpm! I adjusted my Max HR in the device to reflect 187 as Max and got it to 100% the next time I tried a week later. Oddly though, I haven't been able to achieve it since. He did say that it would not be as accurate as a lab test, would require a few attempts to get a squad average but sounded like it could be 'good enough for governement work'. I googled Max HR and came across the Wiki entry which gave a number of alternative formulae to use instead of Karvonen and the much touted 220-age. Two out of three of those gave me 187.
The bloke in question was a runner and occasional triathlete so not a roadie as such but nevertheless, seemed to know what he was talking about in terms of the physiology etc. I now sheepishly throw it open to the floor for comment; what do you guys think of it as a self-test? Have been fearful of mentioning it in case I get thrashed!!! :oops:0 -
cougie wrote:And I'd struggle on the road to max out as all my efforts are going into speed - so no effort left to balance or look for cars etc - so I think the turbo is the best place to do it.
I actually did a controlled fall off the bike afterwards as I was at the absolute limit...! I couldn't move for about 3 minutes! It was uphill and in a headwind too, so I could go slower when at full blast (still hit 35mph though!). For the record, it was done on a traffic-free road, designed for cyclists.
Are my figures of 229 & 239 unusually high? I'll borrow another HR monitor and do another test in a few days. It's supposed to be the best HR monitor there is - straight out of a hospital!0 -
GavH wrote:Ok, I've been holding onto this for a while but I'm going to throw it out there and see how it floats...
While back I read in a running mag that if you can run up a fairly linear hill of around 800m, having had your HR at @80% at the foot of the hill, by increasing the tempo you run up at, at some point, your HR will max out. If you have a HRM that shows a graph of your efforts, you will see a point where the HR peaks and then reduces, despite your still running uphill and trying hard to go faster.
Not sure of the science behind it, but spoke to one of the Army Physical Training Corps guys at work who reckoned it could constitute a reasonably good test of your sport specific HR Max. On a bike, he recommended a slightly longer hill, as linear as possible so as to have no need for gear shifts and then increase cadence as a means of keeping the effort rising. I've done this twice now on the same hill and maxed out at 187 (I'm 31). I could see from the graph afterwards that speed was being maintained, cadence was increasing as was elevation and as was HR until 187 which then dropped despite Cad and Elev still increasing. If anything, the particular hill I used may have even got slightly steeper at the point my HR dropped so I'm fairly confident it wasn't due to the gradiant easing up. The first time I did it my HRM read 97%, hence I tried to push harder to get it to read 98 and ultimately 100. It did not and instead dropped to 96, coincedentally 187 bpm! I adjusted my Max HR in the device to reflect 187 as Max and got it to 100% the next time I tried a week later. Oddly though, I haven't been able to achieve it since. He did say that it would not be as accurate as a lab test, would require a few attempts to get a squad average but sounded like it could be 'good enough for governement work'. I googled Max HR and came across the Wiki entry which gave a number of alternative formulae to use instead of Karvonen and the much touted 220-age. Two out of three of those gave me 187.
The bloke in question was a runner and occasional triathlete so not a roadie as such but nevertheless, seemed to know what he was talking about in terms of the physiology etc. I now sheepishly throw it open to the floor for comment; what do you guys think of it as a self-test? Have been fearful of mentioning it in case I get thrashed!!! :oops:
Yeah - sounds fair to me - in a lab it would be pretty similar but increasing the load thru resistance on the turbo - so pretty similar.
Not too sure about the maxxing out and then dropping - when I test - my max is my absolute max and I cant go on at all with the effort - so the HR drops off.
The 220-age thing is only very rough - it works for me - but lots of people it doesnt.0 -
I haven't yet been tested properly in a lab but the highest I have ever seen my heart rate is 194, and that was after some fast pace climbing in Box Hill where I was at 100% effort. I'm no scientist but I'd imagine my true MHR is somewhere around 195/196.0
-
I had wolff parkinson white syndrome which is an oddity in the electrical pathways of the heart (its been talked about on here before). Before I got it treated in my late teens I could see 250bpm just sitting still and taking it easy
Nowadays my max is 189 which I've seen three times - VO2max test, sprinting in a race and on a spin bike purposely trying to reach my max. On all three occasions I started getting tunnel vision - only for 2-3 seconds, but enough to say that i'd had enough...0 -
Bhima wrote:
Are my figures of 229 & 239 unusually high?
Yes. You may have this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventricular_fibrillation
Either that, or your heart rate monitor is faulty, or you're going under electrical cables a lot."A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"
PTP Runner Up 20150 -
This discussion on heart rate is interesting. I know that one's maximum heart rate is a very individual thing, but how much variance should you see between 2 healthy individuals? Yesterday I went out for a fairly easy ride around the local loop with a mate, both riding side by side most of the time. My peak at the top of the hills was 190bpm, whereas his was about 160bpm, and he was getting dropped on the hills. I am more trained on a bike than he is, but it seems I can happily grind away with an average heart rate of about 165-170 for several hours, whereas his average would have to be closer to say, 145 to achieve the same. Is this just me more accustomed to riding closer to threshold through doing lots of intervals and tempo riding? Or is it personal variations in bodily make up?
And more importantly, does it mean that the individual who feels at their max at a lower heart rate, has more potential to improve their aerobaic engine than someone who is already at the higher end of typical average heart rate figures?
Thanks0 -
Derek, completely irrelevant really, it's just a personal thing.
Whilst you can raise your heart-rate at threshold, and it will likely lead to an improvement it's basically just an all around part of getting fitter. The actual value between two individuals means absolutely nothing.Jibbering Sports Stuff: http://jibbering.com/sports/0 -
Well as far as I know you can have more than one maximum
Depends what your doing, min is different for track and road riding, also different for playing squash and wieght lifting.
I hit 19 doing weights which really surprised me.
On the road when racing I have reached 170 on flat out blast and on a climb.
Compare this to the track where I hit 170 and held it for 2 minutes. Probabaly due to the higher cadance on track (Alex will probably confirm or not lol).
I regularly hit 170 to 175 on the track but have not yet gone over 175 in race on road.
I also get this horrid "pursuiters" cough track racing which I suspect is when I have hit my limit and breathing in cool air, if feels crap, wish some one could explian how to prevent it or treat it
I suppose I could watch monitor and give up in a track race to prevent it 0 -
oldwelshman wrote:I hit 19 doing weights which really surprised me.
19!!! Christ - I know you're old, but that's pretty low for a maximum! LOL0 -
Bhima wrote:
Are my figures of 229 & 239 unusually high? I'll borrow another HR monitor and do another test in a few days. It's supposed to be the best HR monitor there is - straight out of a hospital!
Hi Bhima,
Sorry to repeat all this if you already know it: My previous max HR was about 165 measured on a polar. I switched to Garmin over the winter and started noticing HRs around the figures you are mentioning although I did see higher and occasionally, the HR measurement just went blank. I just put it down to garmin being crap. I bought top of the range polar and saw exactly the same thing. Went to docs, referred to cardiologist, ECG, Atrial Flutter diagnosed. I did an exercise ECG and HR went up to 250. Cardiologist said that was dangerously high. I took warfarin for a few months, had a cardioversion (just resetting the HR back to normal rhythm) and now max is 169.
Of course, this is just the story of somebody on a forum - you are probably fit and well and there are other more likely explanations for your HR. I think you're doing the right thing to try with another HR monitor. If that shows similar HRs, it might be worth having a quick check up at the doctor. I went to the doctors quite a few times and it was only went I presented a print out of my HR graph on a tough ride that they saw that something might not be right.
One thing I found was that when I tried to take my pulse at a HR over 220 say, it was very difficult - the beat was very random and impossible to read. Have you actually felt your pulse when your HR is at 239? Another thing I found was that my HR jumped up very quickly - HR graph was full of huge spikes (which made me think at first that it was electrical interference).
As I said, probably absolutely nothing wrong with you and don't want to alarm you in any way at all.
Karen0 -
Pokerface wrote:oldwelshman wrote:I hit 19 doing weights which really surprised me.
19!!! Christ - I know you're old, but that's pretty low for a maximum! LOL Obvious typo, meant 190.
By the way I did a structured gym test and did not get above 160!!! The gearing on the bike was ridiculous and the cadance was too low so my legs gave way before heart 0 -
-
Sorry, meant to post here 2 weeks ago. Tried another one and got 208 on the road. Didn't try on a trainer.
There's obviously something wrong with the original HRM0 -
Track intensity can see higher HR but it's still bike riding and I can get same in road/crits as well.oldwelshman wrote:Well as far as I know you can have more than one maximum
Depends what your doing, min is different for track and road riding, also different for playing squash and wieght lifting.
I hit 19 doing weights which really surprised me.
On the road when racing I have reached 170 on flat out blast and on a climb.
Compare this to the track where I hit 170 and held it for 2 minutes. Probabaly due to the higher cadance on track (Alex will probably confirm or not lol).
I regularly hit 170 to 175 on the track but have not yet gone over 175 in race on road.
I also get this horrid "pursuiters" cough track racing which I suspect is when I have hit my limit and breathing in cool air, if feels crap, wish some one could explian how to prevent it or treat it I suppose I could watch monitor and give up in a track race to prevent it
Pursuiter's cough is usually a sign of having gone very deep when fitness for such an event is lacking.0 -
Pursuiter's cough is usually a sign of having gone very deep when fitness for such an event is lacking.
Also often due to the dry air e.g. they keep the humidty low at indoor velodromes to makes sure the boards stay in good nick.0 -
eh wrote:Pursuiter's cough is usually a sign of having gone very deep when fitness for such an event is lacking.
Also often due to the dry air e.g. they keep the humidty low at indoor velodromes to makes sure the boards stay in good nick.
I get it on outdoor tracks also, normally after the first race.
This week I took it a bit easier in the first race and I did not get it as bad.
Saw two other guys with it really bad after last race 0 -
I've been getting crazy readings on my Garmin in the last few weeks - have identified it as "Flapping Jersey Syndrome" which can affect any HRM, not sure if Garmin's are particularly susceptible (but I have no probs with my old Polar unit) nor why it's just started happening recently.Bhima wrote:Sorry, meant to post here 2 weeks ago. Tried another one and got 208 on the road. Didn't try on a trainer.
There's obviously something wrong with the original HRM
Static discharge between the synthetic materials in the jersey and base layers give eroneous readings and the faster you go, the worse it gets as your jersey flaps in the breeze. Have been recording 250+ going down hills whilst not pedalling. Still haven't found a foolproof cure but have ordered a Merino Wool base layer and some anti-static spray.0 -
Interesting stuff. My max HR that I've actually seen on the Polar is 172 both on the turbo doing a test and in the last 100m of a '10' when going full bore. This is a lot lower than the calculations reckon it should be and I very rarely get it anywhere near 172 even on hills. I did Alpe D'huez a few years ago as a one off time trial and it didn't get near 172, I think it got to 167 or something at a peak and averaged 160-ish. I can tell you I was farked at the top, it was a maximal effort.
My resting HR has been as low as 30 when well trained and rested and is around 38 when not so well trained. Highest reading in last 5 years was about 42 after I'd already go out of bed and brushed my teeth.
I agree that 225 or more sound madness. I can't imagine it and I'd be pestering the GP for an ecg......0 -
skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:
I agree that 225 or more sound madness. I can't imagine it and I'd be pestering the GP for an ecg......
me too. Bhima do you have any other symptoms? When I had the problem, I felt like I just couldn't quite get enough air into my lungs - which I described to the doctor as an Asthma like feeling (not that I've ever had it - just what I imagined asthma to feel like).0 -
I was treated for a condition called Wolf Parkinson White syndrome which thankfully only showed itself whilst I was sat doing nothing! It appeared in the form of regular fast beat palpitations - and had done for 18 years (I was 36 in 2007 when finally diagnosed and treated). In June of 2007 for the first time ever it was a very very fast irregular beat - my Polar monitor couldn't cope! I was rushed to hospital and a coronary ward where they measured me continually jumping from 165 to 250 bpm, but blood pressure was good. They tried to bring it under control with three different intravenous drugs but gave up after 11 hours and I also had a cardioversion - which thankfully worked.
Wolf Parkinson White essentially is the prescence of a pathway between two chambers of the heart. The electrical signal that is the 'pulse' should travel from one to the other and then be replaced by the next one - i.e. a one way street. Mine was travelling back through the pathway and re-sending itself - imagine this 165-250 times a minute. So, the heart went into flutter - atrial fibrillation. The doctors in the coronary ward said they have never known a heartbeat so high for so long - 14 hours in total from start to cardioversion! (never below 165 on their monitors and usually above 200). Nice record to have.....
Four months and lots of pills later (the pharmaceutical variety) I had a catheter ablation which meant 6 tubes into my femoral arteries (tops of legs) and they effectively 'soldered' the pathway closed. I was awake for the whole process - very interesting it was too! Fully recovered now and doing the Marmotte this year - hoping not to see north of 200bpm on Alpe D'Huez!!0 -
wow bs147 - interesting story. I've been told that ablation might be required if my Atrial Flutter returns but hopefully, it won't. It's been 8 months since my cardioversion. Good luck in the marmotte!0
-
Popette - Did they establish what caused your fibrillation? Without knowing it I'd had my acessory pathway since birth and now it's closed off it shouldn't re-open. I've been fine since though took it easy last year just in case!0
-
Bhima wrote:It was a gradual rise.
Going out in 5 minutes to try and get my absolute maximum (on the road).
Hi there.
I'd be interested to see that graph Bhima. From a quick perusal a lot of your posts don't seem to be as firmly seated in reality as one would like...
The last time I got anywhere near my max heart rate was in a short running race, which I managed to build the pace towards the end, which had an uphill finish. The graph climbs steadily at the end and levels out as I'm sprinting for the line with all I've got. Handily for my maths the max is a nice round 200bpm.
I've never managed to hit these figures outside on a bike - only in the 'comfort' of a lab with a coach screaming in my ear during a maximal test... I'm not sure I'd be able to stay upright on a bicycle at the effort levels required to hit 200bpm pushing the pedals.
Cheers, Andy0 -
Well I established the other week that the HRM I was using was faulty - I was getting massive peaks all over the place, even when at 0mph! Don't have the graph anymore but understand your skepticism! I was skeptical too...
The new HRM I tried has got the data still recorded, but it doesn't belong to me so have no idea how to access the data on a computer.
By the way - one man's 200 BPM is another man's 170. I'm only 21 and I think your Max HR lowers as you get older so I reckon the new readings I got are about right.0
