Forum home Road cycling forum Training, fitness and health

First 10 mile Time Trial

stonehousestonehouse Posts: 222
I completed my first time trial on Saturday. Looking back at my Garmin output, it would seem that for virtually the entire TT, my HR was between 91-93%MHR, with a peak of 97% in the last few hundred metres (I miss judged where the end was)!

I felt that I kept the whole ride under control and therefore I'm assuming that my time, based on the HR above was the best I could have managed with my current level of fitness give or take a few seconds?

Posts

  • dennisndennisn Posts: 10,496
    There are many other variables to take into account. Strength of the headwind / tailwind,
    road surface, tire pressure, could you have been better from an aero standpoint, were you at a training peak or not, did you eat right before the race, did you get enough rest to feel your best that day, what about a proper warm up so that you started READY???
    Lots of other things than heart rate are involved here. Going as fast as you can is the key in time trials but to simply think heart rate tells all is not looking at the whole idea.
  • chrisw12chrisw12 Posts: 1,246
    stonehouse wrote:
    I completed my first time trial on Saturday. Looking back at my Garmin output, it would seem that for virtually the entire TT, my HR was between 91-93%MHR, with a peak of 97% in the last few hundred metres (I miss judged where the end was)!

    I felt that I kept the whole ride under control and therefore I'm assuming that my time, based on the HR above was the best I could have managed with my current level of fitness give or take a few seconds?

    Perhaps/perhaps not.

    Good pacing takes experience.

    Sounds like you put a good effort in though, so well done.

    Have you got the tt'ing bug now?
  • stonehousestonehouse Posts: 222
    Have you got the tt'ing bug now?

    Err, yes I think I might have, got quite a buzz from doing it, although I don't want to get into all the special bike stuff. I just used my standard road bike and will continue to do so, it was meant as a benchmark for me so to speak.
    what about a proper warm up so that you started READY???

    Granted there are plenty of areas I can improve, I almost missed my slot doing a far too casual warm up, so yes that's one area, and getting more aero on the bike is another.

    The point I was making is that I thought that my effort HR was pretty much bang on what I think I'm capable off, I know for sure that if I go over 94/95% HR I start to lose it (run out of breath) big time. I don't see where conditions on the day come into that? The time taken wasn't the debate, did I give my *all* physically was the point.
  • ut_och_cyklaut_och_cykla Posts: 1,594
    You probably gave everything you had to maintain. But you might squeeze out a better time even given teh same conditions - even better pacing etc?
  • dennisndennisn Posts: 10,496
    stonehouse wrote:
    Have you got the tt'ing bug now?

    Err, yes I think I might have, got quite a buzz from doing it, although I don't want to get into all the special bike stuff. I just used my standard road bike and will continue to do so, it was meant as a benchmark for me so to speak.
    what about a proper warm up so that you started READY???

    Granted there are plenty of areas I can improve, I almost missed my slot doing a far too casual warm up, so yes that's one area, and getting more aero on the bike is another.

    The point I was making is that I thought that my effort HR was pretty much bang on what I think I'm capable off, I know for sure that if I go over 94/95% HR I start to lose it (run out of breath) big time. I don't see where conditions on the day come into that? The time taken wasn't the debate, did I give my *all* physically was the point.

    I'm not saying you didn't give it all you had. Most people doing 10 milers tend to give it all they have and hope they can hold on to that pace as they start to get near the finish. Sometimes you can and sometimes you can't. Hence the word "blowup". As for "conditions on the day". If you find yourself hammering into a headwind, this can effect your mental state and that will affect your power output. If you get frustrated with the lack of speed into this headwind(same wind for everyone) then your brain may decide to start saying "screw it, bail out of this madness". And that will happen to you one day. Happens to everyone. I'll grant you that time taken wasn't the debate but giving it your all is not the name of the race. It's called a Time Trial. Which usually requires that you give it your all and you seem well on the way to doing that. Good luck.
  • ProssPross Posts: 25,411
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.
  • Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy
  • SBezzaSBezza Posts: 2,173
    Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy

    +1

    I am always over 90% MHR in TT, even for a 25 mile TT. My MHR is what has been measured at the end of a 10m TT, which might be slightly lower than a lab based MHR, but I would assume is pretty close.
  • stonehousestonehouse Posts: 222
    I've taken my max HR from previous Garmin data, the odd uphill sprint to failure level where my HR hit 183bpm, always the same figure, usually takes me a couple of minutes stationary to recover. I'd assumed that would be a good measurement to use?

    Hope this works, a picture speaks a thousand words, a snippet of the 10 miler TT part of the Garmin trace:

    http://s1016.photobucket.com/albums/af289/stonehouse1/chart/?action=view&current=HR.jpg
  • DaveyLDaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy

    Just checking to see if your HR shoots up as you go through Plean....
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • ProssPross Posts: 25,411
    90% is on the cusp of the red zone in many of the heart rate zone calculations, the most notable exception being the 6 zone ABCC version which shows zone 5 as being 89 - 94% and maintainable for up to 40 minutes so the difference between 90% and possibly 93% can make a big difference. I wasn't trying to insinuate the OP was lying in any way, just that maybe his actual maximum HR is slightly higher than he thinks which given that it has been calculated from hill sprints is a possibility. Not that this makes much of a difference as it is the method I suspect many of us have worked it out as the cost of lab testing is off putting. However, using the ABCC zones I would say it probably isn't far off as that would tie in with "losing it big time" at 94-95% which is the level at which they say you should just be able to hold it for the length of an interval. I still think being at 90% for 10 miles at your first attempt is impressive going, I could never push myself much above an average of 85% which probably explains why I was censored at time trialling! :lol:
  • stonehousestonehouse Posts: 222
    Glad that someone finds my efforts impressive, my time was less so, hence wanting to know that I'd not been slacking and had put in the maximum effort!

    Agreed that my method of finding max HR may not be perfect, but it does seem to be the limit as I've never exceeded it.

    I've done some interval training in preparation in that zones, seemingly to the detriment of my hill climbing capability though :(

    Oh, I forgot to add that I'm 49 and it's my first year of riding since I was 16 too, so I've got some way to go, I reckon I'll be ready for the 2043 Tour de France at this rate though.
  • ProssPross Posts: 25,411
    I think you'd have been hard pressed to go any harder! If you have the ability to ride that hard the times will soon come down as you get fitter.
  • Pross wrote:
    I think you'd have been hard pressed to go any harder! If you have the ability to ride that hard the times will soon come down as you get fitter.

    Hi there.

    A word of caution - don't mistake HR for output. It is conceivable that you (or I) could have started too hard, the heart rate shot up, and remained high for the next 20 minutes, despite easing back...

    Perceived effort is a better guide for pacing than hr. The above graph is unusual in that I usually don't wear the hr strap in short races - and I certainly don't look at the readout while riding!

    Cheers, Andy
  • dennisndennisn Posts: 10,496
    stonehouse wrote:
    Glad that someone finds my efforts impressive, my time was less so, hence wanting to know that I'd not been slacking and had put in the maximum effort!

    Agreed that my method of finding max HR may not be perfect, but it does seem to be the limit as I've never exceeded it.

    I've done some interval training in preparation in that zones, seemingly to the detriment of my hill climbing capability though :(

    Oh, I forgot to add that I'm 49 and it's my first year of riding since I was 16 too, so I've got some way to go, I reckon I'll be ready for the 2043 Tour de France at this rate though.

    If you rode as hard as you could and crossed the line gasping, how can you wonder if you were "slacking"? If you had nothing left to give at the end it doesn't sound to me like
    you were backing off irregardless of what you HRM says. If it said 90%, fine, if it said 85%, fine. It's only a number and, as I understand it, not a number that's all that reliable
    or useful in the real world. While interesting, for some, to know, it's not going to tell you how to go faster or make your legs stronger. Racing is about who can get from point "A"
    to Point "B" the fastest. It's not about who got there using the most power or who got there with the highest heart rate. It's about who crossed the line first or who had the fastest time. The rest doesn't matter. There are no awards for power output or heartrate % of max.
  • ProssPross Posts: 25,411
    Pross wrote:
    I think you'd have been hard pressed to go any harder! If you have the ability to ride that hard the times will soon come down as you get fitter.

    Hi there.

    A word of caution - don't mistake HR for output. It is conceivable that you (or I) could have started too hard, the heart rate shot up, and remained high for the next 20 minutes, despite easing back...

    Perceived effort is a better guide for pacing than hr. The above graph is unusual in that I usually don't wear the hr strap in short races - and I certainly don't look at the readout while riding!

    Cheers, Andy

    Point taken although the OP sounded like a consistent effort.
  • SBezzaSBezza Posts: 2,173
    It normally takes my HR about 1.5 miles to get to the average HR of a TT, some of this is terrain, and some is pacing. It goes above this towards the end when you really push harder towards the finish.

    If you had your HR at about 90% from the off, I know very unlikely with the time it takes HR to rise, then you think you might have put a consistent effort in, but in fact you went too hard initially, and then had to back off. HR averages would look the same, but the speed outcome would probably be very different.

    Looking at the image the OP put up, it seems as though HR is all over the place, with a constant well paced effort, I would expect it to carry on rising over the distance, with perhaps the odd dip, for the turn, and any large downhills, though even these you should pedal really hard down.
  • chrisw12chrisw12 Posts: 1,246
    stonehouse wrote:
    I've taken my max HR from previous Garmin data, the odd uphill sprint to failure level where my HR hit 183bpm, always the same figure, usually takes me a couple of minutes stationary to recover. I'd assumed that would be a good measurement to use?

    Hope this works, a picture speaks a thousand words, a snippet of the 10 miler TT part of the Garmin trace:

    http://s1016.photobucket.com/albums/af289/stonehouse1/chart/?action=view&current=HR.jpg

    Interesting graph that.

    I don't watch my cadence at all but I note that you've kept your cadence in a very tight band. Did you do that naturally or were you cadence watching? You can see (I think) exactly where you've changed gear.
  • dennisndennisn Posts: 10,496
    SBezza wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy

    +1

    ...... which might be slightly lower than a lab based MHR, but I would assume is pretty close.

    Just exactly what is a lab based MHR? What's involved? How is it determined??? :? :?
  • dennisn wrote:
    SBezza wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy

    +1

    ...... which might be slightly lower than a lab based MHR, but I would assume is pretty close.

    Just exactly what is a lab based MHR? What's involved? How is it determined??? :? :?

    Some sort of ramp test usually. Resistance will increase up to a point the rider physically cannot turn the pedals anymore. Usually taken in conjunction with peak power, VO2 max, lactate etc.
    "A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"

    PTP Runner Up 2015
  • dennisndennisn Posts: 10,496
    dennisn wrote:
    SBezza wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy

    +1

    ...... which might be slightly lower than a lab based MHR, but I would assume is pretty close.

    Just exactly what is a lab based MHR? What's involved? How is it determined??? :? :?

    Some sort of ramp test usually. Resistance will increase up to a point the rider physically cannot turn the pedals anymore. Usually taken in conjunction with peak power, VO2 max, lactate etc.

    So you're saying that whatever your HR is when you can't pedal or run any more is your MRH??? Or is it some percentage of THAT number???? If it's some percentage, how is / was that percent determined??? I know, I'm just full of questions. And possibly a few other things. :wink::wink:
  • Old TuggoOld Tuggo Posts: 482
    Pross wrote:
    Just wondering how you have assessed your maximum heart rate? 20 odd minutes in the red zone is pretty impressive going, most heart rate training information I have read reckons it should only be done for a few minutes at a time.

    Hi there.

    I disagree - 90% for 20 odd minutes is about right for a 10m TT effort. See the graph here:

    http://connect.garmin.com/player/7562390

    That came out as 180 average, rising to 196 at the end, where my max is 201 (measure in sports science lab). This is the sort of average numbers I usually see if I wear a heart rate strap in short races.
    I have always rode 10's at a steady 90-92% however this season I have ridden on PE as my HRM is broken and I have done similar if not better times and I have finished more strongly. I am now in a dilemma as to whether to replace the HRM or not.

    Pick Heart Rate and Elevation to see the graph best - it was a mildy undulating 9.6m course we use for the club TT champs.

    Cheers, Andy
Sign In or Register to comment.