Forum home Road cycling forum Training, fitness and health

Maximum Heart Rate

cavastacavasta Posts: 49
Just bought the Edge 800 and still getting to grips with things. At the moment I have more questions than answers due in part to the owner's manual being so useless. But I'm slowly getting there, thanks to patience and Google (and not much thanks to the manual).

This is the first time I've had a heart rate monitor and would like to know how you go about determining your maximum heart rate. I've come across all sorts of different methods and calculations, all of which give different results. :?

Can someone give me a good (i.e. pretty accurate) method of calculating/determining my max HR?

Posts

  • piquetpiquet Posts: 83
    cavasta wrote:
    Just bought the Edge 800 and still getting to grips with things. At the moment I have more questions than answers due in part to the owner's manual being so useless. But I'm slowly getting there, thanks to patience and Google (and not much thanks to the manual).

    This is the first time I've had a heart rate monitor and would like to know how you go about determining your maximum heart rate. I've come across all sorts of different methods and calculations, all of which give different results. :?

    Can someone give me a good (i.e. pretty accurate) method of calculating/determining my max HR?

    don't rely on formulae alone.


    don't do a self administered max test


    Do google "sub-max heart rate test" and follow one of the protocols there
  • NavrigNavrig Posts: 1,352
    The standard calculation is 220 minus your age.

    For me that would mean:

    220-48=172

    At the weekend I peaked at 190 when climbing a steep hill.

    At that point I didn't feel any significant discomfort but at about 30 miles I was completely knackered.

    See:

    http://static.bikeradar.com/forums/view ... t=12783053

    That said I regularly do exceed 180 for very short peaks.
  • doyler78doyler78 Posts: 1,951
    Find a hill that's fairly steady and consistent grade that allows you to climb it for several minutes. Get your heart rate up progressively, for me that just means riding up and down the hill several times gradually increasing the effort. The idea is not to kill your legs but to tax your heart and lungs to the max. Once the heart is up and you are feeling the lungs and heart are beginning to really feel the effort then go as hard as you can giving everything. Throw up and pedal home slowly. Download the data and the max is the max that's there.

    Only do it if you are feeling good that day as fatigue or illness will lower the max heart rate that you will hit and trying to hit your max whilst ill isn't the most sensible thing to do anyway though I doubt you woud be so foolish its worth saying anyway.

    198bpm at 38yo. No more needs said regarding the formulas.
  • Don't test for maximum, it's really unpleasant and, unless you're incredibly motivated or masochistic, you won't hit your max.

    Don't use formulas to find training zones, they're all horrendously inaccurate and to err massively on the conservative side as many of the subjects used in the studies producing the formulas were sedentary.

    Do a field test to find your heart rate at threshold and work from there.

    Warm-up for 10 minutes including a few harder surges towards the end.

    Then, on a flat or slightly climbing course, ride as consistently hard as you can manage for 20 minutes. The average heart rate you get for the 20 minutes correlates pretty well to threshold.

    Then use these percentages of that figure:

    Zone 1: Less than 81%
    Zone 2: 81-89%
    Zone 3: 90-93%
    Zone 4: 94-99%
    Zone 5a: 100-102%
    Zone 5b: 103-106%
    Zone 5c: 106%+
  • GarzGarz Posts: 1,155
    Agree with CC above.

    The standard formula is definitely out for me.

    I went pretty hard on a ride when I got my edge and on a ridiculous hill that was on the course that I never tackled before it made me hit the 190 mark. As my MHR was 188 (according to the formula) I shouldn't be able to reach it theoretically or I should be throwing up and stuff my MHR must be between 190-200.

    It has to be a real hardcore effort and to be accurate would almost be the point of passing out to get your true 'Max'. Basically take your time to probe the real figure and don't be using the standard formula.
  • doyler78doyler78 Posts: 1,951
    What's the point of giving people zones with specifying what they are?
  • jgsijgsi Posts: 5,026
    doyler78 wrote:
    What's the point of giving people zones with specifying what they are?
    exactly... maybe just an oversight... but if I was that arsed about so many zones to get into and stay into, I wouldnt get anything done.......
    HR training can lead to a blinkered approach to training, so using perceived exertion is an alternative... but that means you have to be really in tune with your body and its performance. .. instead of blindly following a number.
  • doyler78 wrote:
    What's the point of giving people zones with specifying what they are?

    Excuse me for trying to help...

    Zone 1: Less than 81% Base aerobic conditioning /recovery
    Zone 2: 81-89% Sustained endurance
    Zone 3: 90-93% Tempo
    Zone 4: 94-99% Sub-Threshold (Sweet-Spot)
    Zone 5a: 100-102% Supra-Threshold
    Zone 5b: 103-106%
    Zone 5c: 106%+

    5b and 5c are just incrementally harder
  • doyler78doyler78 Posts: 1,951
    doyler78 wrote:
    What's the point of giving people zones with specifying what they are?

    Excuse me for trying to help...

    Zone 1: Less than 81% Base aerobic conditioning /recovery
    Zone 2: 81-89% Sustained endurance
    Zone 3: 90-93% Tempo
    Zone 4: 94-99% Sub-Threshold (Sweet-Spot)
    Zone 5a: 100-102% Supra-Threshold
    Zone 5b: 103-106%
    Zone 5c: 106%+

    5b and 5c are just incrementally harder

    Keep your toys in the pram. I helped you provide more useful information. I could have said nothing and your info on its own would have been useless :wink:
  • cavastacavasta Posts: 49
    Some interesting posts... especially the heads up about sub-MHR tests. I found some interesting stuff here: http://www.howtobefit.com/determine-max ... t-rate.htm

    Just to prove how generalised (and therefore pretty unhelpful) arithmetic estimates are, I used 7 different formulae from various sources to "calculate" mine. Estimates ranged from 172 to 183 (I'm 48, 132 lbs, 5'9", ride regularly and have a resting HR of around 37-39 - as recorded first thing in the morning over the course of a week). This morning I went out for a ride with the express purpose of seeing how high I could get my HR (without being too silly about it!). I picked a 1.5 mile climb with an average gradient of 5% but which kicks up to 9% for the last couple of hundred yards. I approached the climb after warming up for about 30 mins. Once on the climb I increased my HR steadily every 1-2 mins and went as hard as I could for the last bit. My HRM showed a MHR of 191, which is a bit different to the estimates. Plenty of food for thought...

    Thanks to all who contributed - much appreciated.
  • Im Bald OkIm Bald Ok Posts: 146
    I have had my 500 for 6 months, last weekend i hit a new MHR of 200 from 197 previously 2 months before.
    If you don't use CC's advice on threshold zones, just ride and update your max when you hit something new. You'll have your max eventually (or close enough).
Sign In or Register to comment.