Forum home Road cycling forum Training, fitness and health

Heart Rates and fitness training zones + reducing resting HR

EyonEyon Posts: 623
I'm trying to loose a bit of the belly and moobs I've got right now.

I'm trying, and failing, to cut down on all the censored I eat, but I certaintly want to make more of an effort on my training now I have my nice shiny Cateye V3 to play with.

I have just turned 22, so in theory my max HR (according to various cardiologists I've been seeing over the last two weeks, long story) was 198bpm by using the usual formula's, not measured.

So going by the general theory of 60-70% HRmax, which will be the most efficient fat burning zone, my HR will be between 145-158bpm.

Now my problem is betwen 145bpm and 158bpm, it hardly feels like I'm actually working?! I dont actually start to feel like I'm doing something until I get to 165bpm or more. If I'm really putting effort in I see my HR creep up to 185bpm and I still feel quite good. In cross town runs where I am pulling away hard I can see my HR go 190+ will no ill effects.

An example, I had to cross town the other day, my ride was 1hr and 4 seconds of moving time long, average HR of 178bpm, maxing out at 198bpm, though the accuracy of the max figure I'm not too sure on, and the average included 5-10 minutes of walking around the LBS finding a new headset for another bike. At no time in this ride did I feel significantly over-worked.

So, is my heart a little less/more efficient than normal? Or is the only way to fat burn easily to go really slow? I tend to pace at a comfortable speed for me, pedaling between 90-100rpm, so if i consciously slow down will it bring my HR down to the 60-70% mark where I want/need to be?

Adding to this, I need to reduce my resting HR a little, its only at 65bpm right now but for various reasons I need to get it lower, what training band should I be in to do this fastest?

Thanks

Posts

  • Eyon wrote:
    I have just turned 22, so in theory my max HR (according to various cardiologists I've been seeing over the last two weeks, long story) was 198bpm by using the usual formula's, not measured.

    So going by the general theory of 60-70% HRmax, which will be the most efficient fat burning zone, my HR will be between 145-158bpm.

    Now my problem is betwen 145bpm and 158bpm, it hardly feels like I'm actually working?!
    HR formulas are for population averages, not for application to an individual. The cardiologists amaze me if that's their crummy advice.

    If it feels easy, it is. Use your exertion level to guide you. In other works, ride harder.
    Eyon wrote:
    Now my problem is betwen 145bpm and 158bpm, it hardly feels like I'm actually working?!

    Or is the only way to fat burn easily to go really slow? I tend to pace at a comfortable speed for me, pedaling between 90-100rpm, so if i consciously slow down will it bring my HR down to the 60-70% mark where I want/need to be?
    Fat burning zone is a myth.

    To lose excess body fat you need to burn more calories and eat less. You do the former by riding harder, not easier. The latter is up to you but one way to help is to keep a food diary. Recording what you eat often helps change behaviour.
  • Bear77Bear77 Posts: 60
    +1 food diary to keep on top of your weight. It can help you find out what you need to improve in your diet and it does make you think about what you eat. I don't think you need to be really censored about it or do it all the time. There are loads online like Training Peaks and Food Focus.
    The revolution will not be televised
  • EyonEyon Posts: 623
    OK, so I'll cut down on the censored I eat, will take a bit of will power but it's do-able.

    I managed a short blast between the storms on my bike on Saturday, only 21 miles but kept my average heart rate at 182bpm, felt great and after the 21 miles when it started to tip it down again, I wasn't particularly tired or sore and could imagine doing another 10-20 miles more at that pace. The day after I went for a slower club run, 25 miles with my heart rate barely in the 150's and genuinely it felt like not much was being done, very fun but not taxing.

    Anyway, just started on food focus, lets hope it will work to tame my urges to eat so much.

    I assume that my resting HR will just drop naturally from getting fitter?

    Ian
  • GiantMikeGiantMike Posts: 3,139
    Eyon wrote:
    I managed a short blast between the storms on my bike on Saturday, only 21 miles but kept my average heart rate at 182bpm, felt great and after the 21 miles when it started to tip it down again, I wasn't particularly tired or sore and could imagine doing another 10-20 miles more at that pace.

    censored me! At 40 my max HR is 189 and the highest average I've averaged in an hour's Cyclocross race was 174
  • SBezzaSBezza Posts: 2,173
    If you are going to do an endurance ride, it needs to be long to get any benefit IMO, no point in doing a 1 or 2 hour ride at endurance level. Save the shorter rides for tempo level efforts or above.

    If you do an endurance ride, it will seem very easy for 3 to 4 hours, then as you get tired it gets harder, so don't gauge an endurance ride effort on such a short ride. If it is still too easy, go harder. :wink:
  • EyonEyon Posts: 623
    So keep the low HR rides for long days in the saddle, and for quick rides really crank up the effort? Both methods should be efficient to burn fat?

    Giantmike, I'm 22, and regularly can push my HR >190 with no problems, the highest I've hit is 195bpm in a hill climb "race" between me and a friend, but that really wiped me out for a while
  • SBezzaSBezza Posts: 2,173
    As Alex has mentioned above, forget about burning fat, it is a calorie deficit you require. Burn more calories than you consume and you will lose body fat, try and keep the amount of weight loss reasonable, probably around 2 to 3 lbs a week, and the majority will be fat. You might lose some muscle from where it is not used, but to be honest it is minimal in the grand scheme of things.

    I lost 7 stones by watching what I ate, and exercising, it really is as simple as this, no matter how hard people might make it seem difficult.
  • EyonEyon Posts: 623
    7 stone!!! Thats pretty impressive! I'm planning from 89kg to 75kg, not a lot, i know, but its enough for some specific health targets I need to acquire.

    Is it better to exersize a little every day than a lot only say, twice a week?
  • SBezzaSBezza Posts: 2,173
    I would say the more regular the better, but you need recovery time as well, for the body to repair itself.

    2 times a week is helpful, but not alot IMO, it won't help much with fitness, and it is easy to laspe out of a regular training plan.

    I used to go to the gym 4/5 times a week, as well as riding my bike. I just ride my bike now, though this is 5/6 days of the week.
  • ozzy1000_0ozzy1000_0 Posts: 144
    I think the whole dieting industry has brain washed us all into seeing wieght loss as somthing complex and difficult... and i reckon this is easy for most people to swallow as they don't like feeling hungry... and sweet fatty things taste nice...

    I've not really gone out to loose weight but when I recently started training for my first century the I lost about 5kg very easily without conciously changing my diet.. i was a heavy 87-88kg for ages but as soon as my weekly mileage went over about 120miles my belly just disapeared and now I'm about 82kg... as the guys above said; burn more than you consume... I think alot of us eat more than we think we do.. maybe keep a diary of everything you consume for a week or so?
  • Eyon wrote:
    Is it better to exersize a little every day than a lot only say, twice a week?
    Frequency and consistency are more important. Provided those regular sessions add up to more than the 2 rides.
  • P_TuckerP_Tucker Posts: 1,878
    ozzy1000_0 wrote:
    I think the whole dieting industry has brain washed us all into seeing wieght loss as somthing complex and difficult... and i reckon this is easy for most people to swallow as they don't like feeling hungry... and sweet fatty things taste nice..

    Indeed. The whole dieting/exercise industry revolves around trying to give people easy answers. If the industry was forced to tell the truth in the "Invention of Lying" style, thousands of jobs would disappear and be replaced with a pamphlet saying:

    Want to lose weight? Eat less food, tubby.
    Want to get fit? Hit the treadmill and the exercise bike hard; and if you can read Heat magazine whilst exercising you aren't trying hard enough.
    Want to gain muscle? Flinging around a weight that a sick infant might use as a toy isn't going to do jack sh!t. If you aren't pulling funny faces by the end of each set then you're doing it wrong. And FFS, stop standing on a f*cking balance board.

    Simple. For £9.99 I can send you the rest of my guide, expanding slightly on the above.
  • chiarkchiark Posts: 335
    P_Tucker wrote:
    For £9.99 I can send you the rest of my guide, expanding slightly on the above.
    Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. :)

    I have to agree though - the world is looking for a quick, easy fix when the reality is that there is a fix, but it's neither quick nor easy. People know this in their heart of hearts, but still want to believe in miracles.

    For what it's worth, my heart rate cycling seems to hover between 160 and 180: if I push hard, I hit the low 180s, and if I slack off it will drop to the 150s... I was thinking that my garmin HRM was faulty for a time, but when I stop it drops down fairly quickly...
    Synapse Alloy 105 / Rock Lobster Tig Team Sl
  • ozzy1000_0ozzy1000_0 Posts: 144
    P_Tucker wrote:
    ozzy1000_0 wrote:
    I think the whole dieting industry has brain washed us all into seeing wieght loss as somthing complex and difficult... and i reckon this is easy for most people to swallow as they don't like feeling hungry... and sweet fatty things taste nice..

    Indeed. The whole dieting/exercise industry revolves around trying to give people easy answers. If the industry was forced to tell the truth in the "Invention of Lying" style, thousands of jobs would disappear and be replaced with a pamphlet saying:

    Want to lose weight? Eat less food, tubby.
    Want to get fit? Hit the treadmill and the exercise bike hard; and if you can read Heat magazine whilst exercising you aren't trying hard enough.
    Want to gain muscle? Flinging around a weight that a sick infant might use as a toy isn't going to do jack sh!t. If you aren't pulling funny faces by the end of each set then you're doing it wrong. And FFS, stop standing on a f*cking balance board.

    Simple. For £9.99 I can send you the rest of my guide, expanding slightly on the above.

    LOL, the only bit i'd contest is the balance board thing... :) i've tried balance boards and they're plain boring, balance ball and indo board are more fun... the idea isn't to loose wieght, or bulk up, but just fire up and reinforce pathways that're involved in stability and balance... a good friend of mine is a trainer to olympians and other elite atheletes, he uses loads of balance stuff/core with his athletes as he swears it improves effieciency in other parts of the body.
  • EyonEyon Posts: 623
    These posts are making me feel inspired! I've cut down the on the censored food and making a log of what goes in versus what goes out, its quite scary to think my breakfast contained more calories than any other meal of the day (even though its my favorite). I think I'll head out for 20 miles between the showers tonight to burn some of it off.

    I can see my 75kg target in the distance :lol:
  • keef66keef66 Posts: 13,286
    22 and you've got moobs?? Crikey! Congratulations on wanting to do something about it / them.

    My experience suports what's been said above:

    Fat burning zone is a myth; to lose weight just consistently consume fewer calories than you're burning. Lose weight faster therefore by exercising more, eating less, or preferably a combination of the two.

    If you have limited time to exercise, a high intensity workout will burn a lot more calories than a steady ride.

    Max HR can only be established by measurement; establishing your true max HR on the bike is not particularly pleasant.

    Don't expect your resting HR to fall as you get fitter, it may well stay the same. RHR isn't neccessarily a good indicator anyway.
  • EyonEyon Posts: 623
    22 and you've got moobs?? Crikey! Congratulations on wanting to do something about it / them.

    I've always been a little overweight, but recently I've had to take my renewal on my medical for my commercial pilots lisence, its very very in-depth and sadly this time round, I failed it. The only difference between now and this time 18 months ago when I first did it was that I'm 9kg heavier, and a lot fitter. So I'm going to loose the beef and see if I can get through it again. This is my reason for wanting to loose weight at the age of 22, other than that I am fit and healthy and weight really isnt a concern.

    Will ignore all myths and hammer out short sessions, I can do these easier than longer sessions which are only do-able for the weekend. I'm tempted to invest in some rollers for the nights I cant get out

    Ian
  • miragevmiragev Posts: 2
    185 -190 bpm thats seems a bit high to me to have to get to these levels to feel like your working especially on the flat round town
    have you just started cycling ?
    at 185bpm what speed would you be going at ..?

    just for instance i can cycle at 23-24 mph on the flat with a heart rate around 140-145bpm for extended periods
    when i climbing really big hills my bpm never really goes much above 165 -170
  • GarzGarz Posts: 1,155
    miragev wrote:
    185 -190 bpm thats seems a bit high to me to have to get to these levels to feel like your working especially on the flat round town
    have you just started cycling ?
    at 185bpm what speed would you be going at ..?

    just for instance i can cycle at 23-24 mph on the flat with a heart rate around 140-145bpm for extended periods
    when i climbing really big hills my bpm never really goes much above 165 -170

    It will seem a bit high as he isn't used to it yet. His HR should get more efficient over time dropping a wee bit. Other factors such as drinking caffeine can raise it too.
Sign In or Register to comment.