Understaning HR Zones

thetool

Been Riding for several months now and enjoying immensely, looking at doing a few events this year so I've started to up my riding and wanting to know what the best HR zone is best to train in.There is so much info out on the web that my brain is fried.
Been using Strava in conjunction with my Garmin 705,and still trying to understand all the data.Talked to various people and they say Zone 3 but for me to stay in that Zone is pretty hard.Did 33 miles on Sat and spent 51% in Zone 4 (Threshold) and didn't seem that hard.
Any help would be appreciated as its bloody hard to know the right way to go about it.

Thanks

wishitwasallflat

http://www.brianmac.co.uk/hrm1.htm

best www info on zones I know of

Gizmodo

I'm no expert because I've never tried it, but I can only assume that to stay in a particular zone you are better picking a flat route or even using a turbo trainer so that you can speed up/slow down as necessary to maintain the zone. As soon as you pick a hilly route you're going to struggle maintaining a particular zone. I stand to be corrected.

wishitwasallflat

Gizmodo wrote:

I'm no expert because I've never tried it, but I can only assume that to stay in a particular zone you are better picking a flat route or even using a turbo trainer so that you can speed up/slow down as necessary to maintain the zone. As soon as you pick a hilly route you're going to struggle maintaining a particular zone. I stand to be corrected.

Spot on in my experience - my prime aim is to stay in Zone 1 for hours to burn fat but the hills - the dammed hills - make me go over zone and so are keeping me fat !!!

Training in zones is dead easy on a turbo as you say you have control but it's even more boring if you are trying anything other than intervals.

siamon

I reckon the generalised information on heart rate zones is so general it is borderline useless. People vary enormously. The first problem is 220 - age and the errors compound from there. Your HR may be an average of 10 less at 8am than if you did exactly the same workout at 6pm but you may "feel" that it takes less effort at 6pm, even though the HR is a zone higher. I wouldn't worry too much. What (I think) is more relevant is your resting rate first thing in the morning. Concentrate on the effort you can feel to pace yourself and use HR as an indication only.

blackhands

wishitwasallflat wrote:

Spot on in my experience - my prime aim is to stay in Zone 1 for hours to burn fat but the hills - the dammed hills - make me go over zone and so are keeping me fat !!!

What's keeping you fat is training in Zone 1. The concept of the "fat burning zone" is a misunderstanding of what actually happens during exercise.

At lower levels of effort (Zone 1) you will derive a higher proportion of energy from fat, but it is a higher proportion of a small number of calories burnt. In contrast, you will burn a smaller proportion of fat at higher Zones, but it will be a smaller proportion of a much greater number.

Pross

thetool wrote:

Been Riding for several months now and enjoying immensely, looking at doing a few events this year so I've started to up my riding and wanting to know what the best HR zone is best to train in.There is so much info out on the web that my brain is fried.
Been using Strava in conjunction with my Garmin 705,and still trying to understand all the data.Talked to various people and they say Zone 3 but for me to stay in that Zone is pretty hard.Did 33 miles on Sat and spent 51% in Zone 4 (Threshold) and didn't seem that hard.
Any help would be appreciated as its bloody hard to know the right way to go about it.

Thanks

If you spent just over half of a 33 mile ride in zone 4 and it wasn't hard then I would suggest you weren't in zone 4. Zone 4 by it's very definition is hard for that amount of time. Have you actually established your maximum HR properly (i.e. by carrying out a ramp test) or have you just used a formula? Have a look at HR zones with their corresponding perceived effort.

Have a look here http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/bike/heart_rate/heart_rate_zone_calculator_abcc_bcf.html Unfortunately the calculator uses a formula for your max HR so once you establish your real max HR you have to fudge about with the age to get the correct maximum!

wishitwasallflat

blackhands wrote:

wishitwasallflat wrote:

Spot on in my experience - my prime aim is to stay in Zone 1 for hours to burn fat but the hills - the dammed hills - make me go over zone and so are keeping me fat !!!

What's keeping you fat is training in Zone 1. The concept of the "fat burning zone" is a misunderstanding of what actually happens during exercise.

At lower levels of effort (Zone 1) you will derive a higher proportion of energy from fat, but it is a higher proportion of a small number of calories burnt. In contrast, you will burn a smaller proportion of fat at higher Zones, but it will be a smaller proportion of a much greater number.

Good point - damn! I suppose that means there really is no easy answer

amaferanga

Since there are numerous definitions of HR zones, it always helps to actually state what your Zone 1, Zone, 2, etc. actually are.

But the bottom zone, Zone 1, should always be a recovery zone and there's no point in riding in that HR zone unless you're actually recovering from a hard ride or block of rides.

jgsi

amaferanga wrote:

Since there are numerous definitions of HR zones, it always helps to actually state what your Zone 1, Zone, 2, etc. actually are.

But the bottom zone, Zone 1, should always be a recovery zone and there's no point in riding in that HR zone unless you're actually recovering from a hard ride or block of rides.

Yup, Zone or Level 1 according to Coggan is 'light recuperation' after hard training days.. minimal sensation of effort...

ddraver

Different authors use different set ups too, zone 4 for author x will be a flat out sprint, whereas for author y that would be zone 6. You could do worse than buying one training book from the works for 2.99 and sticking with that.

Another example, my Sunnto hrm has 4 zones, my Garmin has 5, and the recent cycling plus supplement suggested 6 zones!!

thetool

Pross wrote:

thetool wrote:

Been Riding for several months now and enjoying immensely, looking at doing a few events this year so I've started to up my riding and wanting to know what the best HR zone is best to train in.There is so much info out on the web that my brain is fried.
Been using Strava in conjunction with my Garmin 705,and still trying to understand all the data.Talked to various people and they say Zone 3 but for me to stay in that Zone is pretty hard.Did 33 miles on Sat and spent 51% in Zone 4 (Threshold) and didn't seem that hard.
Any help would be appreciated as its bloody hard to know the right way to go about it.

Thanks

If you spent just over half of a 33 mile ride in zone 4 and it wasn't hard then I would suggest you weren't in zone 4. Zone 4 by it's very definition is hard for that amount of time. Have you actually established your maximum HR properly (i.e. by carrying out a ramp test) or have you just used a formula? Have a look at HR zones with their corresponding perceived effort.

Have a look here http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/bike/heart_rate/heart_rate_zone_calculator_abcc_bcf.html Unfortunately the calculator uses a formula for your max HR so once you establish your real max HR you have to fudge about with the age to get the correct maximum!

My Max heart rate is taken using my Garmin a few months ago when I went all out (MHR 188)what I really meant to say is that while riding in Zone 4 it was a fairly hard ride,climbed 2600ft with an average of 17mph but found it fairly easy to maintain the pace.

Thanks again.

jim453

thetool wrote:

Been Riding for several months now and enjoying immensely, looking at doing a few events this year so I've started to up my riding and wanting to know what the best HR zone is best to train in.There is so much info out on the web that my brain is fried.
Been using Strava in conjunction with my Garmin 705,and still trying to understand all the data.Talked to various people and they say Zone 3 but for me to stay in that Zone is pretty hard.Did 33 miles on Sat and spent 51% in Zone 4 (Threshold) and didn't seem that hard.
Any help would be appreciated as its bloody hard to know the right way to go about it.

Thanks

I'm sure you know this but just in case as a friend of mine was making this error.

Heart rate zones are calculated as a percentage of your usable heart rate not as a percentage of your maximum heart rate.

So, a max and resting heart rate of 180 and 65 (say) would give a 70% training zone of (180-65)*0.7+65= 145.5

This is different to 70% of max. 180*0.7=126. Which is easier and may explain the problem.

Apologies if you are on to this already. Just trying to stop you wasting as much time as my mate did.

wardieboy

ddraver wrote:

Different authors use different set ups too, zone 4 for author x will be a flat out sprint, whereas for author y that would be zone 6. You could do worse than buying one training book from the works for 2.99 and sticking with that.

Another example, my Sunnto hrm has 4 zones, my Garmin has 5, and the recent cycling plus supplement suggested 6 zones!!

You can increase the amount of Garmin zones via Garmin connect if you have a 500 or 800. Can't comment on the other models.

I'm just getting into heart rate training and found the below link very informative:

http://www.cptips.com/hrmntr.htm

ddraver

^Useful tip, thanks, but my point remains the same - Jim, your point is also involved with it as not ALL authors suggest using useable HR, some do it from max HR, some from lactate Threashold, some even from resting HR. Obviously comparing those 4 authors, would not be comparing apples with oranges. So reading 4 different sites can make it much more confusing...

thetool

ddraver wrote:

^Useful tip, thanks, but my point remains the same - Jim, your point is also involved with it as not ALL authors suggest using useable HR, some do it from max HR, some from lactate Threashold, some even from resting HR. Obviously comparing those 4 authors, would not be comparing apples with oranges. So reading 4 different sites can make it much more confusing...

This getting very confusing.......I am using info from Strava and it is almost the same zones as what my Garmin is saying.

ddraver

well you have two apples then.....(i think Strava was set up to be Garmin friendly)

I'm not saying that it's impossible, you just have to be wary and make sure authors/companies are calculating zones in the same way...I mean, you could have any sort of zone on the garmin based on any integer between 1 and 100 should you wish, the defaults are just defaults, not "scientific facts"

Pross

jim453 wrote:

thetool wrote:

Been Riding for several months now and enjoying immensely, looking at doing a few events this year so I've started to up my riding and wanting to know what the best HR zone is best to train in.There is so much info out on the web that my brain is fried.
Been using Strava in conjunction with my Garmin 705,and still trying to understand all the data.Talked to various people and they say Zone 3 but for me to stay in that Zone is pretty hard.Did 33 miles on Sat and spent 51% in Zone 4 (Threshold) and didn't seem that hard.
Any help would be appreciated as its bloody hard to know the right way to go about it.

Thanks

I'm sure you know this but just in case as a friend of mine was making this error.

Heart rate zones are calculated as a percentage of your usable heart rate not as a percentage of your maximum heart rate.

So, a max and resting heart rate of 180 and 65 (say) would give a 70% training zone of (180-65)*0.7+65= 145.5

This is different to 70% of max. 180*0.7=126. Which is easier and may explain the problem.

Apologies if you are on to this already. Just trying to stop you wasting as much time as my mate did.

That's not the case. It is just another way of doing things. From various bits of information I have read since the early 90s the early (Peter Keen / BCF) HR zones are based on max heart rate, Coggan's are based on Threshold HR as that seems to put things in line with his power training. Whilst it is true to say there are zones out there based on the above formula to say that is the correct way and you are wasting your time doing it by the Max HR route is misleading. I couldn't train for 3 or 4 hours at the HR I would be at when riding in zone 3 with the system I use.

jim453

Pross wrote:

jim453 wrote:

thetool wrote:

Been Riding for several months now and enjoying immensely, looking at doing a few events this year so I've started to up my riding and wanting to know what the best HR zone is best to train in.There is so much info out on the web that my brain is fried.
Been using Strava in conjunction with my Garmin 705,and still trying to understand all the data.Talked to various people and they say Zone 3 but for me to stay in that Zone is pretty hard.Did 33 miles on Sat and spent 51% in Zone 4 (Threshold) and didn't seem that hard.
Any help would be appreciated as its bloody hard to know the right way to go about it.

Thanks

I'm sure you know this but just in case as a friend of mine was making this error.

Heart rate zones are calculated as a percentage of your usable heart rate not as a percentage of your maximum heart rate.

So, a max and resting heart rate of 180 and 65 (say) would give a 70% training zone of (180-65)*0.7+65= 145.5

This is different to 70% of max. 180*0.7=126. Which is easier and may explain the problem.

Apologies if you are on to this already. Just trying to stop you wasting as much time as my mate did.

That's not the case. It is just another way of doing things. From various bits of information I have read since the early 90s the early (Peter Keen / BCF) HR zones are based on max heart rate, Coggan's are based on Threshold HR as that seems to put things in line with his power training. Whilst it is true to say there are zones out there based on the above formula to say that is the correct way and you are wasting your time doing it by the Max HR route is misleading. I couldn't train for 3 or 4 hours at the HR I would be at when riding in zone 3 with the system I use.

Well, fair enough. You seem to know what you're on about. However, what is not in doubt is that the OP is doing something wrong, riding for that length of time at threshold should, by definition be quite an effort. It is possible that he has made exactly the error I have described or is using HR zones designed for one system with the wrong kind of system. This is exactly what my friend did and wasted a fair bit of time jogging like he was walking on the moon in some kind of f'ed up attempt to keep his heart rate in the 'correct' zone. He spent a lot of time looking like an idiot and not working very hard whilst believing he was busting out mile after mile at 'threshold' but still having shed loads more in the tank. I think he thought he may end up winning the marathon at the London olympics. I put him straight.

Only trying to help, certainly did not intend to mislead anyone.

Pross

I suspect the error is in that he hasn't worked out either his max HR or threshold HR properly yet.

thetool

Still trying to figure out whats whats with what formula is rite,but here is a ride that I did Sat........Does this look about rite?



http://connect.garmin.com/activity/150506987

Pross

thetool wrote:

Still trying to figure out whats whats with what formula is rite,but here is a ride that I did Sat........Does this look about rite?



http://connect.garmin.com/activity/150506987

It looks a good ride with an impressive average speed over that distance but can't comment that much on it HR wise. How did you determine your max HR? The average HR for that looks to be sensible for a 55 mile ride at 19 mph

thetool

In July when I first starting riding.This was the max HR that was recorded.It was in 100deg heat & and pushed to exhaustion

Secteur

Havent read all the responses, but...

Forget training to zones unless you're a pro and are training on the turbo / flat.

Real life outdoors cycling makes zone training almost impossible, and pointless.

I just go hard wherever I cycle. I live in a hilly area. For example, my Garmin tells me that my average heart rate throughout today's ride was 86% of max - I tend to train at a high heart rate because if it's not high, then it's not hard and I like to go hard.

Just go out and ride hard and you will burn far far more calories (and fat) than doing a slow spin in zone 1. Also, the longer you can train for (and the more often you do it), the more calories (and fat) you will burn.

Dont forget not to put too many calories back in at tea-time if weight loss is your goal!

The only use I have for heart rates is that I know what my heart rates are at the peaks of key climbs on my regular training route, and when I am not at my fittest my HR is always slightly higher, so I can gauge my bike-fitness by my heart rate at key points (which always correlates to just how I feel internally, so knowing my actual HR is pretty academic really)

Secteur

thetool wrote:

In July when I first starting riding.This was the max HR that was recorded.It was in 100deg heat & and pushed to exhaustion

This is a totally incorrect way to gauge your maxHR. A HR measured when you are hyperthermic and dehydrated (and therefore hypotensive) will reflect only your gross physiological abnormality, not your fit (training) max HR.

You need to measure your max HR when fully hydrated and not over-heated, usuing the usual recommended methods which often pop up on here (just do a few tough 1 hour rides including some climbs which are hard for you, push yourself and see what your highest HR was, making sure you are fighting fit when you do them - cool days and lots of fuel & fluid on board).

BruceG

wardieboy wrote:

ddraver wrote:

Different authors use different set ups too, zone 4 for author x will be a flat out sprint, whereas for author y that would be zone 6. You could do worse than buying one training book from the works for 2.99 and sticking with that.

Another example, my Sunnto hrm has 4 zones, my Garmin has 5, and the recent cycling plus supplement suggested 6 zones!!

You can increase the amount of Garmin zones via Garmin connect if you have a 500 or 800. Can't comment on the other models.

I'm just getting into heart rate training and found the below link very informative:

http://www.cptips.com/hrmntr.htm

Dont know about the 800, but you cannot change the amount of zones on a 500. You can make the change on the connect screen, but when you try to send to the 500, it fails stating that the device doesnt support that many zones. So 5 is the max for the 500.

amaferanga

Secteur wrote:

Havent read all the responses, but...

Forget training to zones unless you're a pro and are training on the turbo / flat.

Real life outdoors cycling makes zone training almost impossible, and pointless.

I just go hard wherever I cycle. I live in a hilly area. For example, my Garmin tells me that my average heart rate throughout today's ride was 86% of max - I tend to train at a high heart rate because if it's not high, then it's not hard and I like to go hard.

Just go out and ride hard and you will burn far far more calories (and fat) than doing a slow spin in zone 1. Also, the longer you can train for (and the more often you do it), the more calories (and fat) you will burn.

Dont forget not to put too many calories back in at tea-time if weight loss is your goal!

The only use I have for heart rates is that I know what my heart rates are at the peaks of key climbs on my regular training route, and when I am not at my fittest my HR is always slightly higher, so I can gauge my bike-fitness by my heart rate at key points (which always correlates to just how I feel internally, so knowing my actual HR is pretty academic really)

Sorry, but that's terrible advice. Firstly riding hard all the time is a crap way to train. Intervals work much much better if you do them properly. You'll plateau pretty quickly from just riding hard all the time. Secondly, HR zones are no more than a guide so there's no need to try to stick to them religiously. But along with RPE they can be used to effectively pace yourself. If you do threshold type intervals >10min or so then HR can be used to guide your effort.

If you're just riding hard all the time then you're wasting your time even bothering with an HR monitor.

Secteur

Well I was referring to weight loss, not improving cardiovascular ability, in my post.

For someone who admits to being overweight and just wanting to lose weight as a main priority, I think several hard rides a week with no reference to HR zones at all would be most appropriate.

I was trying to get away from reference to HR zones at all.

maxandpaddy

Sorry if going off the thread a bit,
I cycle every day to work and back and mtb at weekends, I use to drink way to much and have smoked for over 30 yrs, now don't do either. I am 48 yrs old has is my mate, 6 foot 1 in hight, I am now about 12 stone 12 pound from about 16 stone. my mate has never smoked and very rarely drank he his 10 stone and 5 foot 8 and only rides weekends.

My question is...... when we were riding the other day we both had hr chest straps on, mine was reading 85 and his was 115 this happened through out the ride where his was about 30 or so higher is this all down to fitness, or another underlying problem.

ddraver

Peoples induvidual HR varies significantly, yes part of it might be that he is expending more effort than you and so therefore has a lower HR but you could nt tell this from just a quick glance...

petemadoc

maxandpaddy wrote:

Sorry if going off the thread a bit,
I cycle every day to work and back and mtb at weekends, I use to drink way to much and have smoked for over 30 yrs, now don't do either. I am 48 yrs old has is my mate, 6 foot 1 in hight, I am now about 12 stone 12 pound from about 16 stone. my mate has never smoked and very rarely drank he his 10 stone and 5 foot 8 and only rides weekends.

My question is...... when we were riding the other day we both had hr chest straps on, mine was reading 85 and his was 115 this happened through out the ride where his was about 30 or so higher is this all down to fitness, or another underlying problem.

Mine jumps to 85 when I lift my cup of coffee

Put in the most simple terms possible is this the best way to do interval sessions on a turbo

Warm up for a bit

do 10 min intervals at threshold somewhere between 80-90%

a few minutes break inbetween each interval

warm down for a bit

Job done?