heart rate

chatlow

Sorry if this is posted in the wrong section or has been in a recent thread but I am eager to find out about my heart rate. I have bought a very cheap HRM from aldi and just tried it out. Not entirely sure what my resting heart rate is (going to do this when I wake up tomorrow) but right now as I type (20 mins after cycling) it's 78. I am 30 years old. 5'9" and 11.5 stone.

The HRM max was 211bpm and average was 155. I really don't know how accurate this thing is but does 211 seem a bit high as I always thought your max bpm should be '220-your age' so 190 for me? That being said I am sure I read that cavendish's heart rate was at 285 at one point in extreme training!

If this monitor is accurate then I am just unfit and need sorting out!!

thanks

danowat

chatlow wrote:

I always thought your max bpm should be '220-your age'

You thought wrong

16mm

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion.

charlie_potatoes

16mm wrote:

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion whilst wearing a heart rate monitor

FTFY 8)

gavbarron

220-age is a very loose and inaccurate estimate. Max heart rate is just that, maximum heart rate and so will vary from person to person. It probably won't change a huge deal as you get fitter although your resting heart rate will go down as you get fitter. Also ignore average heart rate too, it's a pointless figure and could falsely lead you to think you've been in a certain training zone for a session when really you were either side of it and missed the objective of that ride.

imposter2.0

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

16mm wrote:

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion whilst wearing a heart rate monitor

FTFY 8)

although if the lion catches you, then whatever you record will be largely irrelevant from that point on...

Chris87

A few things worth noting.

Firstly, it will be accurate enough, (if its the crivit one) I tried the same one for a while and it matched up (enough) with the HRMs at my gym and the more expensive HRM I replaced it with.

Secondly for your resting HR its best to record it in the morning when you wake up for a few days then average it, also bear in mind that illness and dehydration can have a bit effect on it. Don't worry too much about your resting rate though, as it isn't that useful for HR training.

Thirdly, you will get a lot of negative comments on here about the various formulas for your Max HR, they are rarely accurate but until you get a good idea of what your max HR is (it will involve a decent length climb and pushing yourself to an uncomfortable level, not advised unless you already have a fairly good base fitness) it is at least something to go by for working out your training zones.

Finally do your homework on HR training, its not about pushing hard all the time, most of it is actually about going at a fairly easy but sustained pace to help strengthen your heart. The hard part of it is usually keeping your HR low enough to be beneficial.

charlie_potatoes

Imposter wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

16mm wrote:

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion whilst wearing a heart rate monitor

FTFY 8)

although if the lion catches you, then whatever you record will be largely irrelevant from that point on...

Unless you are sufficiently trained in the art of self defence

team47b

16mm wrote:

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion.

They can run at 60kph over a maximum of 300 meters, so get fit first before attempting to test your maximum heart rate.

chatlow

team47b wrote:

16mm wrote:

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion.

They can run at 60kph over a maximum of 300 meters, so get fit first before attempting to test your maximum heart rate.

Nice test. Although I won't need a lion after telling the wife about a potential carbon purchase!

charlie_potatoes

team47b wrote:

16mm wrote:

your max HR is the max you've ever seen it. The best way to find your max is to be chased by a hungry lion.

They can run at 60kph over a maximum of 300 meters, so get fit first before attempting to test your maximum heart rate.

I'd rinse it then 8)
And in any case I reckon I could kick the granny out of a Lion in an anything goes situation

hatch87

Wouldn't worry about it, I'm 26 and regularly get my heart to 210 on climbs, and thats without even pushing sometimes so my actual max is probably higher.

andrewjoseph

if you're not actually greying out, dribbling and falling off the bike, then you are probably not seeing your max hr.

best to try on a really quiet, steep hill or turbo. turbo is probably best so you don't fall over. then do hard intervals with 30 second rest between.

my max is 191 and i rarely get up to it, it hurts. my wife has a max of 203. we are both 52.

Buckie2k5

on the other side of the scale iam 35 and max ive had it is 172 during a 10 mile TT

kampernaut

Chris87 wrote:

Secondly for your resting HR its best to record it in the morning when you wake up for a few days then average it, also bear in mind that illness and dehydration can have a bit effect on it.

Important just to rest for several minutes after donning the strap in the morning too. Dozing off is OK.

Chris87 wrote:

Don't worry too much about your resting rate though, as it isn't that useful for HR training.

Not sure I agree with this. I suppose it depends on who's HRM training theory you subscribe to. Some use percentage of the difference between max and min heart rates %HRR (Heart Rate Reserve) as a way to determine training zones rather than percentage of maximum heart rate. This sometimes makes quite a difference to the thresholds you use for training especially as you get fitter and the resting heart rate drops.

Chris87 wrote:

Thirdly, you will get a lot of negative comments on here about the various formulas for your Max HR, they are rarely accurate but until you get a good idea of what your max HR is (it will involve a decent length climb and pushing yourself to an uncomfortable level, not advised unless you already have a fairly good base fitness) it is at least something to go by for working out your training zones.

Spot on.

Chris87 wrote:

Finally do your homework on HR training, its not about pushing hard all the time, most of it is actually about going at a fairly easy but sustained pace to help strengthen your heart.

I couldn't agree more. Worth buying a good book on the subject IMO. I learned about HRM training from a long distance running book but I'm sure that similar principles apply to cycling. You need to understand what those numbers mean for you and how to use them to your advantage otherwise the HRM is just a gadget that tells you nothing.

Chris87 wrote:

The hard part of it is usually keeping your HR low enough to be beneficial.

How true. Go slower to get faster seems totally counterintuitive but it works in my experience. The low intensity workouts need to be combined with high intensity ones too though. You can also use the HRM as a way to determine how hard to make a high intensity session.

paul2718

How true. Go slower to get faster seems totally counterintuitive but it works in my experience. The low intensity workouts need to be combined with high intensity ones too though. You can also use the HRM as a way to determine how hard to make a high intensity session.

This makes no sense to me at all.

I reckon you could skip the 'low intensity' sessions with little loss of effect.

Unless you're riding a really long way, in which case it's not a 'low intensity' session...

Maybe I've missed a point.

http://app.strava.com/activities/55025758 was my weekend ride. The highest HR I've ever seen is 180, does this ride qualify as 'low intensity'?

Paul

chatlow

thanks for the replies. I have since tested my resting heart rate and it's around 60. Will be very interested to monitor my heart rate over the next few months of commuting and training and hopefully watch it come down

kampernaut

paul2718 wrote:

How true. Go slower to get faster seems totally counterintuitive but it works in my experience. The low intensity workouts need to be combined with high intensity ones too though. You can also use the HRM as a way to determine how hard to make a high intensity session.

This makes no sense to me at all.

I reckon you could skip the 'low intensity' sessions with little loss of effect.

Unless you're riding a really long way, in which case it's not a 'low intensity' session...

Maybe I've missed a point.

It didn't make any sense to me either. I read about it and still didn't believe it. Fortunately I had the patience to experiment to see if it worked and it does for me.

Intensity and duration aren't the same thing at all. You can keep going for a LOT longer at <70%HRR than you can at >85%HRR. The more time you spend above 70%HRR, the quicker you burn your glycogen stores. Eventually they run out and you come to a complete stop.

Regularly spending long periods of time exercising at about or just below 70%HRR makes you faster and faster for that level of exertion — particularly when combined with hard sessions on other days. At this exertion level you apparently don't consume much glycogen after about 30 minutes of exercising. Thus working at that level wherever possible allows you to more easily stave off total glycogen depletion. Ironically low intensity training has another surprising effect and that is that you must work much harder to get above 85%HRR on the hard days.

However, trying to stick to the easy threshold is difficult/really boring because it feels so slow and of course impossible on anything even remotely hilly at first. It is also hard to believe you are getting any benefit from it especially if you are used to working yourself hard.

I'm not suggesting you shouldn't train yourself with high intensity (i.e. >85%HRR) just that it is advantageous to mix the two types on different days. What type of mix will depend on the objective of your training but it is particularly useful for long duration endurance activities and for beginners since it allows you to comfortably develop with significantly less risk of injury.

paul2718 wrote:

http://app.strava.com/activities/55025758 was my weekend ride. The highest HR I've ev
er seen is 180, does this ride qualify as 'low intensity'?

Paul

Don't know because it depends on your individual max/min HRs and what your HR was over that ride. I suspect that it was a mix of low and high intensity — probably very high on that hill ~34km in. Great average speed. I wish I were as fast as you.

HRM training is by no means compulsory and obviously not for everyone. However there seems little point in wearing one if you aren't going to use it effectively. Everything I've read about them suggests they are an inexpensive and effective way of measuring exercise intensity. There seems to be plenty of research done to validate that a mixture of high and low levels of intensity as the most effective way to train for endurance activities.

paul2718

I remain sceptical that riding at a lower heart rate (or power) than you can sustain for the duration of that ride is a productive use of time.

But fortunately nobody really knows for sure other than that at our levels anything is better than nothing, so whatever keeps you going is good.

Paul

Calpol

paul2718 wrote:

I remain sceptical that riding at a lower heart rate (or power) than you can sustain for the duration of that ride is a productive use of time.

But fortunately nobody really knows for sure other than that at our levels anything is better than nothing, so whatever keeps you going is good.

Paul

I am with you on this. sure if you have all day every day then it might be a good way of doing things but i have read many conflicting pieces on this subject over the years. When I started I would have been walking and pushing the bike in order to keep my heart in the "fat burning zone". Now with a decent amount of miles in my heart rate has probably decreased by 10-15bpm holding the same speed (if not a little faster). Ride your bike, enjoy it, push yourself beyond whats comfortable, allow your body time to recover and I am sure you will see fitness improvements.

hatch87

I know what you mean, I tried it once, my average was as low as 13mph and I was still struggling to keep my heart in the zone. Once a hill of more than 1% came along I was screwed, lowest gear, about 60 cadence and still beating away at 160. The thing is, even if it does work in the long run, if your not enjoying it you will lose motivation. I'll just keeping racing around like a hampster at 180 as it keeps me happy