Cadence Sensor, HRM or both ?
woo1
Posts: 51
I've got a turbo trainer but at the moment have no structure to my training. I've decided to up my game and just need some advice on what's best way to judge my performance(fitness).
I have no computer devices apart from my iPhone which I use Cyclemeter & Strava, so need something that can link to these devices.
Do I need both cadence & HRM ?
Any help would be appreciated
I have no computer devices apart from my iPhone which I use Cyclemeter & Strava, so need something that can link to these devices.
Do I need both cadence & HRM ?
Any help would be appreciated
0
Comments
-
No. Google "RPE"And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0
-
A HR Monitor will help you work out effort levels against HR zones, approximate output against maxes etc. Validate your recovery time etc. Cadence is useful and a cadence sensor can help you equate a approx speed too for example. Without a HRM its very hard to work out your output levels, so accurate High intensity interval training becomes quite hard..
I use my edge 800 which has a HRM and cadence sensor. A lot of people are critical of calculated thresholds, but in the absence of any tested output they are better than nothing:
These are the established formula:
Calculating Max HR
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/maxhr.htm
Calculating HR zones - You Need Max HR and Resting HR (sit quite for 4 or 5 minutes on a day when you haven't exercised and take your avg (or middle minute) HR ideally laying down as relaxed as possible.
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/hrm1.htm
Calculating Vo2Max - the basic indicator of Cardio fitness (the amount of oxygen you can consume flat out).
http://www.brianmac.co.uk/vo2max.htm
Your HRM will help you establish some basic data to develop.
The alternative is to use youtube and follow some of the training plans set there. Better than nothing.
Don't forget to stretch properly after and warm up too.
Couple of my vids which may help:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHc_c0j ... HcMEbisZPg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgEbH31FbWs
GCN has a few workout vids too:
https://www.youtube.com/user/globalcyclingnetwork0 -
I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.0
-
craker wrote:yaya wrote:I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.
What risk is that? Do you know of any evidence that training at high HRs is a problem?
Unfortunately there are no known survivors with the relevant experience able to tell us what happened to them!!
More seriously though, particularly for someone ramping up their effort, it's got to be of benefit to work within the generic thresholds to help keep out of the red zone. I still remember (was it the 80's?) in my native Belfast regularly hearing about yet another middle aged man (usually) who had popped their clogs whilst playing squash. Better safe than sorry.
Peter0 -
woo1 wrote:I've got a turbo trainer but at the moment have no structure to my training. I've decided to up my game and just need some advice on what's best way to judge my performance(fitness).
I have no computer devices apart from my iPhone which I use Cyclemeter & Strava, so need something that can link to these devices.
Do I need both cadence & HRM ?
Any help would be appreciated
Firstly have a look at http://www.wahoofitness.com , they do products which will link into your iPhone using the Bluetooth LE standard. iPhones won't work with ANT+ which is what a lot of HRM and sensors use.
It's entirely up to yourself of course but I would suggest a HRM as a minimum just to give you some objective numbers as to how hard you're working. All to easy to kid yourself that you've put in a session then see that your HR remained at 'rest' the entire time
. Cadence is useful just to make sure that you're pedalling at your target cadence or to practice low and high cadence drills, but not as essential as the HRM. 0 -
northpole wrote:More seriously though, particularly for someone ramping up their effort, it's got to be of benefit to work within the generic thresholds to help keep out of the red zone. I still remember (was it the 80's?) in my native Belfast regularly hearing about yet another middle aged man (usually) who had popped their clogs whilst playing squash. Better safe than sorry.
I remember reading that, so long as you're reasonably fit, attempting to find MHR is perfectly safe. What you and YaYa seem to be suggesting is that there is a level of exercise that increases your risk (of what? Heart attack?) Anecdotal evidence aside, how am I more at risk in the 'Red Zone'. What is the red zone, and should I play it safe by staring at the TV ;-)0 -
northpole wrote:craker wrote:yaya wrote:I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.
What risk is that? Do you know of any evidence that training at high HRs is a problem?
Unfortunately there are no known survivors with the relevant experience able to tell us what happened to them!!
More seriously though, particularly for someone ramping up their effort, it's got to be of benefit to work within the generic thresholds to help keep out of the red zone. I still remember (was it the 80's?) in my native Belfast regularly hearing about yet another middle aged man (usually) who had popped their clogs whilst playing squash. Better safe than sorry.
Peter
I find it's more useful on the turbo to make sure you aren't slacking by having your heart rate too low. Certainly I find it much more difficult to get my heart rate up indoors than I do outside where it's all too easy!0 -
craker wrote:yaya wrote:I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.
What risk is that? Do you know of any evidence that training at high HRs is a problem?
Let's just say that I know quite a bit about heart, heart problems and exercise but you can do your own research and draw your own insights. There are many variables like age, gender and one's health condition that can determine how far you can push. So it is wise to know your safety limits and work inside those. Generally speaking, working at more than 85% of your max heart rate makes it harder for the heart to recover and increases the risk of a heart event.0 -
yaya wrote:craker wrote:yaya wrote:I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.
What risk is that? Do you know of any evidence that training at high HRs is a problem?
Let's just say that I know quite a bit about heart, heart problems and exercise but you can do your own research and draw your own insights. There are many variables like age, gender and one's health condition that can determine how far you can push. So it is wise to know your safety limits and work inside those. Generally speaking, working at more than 85% of your max heart rate makes it harder for the heart to recover and increases the risk of a heart event.
Is the 220 minus your age thing a reliable rule of thumb for ascertaining maximum heart rate ? We had a guy from our club who dropped dead at 45 after a ride.0 -
paxington wrote:yaya wrote:craker wrote:yaya wrote:I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.
What risk is that? Do you know of any evidence that training at high HRs is a problem?
Let's just say that I know quite a bit about heart, heart problems and exercise but you can do your own research and draw your own insights. There are many variables like age, gender and one's health condition that can determine how far you can push. So it is wise to know your safety limits and work inside those. Generally speaking, working at more than 85% of your max heart rate makes it harder for the heart to recover and increases the risk of a heart event.
Is the 220 minus your age thing a reliable rule of thumb for ascertaining maximum heart rate ? We had a guy from our club who dropped dead at 45 after a ride.
No.0 -
220 - age puts my max heart rate at 183, and from actual results where I've been working hard that seems to be about right.
Assuming it is then 85% is 155bpm, which I seem to hit quite regularly. Are you saying never go above that ever or don't have sustained effort above that?0 -
markhewitt1978 wrote:220 - age puts my max heart rate at 183, and from actual results where I've been working hard that seems to be about right.
Assuming it is then 85% is 155bpm, which I seem to hit quite regularly. Are you saying never go above that ever or don't have sustained effort above that?
As I said there are several variables in play so it is best to consult a specialist who can look into your health condition, family history, medications, diet etc. etc.
For 45 yr or older the formula changes a bit: 208 minus (age x 0.7).
And BTW I'm not a specialist...just someone with personal experience and a deep interest (literally...)0 -
yaya wrote:
Let's just say that I know quite a bit about heart, heart problems and exercise but you can do your own research and draw your own insights.
Actually I'd like you to do my research for me. Is there a study suggesting that maintaining high heart rates is bad for your health? There's lots of athletes out there putting themselves in harms way if so.yaya wrote:So it is wise to know your safety limits and work inside those. Generally speaking, working at more than 85% of your max heart rate makes it harder for the heart to recover and increases the risk of a heart event.
That is the pertinent question isn't it. First time I've heard anyone claiming that exercising beyond 85% of MHR could damage your health.0 -
Divulge your knowledge + evidence for your claims pleaseyaya wrote:craker wrote:yaya wrote:I recommend an HRM to anyone who does cycling, running etc. mostly because it can keep you in a safe zone and save necessary risk.
What risk is that? Do you know of any evidence that training at high HRs is a problem?
Let's just say that I know quite a bit about heart, heart problems and exercise but you can do your own research and draw your own insights. There are many variables like age, gender and one's health condition that can determine how far you can push. So it is wise to know your safety limits and work inside those. Generally speaking, working at more than 85% of your max heart rate makes it harder for the heart to recover and increases the risk of a heart event.And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0 -
paxington wrote:Is the 220 minus your age thing a reliable rule of thumb for ascertaining maximum heart rate ? We had a guy from our club who dropped dead at 45 after a ride.
Two completely seperate issues there, I would think. Firstly - no, 220 is not a reliable measure. If you want to know your MHR - test it, don't calculate it.
Secondly - there are probably many reasons why someone would drop dead after exercise - but miscalculating your MHR probably isn't one of them.0 -
Don't calculate HR zones using max heart rate. First, it's not the most pleasant experience.
If you wimp out and get it wrong, all the zones are out.
And finally, if you're not fit, your lactate threshold can vary as you improve - but if you've calculated from the invariable max heart rate, then the zone boundaries around this threshold will not change.
It's better - and less vomit inducing - to measure your Lactate Threshold Heart Rate (LTHR) and calculate your zones from there. It's also referred to as Function Threshold Heart Rate.
Some details here: http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/zuvvi/ ... D_TEST.pdf
As for sensors and training for a turbo, I can REALLY recommend getting HRM, speed and cadence sensors and use http://www.trainerroad.com/ . It uses calculated turbo power curves to train against. It's not spot on powermeter stuff, but it's 'relatively' accurate against previous sessions which makes it better than training using just heart rate and not as expensive as a power meter. It will work with laptops and smartphones.0 -
Using the 220 minus your age can be hugely inaccurate. To determine my max HR, I used the ramping effort method and maxed out at 206bpm, which is over 20bpm more than what it should be according to 220 minus your age.
I initially used 220 - x and wondered why the hell I was only doing a 12mph average on a supposed Zone 2 ride. It was because my zones were totally out.0 -
-
SloppySchleckonds wrote:
Wearing a helmet increases this risk.0 -
Sorry all for being a bit sensitive to this subject...today I'm celebrating 12 weeks since my open heart surgery so that's a good excuse I suppose :-)
Seriously though, if you do any strenuous kind of sport that pushes your heart rate close to the maximum it would be good if you get an expert advice first and check that your "system" is all in order to avoid any unpleasant surprises, especially if you are over 40 and just recently became a MAMIL and if you carry any kind of issues such as high blood pressure or if you're on medication. An HRM can help in staying out of trouble.
and FWIW my op was an unpleasant experience but it was not a surprise and did not result from bad training habits...Just had a couple of birth defects that had to be sorted. I'm taking the bike out for the first time this Friday, the turbo was excellent for recovery but I need the fresh air!
Best
Y0 -
Hope everything goes well for you, and good luck.0
-
As an ex coronary care nurse I would say if in doubt get a check with gp.0
