Forum home Road cycling forum Training, fitness and health

HRR or HR max

airbusboyairbusboy Posts: 231
Afternoon fellow cyclists....

Last year i trained on my HR Max.... recently a buddy has bought a G500 and is selling me the idea of Heart Rate Reserve as a figure to train at; seems quite reasonable as it considers my resting HR......

What is the recommended practice?

RHR = 50
Mx = 207

basically the difference at training 75% (endurance pace) is HRmax appox 155BPM (ish) or on HRR = 173 (ish).

Thoughts please......

Rgds
'Ride hard for those who can't.....'

Posts

  • PseudonymPseudonym Posts: 1,032
    Not sure I understand it what you're saying. Your resting HR has very little to do with your max HR, so I can't see the benefit in incorporating RHR into any training levels or calculations...
  • amaferangaamaferanga Posts: 6,789
    Regardless of which one you use, the HR you work at should be about the same to within a few bpm for each 'zone'.
    More problems but still living....
  • nickwillnickwill Posts: 2,735
    HRR is totally wrong for me and brings up much higher heart rates than the current Keen/British Cycling HR max percentages. I have a max of 193 and a resting HR of 52 which means that as a 54 year old I am quite a fast beater. The BC percentages coincide perfectly with perceived exertion for me, whereas the Karvonen and other HRR rechnique place my threshold ridiculously high!
  • SBezzaSBezza Posts: 2,173
    Don't forget most training zones are generally based on HR Max, so the percentages are likely to be out using other methods to find training zones.
  • airbusboyairbusboy Posts: 231
    I think i might have been slightly slow; HRMAX zone % are different to HRR %..... ? So even though the percentages are different the end result should be almost identical?

    I didn't understand why RHR mattered...

    Rgds
    'Ride hard for those who can't.....'
  • jgsijgsi Posts: 5,031
    airbusboy wrote:
    I think i might have been slightly slow; HRMAX zone % are different to HRR %..... ? So even though the percentages are different the end result should be almost identical?

    I didn't understand why RHR mattered...

    Rgds

    It is used in the fancier Karvonen formular, but it is all still relatively stick a finger in the air and see where it blows.
    I much prefer, if you have to use HR i.e. no power meter to the field test of a very good warm up and then 20 minutes at you best sustainable effort to find your functional heart rate and then use COGGAN's % zones to train in more effectively. He obviously uses power output as a preference but also gives the equivalent based on the field test hr result.
Sign In or Register to comment.