preferred-google-button
log in
register

HR zones – am I dumb, or just superhuman?

  • Creator
    Topic
  • December 29, 2016 at 3:28 am #26607
    sminchnz

    Earlier this year I started riding again after almost 20 years off the bike, and having decided to take this a bit more seriously I just got The Time-Crunched Cyclist but now that I’ve read it I am a little baffled.

    When I was riding at university I could always hold a high heart rate – I’d always climb in the 180s, and once did a race where I averaged 182 for the first hour (!). I’m now 39 and climb at 175–180 all the time, and hit 184 on a climb the other day. I haven’t tried to do a max HR test, but I’m wondering if 190 would be about right. In short, I have a high heart rate when I’m on the bike.

    When I did the TCC fitness test averaged 170 for eight minutes on my indoor trainer, which was lower than I’d have anticipated, but I can’t argue with the data. The thing is, that figure is used to calculate HRs for intervals etc that make no sense to me. When I look at my data on Strava I can see that when I was out for five hours yesterday I held 160–165 for 20 minutes at a time on climbs and along the flats – but TCC is suggesting I do 3 x 12 minute intervals at 156–160 BPM, which I’d have considered a warmup. The “power intervals” are around 172 which I’d rate as a comfortable climbing pace, and holding this for two minutes (as the training plan suggests) is a doddle.

    I figure I’ve screwed something up. 

    Did I go too easy on the fitness test? Or is this due to me doing the test on the trainer and comparing it to HRs on the road? Do I need to adjust the TCC interval figures for outdoor riding, and if so, should I add perhaps 5 or 10 BPM to all of them and see how that goes? Or should I just do the test again but do it outdoors this time? (I did it indoors because that made it easier to control things, given I want to do the same test every few months.)

    What do ya’ll reckon?

    Stephen

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 12 replies - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • January 2, 2017 at 6:49 pm #884063
    0
    sminchnz

    Thank you all for your

    Thank you all for your comments – some really good stuff here that I reckon will set me straight. Spot on about this being a single instance of the test (and the first time I’ve tried it) so not sure why I was paying that much attention to a single data point. I’ll repeat it a few times both indoors and out, and take it from there. And I’ve just found the series of articles on British Cycling that cover heart rate, so I’ll give those a thorough once over.

    Thanks again, everyone. I hope your year is off to a good start!

    Stephen

    January 1, 2017 at 12:19 am #884061
    0
    Skimpy1

    What speed were you going.

    What speed were you going. Really, really fast or just disappointing?

    Everyone is different. Feel is equally important. Its all just data, and if you cannot correlate with what is actually happening on the bike or with your body, its pretty meaningless data.

     

    December 31, 2016 at 10:39 pm #884059
    0
    madcarew

    The-Kaner:

    The-Kaner:

    As mentioned by others, HR straps can give spiked readings when they are not working properly. In my 20 yrs of using them I’ve found that when one side of the strap is not working properly they almost inevitably read 220 – 230 BPM. However!!! this normally corrects instantly or not at all. A sustained elevated HR after a spike is normally evidence of incomplete heart beats and your should push your doc for an ECG as you are in the classic zone (reasonably fit, middle aged man) for AF or incomplete heart beat. This will not show up on blood work. It is highly unlikely that you will need to change anything, but combined with your warning about cholesterol level it is definitely worth seeing a cardiologist to get it checked.

    December 31, 2016 at 10:00 pm #884057
    0
    madcarew

    Stephen, You are neither dumb

    Stephen, You are neither dumb, nor Super Human.

    Here’s the low down on Heart rate:

    Most ‘recommendations’ are worked from 220 less your age which is relevant for about 40% of the population. It’s barely even a starting point really. 

    On an indoor trainer / turbo, due to heat issues your sustainable HR is generally lower than it is out in ‘the real world’.

    Your measurements on the climb are what are relevant.

    The important part of HR is what’s called the Heart Rate Reserve or Working Heart Rate. This is your max HR less your resting HR. When HR zones are calculated (and these are reasonably consistent across most of the population, it is your HRR that is important.

    I am 49 years old and have a Max HR of 190 and a resting HR of 40, making my HRR 150. My lactate threshold is at 82 – 83% of my  HRR. IThis works out as 83% x 150 + resting HR, which is 163 – 165 BPM. I can hold this for 2 – 2.5 hrs. My FTP appears at about 85 -87% HRR (=168 – 172) which when appropriately incentivised I can just hold for 1 hr. This is the ‘anaerobic threshold’. Max VO2 appears at approx 178 – 180 (92 – 93% HRR). I can hold this for about 6 minutes.

    For you to work out your zones see the excellent British Cycling articles and go from there. 

    “I hit 184 on a climb the other day” If you were out of the saddle and going for it this would probably be your Max VO2 but considering you climb regularly at 180, your Max VO2 is probably around 190 ish . If you can hold 182 for an hour in a race this is probably about your FTP / anaerobic threshold. If you have remained active over the intervening years then these numbers will be similar (my numbers are within a couple of beats of what they were when I was racing elite / cat1 30 years ago)

    Your best course of action is to warm up well, hit a climb, ride it hard for 5 mins and then do a 2 min all out legs turning to jelly effort for you max HR. Then over the course of 3 mornings, before you get out of bed, take your pulse. The lowest of the 3 mornings number is your resting HR. Take it from there 🙂 

    December 29, 2016 at 2:21 pm #884055
    0
    Jimmy Ray Will

    As mentioned before… you
    As mentioned before… you need a few tests to really get to your true max hr.

    I used to run a test that had me riding hard up a hill, as hard as I could sustain for a solid 3 mins, then give it a max effort sprint to exhaustion. That was fairly reflective.

    As also mentioned, HR can vary quite a bit. When you are fresh, you’ll see higher numbers, you will also see higher numbers when you are dehydrated, at different times of day.

    Hence why one test may have very different results to another.

    But… you can quickly learn these variables. Monitor your hr against perception of effort and see how it compares when you’ve had a few days off, when you’ve done a hard day the day before etc. Also look at your hr response at different times of day… I always run about 10beats higher if I train before 8.00am…
    Once you know yourself, you can use hr as a very accurate training tool.

    December 29, 2016 at 1:16 pm #884053
    0
    davel

    The odd crazy spike could be
    The odd crazy spike could be a problem with your HRM – some chest straps have a short lifespan and are susceptible to contact corrosion and need regular washing etc.

    December 29, 2016 at 1:04 pm #884051
    0
    The _Kaner

    I was beginning to wonder

    I was beginning to wonder myself about my own HR.

    My level of fitness is ok-ish, decent stamina on the bike (I will be 50 next May), I cycle for leisure/fitness and don’t race (except against myself)  – mainly a lone rider…and don’t follow a structured training plan. I just go out and come back in when I feel like I’ve had enough.

    On rides of ~60km (<3hrs cycling time, averaging around 22-25kph on rolling terrain) I seem to average around 160bpm (ish). This can be said of 95% of my rides.

    Similar routes and terrain each time – no really hard climbs – and usually ride fasted, early to mid morning timeframe.

    On at least one occasion my Max HR was in the 230bpm range (had a few months off the bike). I thought I had a heart problem.

    My HR spikes, doesn’t really fall back down to what I’d consider a low resting rate during  easy- ish efforts.

    I can maintain a rested HR of around 60bpm most (inactive) days and I’ve no blood pressure issues (don’t mention the cholesterol though).

    But looking at the Strava/Garmin data, it is usually a very similar story as regards HR max and ave values.

    Doc says no issues – during general exam and blood work shows no issues.

    I guess I just have to get used to the fact that’s the way my body works.

    Maybe a sports analyst/coach would have a different explanation or take on the issue…

     

    December 29, 2016 at 12:35 pm #884049
    0
    davel

    SleepingJiva wrote:

    SleepingJiva wrote:

    The problem with heart rate is there are too many factors that can affect what your heart beats at. Have you had enough sleep? when was the last coffee? Slightly under the weather? Whats the humidity like?

    I gave up cycling but run a lot and there are mainly two camps in running, one side train to heart rates, ( I want to maintain over 85% MHR for twenty mins then under it for an hour). The other side train to pace, I want to run at my pace for a 1:45 half marathon (4:58m/Km) and the heart will just do it’s thing.

    I trained to HR for a long time but with limited results. My max HR is 198 and I found easy days when I wasnt suppose to exceed 68% a nightmare. I might aswell have been walking. I switched to pace training and made progress. Speed is speed. I always have the HR on just to work out RI or make sure I’m not going trachy but thats it. 

    So I guess you could start setting speed targets instead and see if this works better for you. I don’t really advocate one method more than the other, others train by heart rate and make a tonne of progress.

    You can go on a lot of forums and see people arguing about Maffetone method Vs PAce etc but at the end of the day everybody is different and different things will work.

    I agree largely for running, where pace is a valuable metric. But pace/speed is more affected by external variables in cycling (wind, tyre pressure, road surface, gradient) so power is the most consistent metric.

    If cycle training without a power meter, I’d rate HR as a much more consistent measurement (of effort) than speed.

    Back to the OP: you might need to adjust your zones for outdoor. It takes really intense (20sec HIIT interval intense) efforts to spike my HR close to max. I generally find I’m about 15-20 bpm down indoors – but then I train to power zones so HR is a secondary measure which, as SleepingJiva says, can be influenced by many factors.

    December 29, 2016 at 10:37 am #884047
    0
    SleepingJiva

    That being said; my dad

    That being said; my dad started running and I gave him a heart rate monitor and told him not to exceed 80%, at least until his fitnes is up. HR training is a good way to achiveve a base level of fitness witout getting into problems from doing to much to soon.

    December 29, 2016 at 10:11 am #884045
    0
    SleepingJiva

    The problem with heart rate

    The problem with heart rate is there are too many factors that can affect what your heart beats at. Have you had enough sleep? when was the last coffee? Slightly under the weather? Whats the humidity like?

    I gave up cycling but run a lot and there are mainly two camps in running, one side train to heart rates, ( I want to maintain over 85% MHR for twenty mins then under it for an hour). The other side train to pace, I want to run at my pace for a 1:45 half marathon (4:58m/Km) and the heart will just do it’s thing.

    I trained to HR for a long time but with limited results. My max HR is 198 and I found easy days when I wasnt suppose to exceed 68% a nightmare. I might aswell have been walking. I switched to pace training and made progress. Speed is speed. I always have the HR on just to work out RI or make sure I’m not going trachy but thats it. 

    So I guess you could start setting speed targets instead and see if this works better for you. I don’t really advocate one method more than the other, others train by heart rate and make a tonne of progress.

    You can go on a lot of forums and see people arguing about Maffetone method Vs PAce etc but at the end of the day everybody is different and different things will work.

    December 29, 2016 at 9:03 am #884043
    0
    shay cycles

    Stephen the test itself may

    Stephen the test itself may be perfectly good but no serious scientist or serious coach would set too much stall on a single test.

    The easiest thing is to repeat the test a number of times (with a suitable number of days between) and then you’ll have a set of results that give you a much more reliable indication.

    Good luck with the training.

    December 29, 2016 at 8:51 am #884041
    0
    CXR94Di2

    Best way simple way is to

    Best way simple way is to find a long steepish hill, and go hell for leather up it, that will record your max rate,  you need to be absolutely dying lungs and legs bursting.  

    You sound very fit, and maybe just blessed with good heart and lungs capabilities.  I ride with a guy in his 50s who has had heart stents fitted and is one of the fittest fellas I know, he destroys virtually everyone in races.

     

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 12 replies - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.