bexiesbruv

There are a few dead links on the site but the cycling software package is still downloadable.

FrenchFit 

You're describing me, except for the resting heat rate...mine seems locked in around 58. However, when I quit smoking at 61 I took up running seriously, meaning 4-5 times a week with one LSD run no less than a 10K, usually longer. My peak heart rate dropped dramatically over time, from around 220 down to around 175. My training now includes hill running and intervals. My efficient HR zone seems to be in the 135-150 zone, as compared to 175+ a few years ago. So, my comment is it appears you can train into your zones and max, and that means the charts/calculations are pretty much meaningless.

bexiesbruv

I think you are describing something called "training effect"
With running and cycling, constant re-evaluation of performance is key. A baseline is required (to a certain extent) to establish a training pattern that allows for increased speed/endurance/strength (if indeed thats what you want). You dont have to (I don't, I just run/ride for fun, not performance), but it makes it easier to create a plan.
If your current peak HR is 175, I would suggest its likely a little higher unless you have gone so hard that you absolutely could not go any more without puking or passing out (or both) I am 55 and my max hr is only in the high 160's (or was) and my understanding is that this is fixed in the sense that it cannot be increased, and it will only decrease with time, as we age. No amount of training increases max hr. On the other hand, training does affect resting heart rate (and all the "zones" in between it and Max HR) and it can be lowered.
So if a person continues to use the same plan/regime in training without modification, they likely will reach a plateau where RHR and the zones between it and the MaxHR are no longer changing.
Dr. Phil Maffetone has a great article on (re)training the aerobic capacity of an athlete. I followed his plan a few years ago and had to start by walking, and progressed to a slow jog, all the while keeping my HR at or around, but not over 115. Over time (about 3 months) I was up to a reasonable run pace for the same HR. Right now, my HR is 135 for 9:40 minute miles. Thats the training effect, and how it applied to me.

FrenchFit 

I'd agree, with one exception. I'd bet that if I went to a more sedentary lifestyle my max HR would actually increase; although I guess you could say that the "training effect" can wear off. I don't think I would be unhealthy with a max HR of over 200, but I know I would not be able to put out the continuous effort I do now. But so what? I'm not convinced heart training translates into greater life expectancy or overall health; past a certain point in aerobic competence I think it's somewhat irrelevant and perhaps counter-productive when taken to extremes. Although I like my training regime ...it is sort of stupid pet trick,,,not something I would recommend to others. I guess I lack the "athlete" mindset.

FarHorizon

Heart rate? Anywhere from 75 to 100 (depending on how much coffee I've had). Caffeine seems to particularly stimulate my HR. I can get down to 65 at rest (laying in bed reading a book), but normally 75-80 is "normal."

bexiesbruv

I dont think your max (or anyones) can increase but the training effect (or lack of) does alter. I am pretty sure thats aerobic and anerobic capacity and yes, it has nothing at all to do with health, this is fitness. I have a friend, he is an Ultraman finisher, has done a 480km ride for charity but is really unhealthy. On the other hand, I am reasonably fit (I can run 10k) but quite healthy, and always have been with the exception of high blood pressure. The other thing to consider as well. When/if you test yourself and go flat out hard till you cannot do anymore and your max hr is say, 170, but you have not trained much, then you train and do it again and now its 175 I think it just means you have conditioned yourself to go harder, for longer and that previously you just never actually reached your max albeit you thought you did. Also, I have read and its the same for me, its harder to get to MHR on a bike than running or walking on a treadmill with an increase in speed and incline. I had a heart stress test under Doctor supervision and was amazed how hard that was just starting at a walk and increasing the speed and incline every two minutes until you just cannot go anymore.

bexiesbruv

My current resting hr is 60, taken this morning along with my blood pressure which sits at 115/75 with meds. My HR reduces if I take a lower dose of medication but of course my pressure increases as well. at the moment its too low so time to adjust the dose again. Its a continual thing.
Coffee is very bad for my blood pressure. It can go from normal (with meds) to hypertensive with a single cup of coffee.

professorbob

I'm really glad you posted this as I think about the same thing quite often when I ride. My theoretical max HR is 165. I know that I've had it up to 180, from taking my pulse at the top of a long steep hill. I did have one scare when I over did it. I was grunting up a 12 mile climb and at a certain point, I said to myself ENOUGH! I stopped, sat down on a stone wall and blacked out. It took all of my strength and concentration to no fall over. I spoke to my Dr. about it and he didn't have anything to say other than my blood pressure dropped too low when I stopped. My body needed more blood supply and that's why everything went dark. So I haven't gone up that hill again. Having said all that, I'm a clyde (6' 250lbs) who smoked a pack a day from 1982-1994. I started biking (after a 10 year hiatus) in 1992. One of the real issues is that when I quit smoking I gained about 40 lbs that I can't seem to shake. I drop about 15-20 during riding season, then gain it all back after Thanksgiving. I think that was the worst part of smoking. Stats are resting HR about 65-70, BP 110/70. The answer I can't seem to get is how high can I run my HR up safely?

professorbob

And to any of you out there who has been able to quit smoking, my hat's off to you. I now how difficult it can be!

chasm54

The answer to your final question is that if you do not have any underlying heart or coronary artery disease (and only your cardiologist can help you with that) you can safely go as hard as you can go. Your maximum HR is what it is - it's the fastest rate at which your particular heart will beat. You aren't going to drop dead if you reach it, and you can't, by definition, go beyond it. Nor can you sustain it for very long. You're anaerobic well before your HR is maxed out, so you are going to see that maximum rate only fleetingly and at moments of extreme effort. And max HRs vary widely between individuals. Aged 60, I saw 178 on Wednesday during an interval session. I was feeling that oh-so-familiar "I want to puke" sensation, but suspect I'd have squeezed out a couple more bpm had I been being pursued by an angry husband. A couple of years ago I saw 182, and that's consistent with the idea that max HR declines slowly with age.

the good news is, it's pretty much irrelevant for training purposes. If you want to use HR to train, the much more important number is lactate threshold HR (LTHR). That is essentially (gross oversimplification coming here) the rate you can sustain without going anaerobic. You can figure it out by going as hard as you can sustain for 30 minutes, switching on the HRM after 10 and taking the average HR for the last 20. That figure will be a decent approximation of LTHR. Then you can use that to figure out HR training zones like this.

Stick in zones 2 and 3 most of the time to build aerobic fitness. Keep zone 4 for hills, and z5 for sprints, or for interval training if you want to get systematic. But don't worry that working your heart hard for short periods will damage it, that isn't how it works for healthy hearts.

qcpmsame 

Professorbob,

Chas has things very well summed up in his reply, one thing I'll put in here is that if you are interested in training, and using the heart rate zones for this, Joe Friel's book, "The Cyclist Training Bible", is an excellent source for information on training the 50+ cyclist and on using the heart rate zones. Here is a link for it at Amazon:https://www.amazon.com/Cyclists-Train...training+bible. I highly recommend his book(s) in training and specifically for the senior cyclist. check some of the others out if you are needing this type of reference source.

Best wishes on your training, the 50+ Forum is hands down, the best place for support and information on cycling, for me, hopefully it will do the same for you.

Bill

FrenchFit 

I'll echo Chasm54's post, doing sprints on an incline treadmill will get you very close to your max..and you'll know when you are there. If you are not a gym member, find a very difficult hill to spin up and when you reach the puke stage you're there. As your doctor said, going from that zone to sitting down is a bad idea...you have to keep moving. Hands on knees leaning over for more than a few seconds is a bad idea too.

Testing your max from time to time is fine idea assuming you don't have cardio issues. Just get up there smoothly, get down smoothly. Do not go sedentary afterwards. If you do any mountain biking you will likely hit your max from time to time, may as well get a feel for where that limit is.

spdracr39

I started off using the formulas to calculate MHR but they were all way low. I then began adjusting up using the max heart rate I had achieved on a ride. I began at 175 in April last year and just recently made an adjustment to 189. I am 49 YO 6'0" and 210 lbs. I usually to a hill training ride once per week and that is when I always seem to hit my MHR, go figure. My resting heart rate last time I checked was around 55. I believe I have actually hit my max one time on a ride and I thought I was going to implode but didn't have my HRM on that time. I have never felt that bad again so I know 189 is lower than the actual.

BikeArkansas

65 years old. 48 resting heart rate. I thought the max rate was 166. However, a couple years ago I rode through Death Valley. My Garmin was reading 178 heart rate for over 3 hours and I could not get it down. Temp was 113 F. Things change as conditions change.

professorbob

Good answers everyone. I know that my max is higher than my theoretical max because I go above it fairly often-mostly on climbs. I don't have any heart disease, so I'm going to "choose" not to worry about it much.

tigat

I'm a bit baffled by all of this.

For Christmas and curiosity, my wife and daughter set me up for a pretty complete cycling analysis, including measuring VO2 max, lactate threshold and the like. I'm 6' and 165 lbs. Only biking for 4 years but have been active and fit for a lifetime. My resting pulse has been steady in the low 50s for 35 years. It was mid to low 40s in college when I ran 75 miles/wk.

Other than for the test, I've never ridden with a heart monitor.

Somewhat to my surprise, I flipped to anaerobic at what I considered to be a fairly low 155 bpm, although it took a long time to get there. Went on for about 6 minutes after that, with increasing load, but never went over 165 bpm. I didn't get quite to the puke stage, but as close as I wanted to get. The funny thing was, my VO2 max was extremely high for a 58 year old.

I'm not complaining at all, but wondering, after seeing the postings above, if I might be leaving more on the table in terms of pain tolerance than I thought.

bexiesbruv

My (limited) understanding of all this is that you can train and increase all except max heart rate. You can decrease resting heart rate. I doubt you left too much on the table, they would have pushed you pretty hard to get to max hr, I would think. Your being active and fit for as long as you have also indicates why you have the numbers you do. My wife and I are both 55, she ran her first marathon in 1982 and has been active all this time (even when we had our three kids), I have not. She has never had the tests done but her resting HR is in the mid to low 40's (mine is currently at 58 and dropping again due to meds reduction) Her max HR is 172. Mine (pretty sure) is the same as yours.
What makes athletes what they are (My wife included) is their ability to tolerate the pain of extended periods of high (not max) HR in competition. My wife is a monster at it. So you, with a high V02 max number would likely be in that "club". Now that you have the numbers, you should be able to find a program that gives you a training regime that allows for more efficient use of your training to make you stronger and faster, without too many wasted efforts.

zonatandem

At age 82 sitting here at the 'puter, my heart rate 49.
Weight 135 lbs, just under 5'7".
Was extensively tested 22 years ago (age 60) at the local university (paid $15 an hour!) and max heart rate on treadmill was 185; resting heart rate (15 minutes later) was 38 BPM. Funny comment from the clinician when they measured for my low heart rate " . . . are you asleep?' My reply; 'No, but you told me to relax!'
Still bicycle 100 miles a week.
Numbers are interesting, but don't always tell the whole story!

bexiesbruv

You are, were, or should have been a Pro athlete! The Gentleman that built my bike frame was the same, and he competed in the Commonwealth games in the late 1950's.

GravelMN

I guestimated my MHR by hitting the elliptical trainer with continuous heart rate monitoring. After a 10 minute warm up at 160 bpm I start Tabata-ish intervals of pushing as hard as I can for two minutes then resting for one, repeat. By the third interval I can usually push my HR to 180+. At about 186 bpm things start getting pretty fuzzy after 30 seconds. I've tried several variations and have been unable to push my HR over 188, so I figure my functional MHR to be about 180.

Mark Stone

I've done nearly identical testing on myself on a trainer, and my max is 153. It's always been lower than others people's and lower than what the charts say it should be at my age (62 next month). My RHR is high 30s.

nkfrench 

While I don't fit into the formulaic 220-age, *somebody* will be average and it will work for them.

I had a max stress test about 19 years ago on a treadmill. Results seem accurate despite the years transpired since. I was in good shape from competitive swimming at that time.
I base my training on an experienced highest heartrate + an extra beat from climbing up my nemesis hill, in warm weather, rested, fueled, warmed up and caffeinated. It is just a couple of beats lower than the stress test results.
In cool weather I generally don't get within 10 beats of HR max.
In hot weather I tend to get dehydrated and can't get my HR down under 150 at rest. Other rides it drops substantially in a minute after ceasing pedalling.

StanSeven

Sorry I didn't see this earlier. I think your Garmin just had a bad reading. If your previous idea of max is 166 and assuming that was fairly accurate, there's no way you could sustain 178 for three hours. Anywhere close to max is impossible to keep for more than a few seconds; vision is blurry; you sometimes see white or spots; and breathing is difficult.

Being dehydrated can keep it up there without that much effort, but I really doubt it can stay that high on its own for that long.

wnl256

Those formulas are used by doctors to calculate a target heart rate for stress tests. They won't tell you what your specific maximum heart rate is.

Your MHR is whatever you can get your heart to do. By formula mine should be about 165. But I am routinely in the 170s when I ride and have no issues. When my doctor did a stress test on me last year I got up to 165 easily. He said we were done and I said "that's it?" I felt like I had just started warming up.

If your doctor tells you specifically that you need to keep your rate below a certain number (say, after heart surgery or due to a heart condition) then that's a different matter entirely. But aside from that I don't think you need to go to any special effort to maintain a low rate. Just pedal until you start running out of aerobic capacity, then back off a bit.

khutch

Yeah, I think the standard max heart rate formulas were written by the defendent's lawyers for inclusion in their exercise product manuals so they could not be sued! I am very close to 63 now and for the past several years I have worn a heart rate monitor while cycling. I am just cruising at 150-160 bpm so clearly 220 minus my age is not my max heart rate. When I first got the heart rate monitor it either had or I found information on simple max heart rate tests you can do. Here is a link to some tests that I have used. The step test is a very simple test to do that probably won't over-stress anyone who is fit enough to ride a bike and worry about heart rates but as always consult your doctor before taking any advice you found on the internet!! If it has flaws it is that it is based on average results and you have to honestly characterize your present exercise level. But I used it. And then I used a variation of the 5k test. I just warmed up on a bike trainer for 15 or 20 minutes at my normal 155 bpm, give or take, and then I went flat out, hard as I could, for as long as I could (probably 90 seconds!) while letting the monitor record my heart rates. Both tests gave me within a beat or two of 189 and that is the value I have used ever since. When I put that number in my heart rate monitor (Polar CS600) and use its software the heart rate ranges it gives me for easy, hard, very difficult, you are about to die, etc are fairly accurate and I think that is all you need from your max heart rate.