Please help me interpret my heart rate data
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I recently started biking and would like to train so that I can do distance events in reasonable time (charity type stuff... not racing), so I got a HRM and did some tests.
Max HR = 187
Anaerobic threshold test (on an exercise bike):
- After warming up I got up to a steady brisk pace. I held that pace for about 10 minutes, but could have done it for quite a while longer. HR was 166 (89% of max).
- Then I notched up a bit to HR = 170 (91%) and did that for 10 min w/out a problem.
- I was at HR = 174 (93%) for some time (not certain exactly how long), but I'm certain I could sustain that for 10 minutes without a problem. At this point I could still have a conversation, but would need to take breathes in between sentences.
- I could even handle maintaining HR = 177 (95%) for some time, but really pumping at this point and probably not comfortable having a conversation.
Questions:
- I figure my anaerobic threshold is 174 or 93% of max. What do you think?
- Now I know that pretty much all of my exercise routines over the past few years have been predominantly in Zone 4. I imagine that's good for some things and not good for other things, but not sure what. What did this type of training prepare me to do well? And what downside was there to being in Zone 4 so much vs spending more time in Zone 3?
- I've seen various guidance about how to test for threshold. How would you do it? Which source do you trust most for this?
Max HR = 187
Anaerobic threshold test (on an exercise bike):
- After warming up I got up to a steady brisk pace. I held that pace for about 10 minutes, but could have done it for quite a while longer. HR was 166 (89% of max).
- Then I notched up a bit to HR = 170 (91%) and did that for 10 min w/out a problem.
- I was at HR = 174 (93%) for some time (not certain exactly how long), but I'm certain I could sustain that for 10 minutes without a problem. At this point I could still have a conversation, but would need to take breathes in between sentences.
- I could even handle maintaining HR = 177 (95%) for some time, but really pumping at this point and probably not comfortable having a conversation.
Questions:
- I figure my anaerobic threshold is 174 or 93% of max. What do you think?
- Now I know that pretty much all of my exercise routines over the past few years have been predominantly in Zone 4. I imagine that's good for some things and not good for other things, but not sure what. What did this type of training prepare me to do well? And what downside was there to being in Zone 4 so much vs spending more time in Zone 3?
- I've seen various guidance about how to test for threshold. How would you do it? Which source do you trust most for this?
Last edited by Shut up & ride; 09-06-05 at 06:58 AM.
#2
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,294
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1441 Post(s)
Liked 710 Times
in
364 Posts
you might buy Chris Charmichael's book. It will give you a method to calculate your HR zones for different types of intervals.
#3
Lanterne Rouge
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,993
Bikes: Time VX Edge
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shut up & ride
- I was at HR = 174 (93%) for some time (not certain exactly how long), but I'm certain I could sustain that for 10 minutes without a problem. At this point I could still have a conversation, but would need to take breathes in between sentences.
- I could even handle maintaining HR = 177 (95%) for some time, but really pumping at this point and probably not comfortable having a conversation.
- I figure my anaerobic threshold is 174 or 93% of max. What do you think?
- I've seen various guidance about how to test for threshold. How would you do it? Which source do you trust most for this?
- I could even handle maintaining HR = 177 (95%) for some time, but really pumping at this point and probably not comfortable having a conversation.
- I figure my anaerobic threshold is 174 or 93% of max. What do you think?
- I've seen various guidance about how to test for threshold. How would you do it? Which source do you trust most for this?
2 X 20 Thread
Doing too much anerobic training wipes your aerobic system clean. Try running an aerobic gear now and sustaining it for a couple hours. It'll be tougher - that I can assure you. Zone 4 Training [I'm assuming the entire time that Zone 4 = Redline] is good for short bursts of immense power. But short is the word.
Your description sounds eerily close to what I've been doing for a while. Since then, I've stopped almost any anerobic intervals and gone completely to aerobic training. I want solid wattage for hours versus insane wattage for minutes.
Good Luck!
-Peter
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 7,481
Bikes: Too many to list!
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by NoRacer
How did you determine your Max Heart Rate?
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ben Cousins
The sensation of my legs filling up with lactic acid is quite a familiar one.
Originally Posted by NoRacer
How did you determine your Max Heart Rate? I hope you didn't use 220 minus age.
Originally Posted by simplyred
10 minutes = not good enough to determine anerobic threshold. You need to be able to do the 2 X 20 minute run to determine your threshold.
2 X 20 Thread
2 X 20 Thread
To your other point, I was using "Zone 4" on the 1-5 scale. I know there are various scales, but I was not redlining / anaerobic. I only got to heart rates that I knew I could sustain for a while. It's possible that I could not sustain the 177 (95%) for 40 minutes, so perhaps the time I was in there was technically anaerobic. But that was for purposes of this "test", a bit higher than my regular workout effort.
I'll be getting Joe Friel's book in a couple days. After taking a look at it, maybe I'll get Charmichael's or Sally Edwards' book too.
#7
Isaias
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Essex, MD
Posts: 5,182
Bikes: Ridley X-Fire (carbon, white)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
IMHO, as a runner and a cyclist with over 6 years of heart rate monitor experience:
#8
Senior Member
A very nice review of variability of HR (which has probably been referenced before) is at: https://home.hia.no/~stephens/hrchngs.htm
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I believe the last two posts regarding variability. But I'm not sure what the implications are. Does this suggest:
- If you're not analy precise about your measurements and exercise targets for specific activities and conditions, then you're wasting time or even being counterproductive?
- Don't worry about the number.... go by feel?
- Take tons of data and try to arrive at a specific LT for the activity, conditions, etc?
- Work out under the same conditions as much as possible? (It seems like that wouldn't train you well for the real world. If nothing else, the course and weather will vary.)
Given that I don't have tons of data, from what I've told you so far, would you agree that I should consider my LT to be 174 until I get data that says otherwise?
And back to my other initial question, assuming I've been exercising at or just under my LT for years, what have I missed out on (if anything) by not working at a lower intensity? What will I improve by starting to do more workouts in Zone 3 (regular aerobic range)?
Just got the Friel book in the mail. Guess it's time to start reading.
- If you're not analy precise about your measurements and exercise targets for specific activities and conditions, then you're wasting time or even being counterproductive?
- Don't worry about the number.... go by feel?
- Take tons of data and try to arrive at a specific LT for the activity, conditions, etc?
- Work out under the same conditions as much as possible? (It seems like that wouldn't train you well for the real world. If nothing else, the course and weather will vary.)
Given that I don't have tons of data, from what I've told you so far, would you agree that I should consider my LT to be 174 until I get data that says otherwise?
And back to my other initial question, assuming I've been exercising at or just under my LT for years, what have I missed out on (if anything) by not working at a lower intensity? What will I improve by starting to do more workouts in Zone 3 (regular aerobic range)?
Just got the Friel book in the mail. Guess it's time to start reading.
#10
Isaias
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Essex, MD
Posts: 5,182
Bikes: Ridley X-Fire (carbon, white)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shut up & ride
I believe the last two posts regarding variability. But I'm not sure what the implications are. Does this suggest:
- If you're not analy precise about your measurements and exercise targets for specific activities and conditions, then you're wasting time or even being counterproductive?
- Don't worry about the number.... go by feel?
- Take tons of data and try to arrive at a specific LT for the activity, conditions, etc?
- Work out under the same conditions as much as possible? (It seems like that wouldn't train you well for the real world. If nothing else, the course and weather will vary.)
Given that I don't have tons of data, from what I've told you so far, would you agree that I should consider my LT to be 174 until I get data that says otherwise?
And back to my other initial question, assuming I've been exercising at or just under my LT for years, what have I missed out on (if anything) by not working at a lower intensity? What will I improve by starting to do more workouts in Zone 3 (regular aerobic range)?
Just got the Friel book in the mail. Guess it's time to start reading.
- If you're not analy precise about your measurements and exercise targets for specific activities and conditions, then you're wasting time or even being counterproductive?
- Don't worry about the number.... go by feel?
- Take tons of data and try to arrive at a specific LT for the activity, conditions, etc?
- Work out under the same conditions as much as possible? (It seems like that wouldn't train you well for the real world. If nothing else, the course and weather will vary.)
Given that I don't have tons of data, from what I've told you so far, would you agree that I should consider my LT to be 174 until I get data that says otherwise?
And back to my other initial question, assuming I've been exercising at or just under my LT for years, what have I missed out on (if anything) by not working at a lower intensity? What will I improve by starting to do more workouts in Zone 3 (regular aerobic range)?
Just got the Friel book in the mail. Guess it's time to start reading.
My vote is to go by feel--listening to your body--avoiding getting wrapped around the axle, so to speak, with numbers and zones.
For me:
An aerobic ride is anywhere where I can have a conversation with full sentences. My perceived effort level is 'easy'.
Crossing LT brings on tightness in my quads, approaching or just exceeding ventilatory threshold, and if I keep it up, tightness becomes evident in other muscles in my body. My perceived effort level is 'comfortably hard'.
Anaerobic--I'm breathing very hard (I'm way above the ventilatory threshold) and I wouldn't be able to hold this intensity for longer than 6-10 minutes.
If you are training to race, you'll want to keep track of how much time you spend at each level of intensity, otherwise, IMHO, just stay aerobic for the best health benefits and the biggest 'bang for the buck' when it comes to developing the aerobic portion of your cardiovascular system.