Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Lower range HR

  1. #1
    Ca-na-da? krazyderek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Dartmouth, NS, Canada
    My Bikes
    raleigh grand prix
    Posts
    2,024
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lower range HR

    I come from a high intensity sport backround of 15minute runs, and 5 minute sprint canoe racing. There was the ocasional 45 minute endurance steady workout or run,but for the most part we focused on ball busting intervals year round.

    Cycling for 5 years now, racing the past 2 and i'm really getting into specific trainning this year. According to all the charts in every book, my HR should be 130, when i'm putting out 160watts (lower LV2 rides) but it's more like 140.

    I find alot of this, where my HR is higher then it should be for the level of work, but i feel fine. My HR starts to line up with the statistics when i start getting into threshold and over work (LV4 +).

    I've been able to maintain higher then normal HR while climbing and on hard rides(180 for 10-20 minutes, theshold is 170, and max HR is 196), but this has started to fade of the past year a bit.

    Would i be correct in saying that my body preffers carbohydrates over fat as a fuel, hence the higher HR at lower intensities, cause it's burning more carbs then it should be due to my past athletic experiences?

    I've been trainning alot in the lower Lv2, and Lv1 to try and build my aerobic capacity and teach my body to use fat as a fuel a bit more, but of course it's a slow process and i just wanted to see if anyone else had encountered this problem, or had general feedback.

    Derek.
    Cannondale '06 Synapse, Michelin Krylion Carbon's
    Cannondale '05 R1000 , Vittoria Rubino Pro Slick
    CycleOps PowerTap Pro
    Home made Free Motion Rollers

  2. #2
    just another gosling Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Everett, WA
    My Bikes
    CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
    Posts
    7,578
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I find my HR at moderate outputs will vary a good bit with training volume. If my volume, including amount of intensity, has been high recently, my HR will be reduced at moderate outputs. If I'm well rested, my HR will run noticeably higher. So take the charts with a grain of salt.

    I don't think fuel determines HR. It's the other way around.

    Latest thinking is that training in the lower levels doesn't build much aerobic capacity. Anaerobic training builds aerobic capacity faster than LSD. Much faster. It will drop your HR more than LSD, too. That's because "anaerobic" training mostly isn't. Sounds like you have a talent for intensity. I'd try to continue to develop that. Being able to attack hard is a wonderful skill. Use the LSD for recovery. My .02.

  3. #3
    ROAD enthusiast revolator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bat Cave
    Posts
    722
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've noticed my HR doesn't get as high when my meals are close to the ride. Is that in my mind?

  4. #4
    Ca-na-da? krazyderek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Dartmouth, NS, Canada
    My Bikes
    raleigh grand prix
    Posts
    2,024
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    I find my HR at moderate outputs will vary a good bit with training volume. If my volume, including amount of intensity, has been high recently, my HR will be reduced at moderate outputs. If I'm well rested, my HR will run noticeably higher. So take the charts with a grain of salt.

    I don't think fuel determines HR. It's the other way around.

    Latest thinking is that training in the lower levels doesn't build much aerobic capacity. Anaerobic training builds aerobic capacity faster than LSD. Much faster. It will drop your HR more than LSD, too. That's because "anaerobic" training mostly isn't. Sounds like you have a talent for intensity. I'd try to continue to develop that. Being able to attack hard is a wonderful skill. Use the LSD for recovery. My .02.
    Do you have any articles or books you're getting this from? I'd love to read up on it aswell. So far i've been holding "base building for cyclists" as my bible, it shows with case studies how trainning at very low intensities for early and mid base in a consistent manor lower's HR, and lactose per watts of power produced, thus allowing for one to peak higher later in the season once you enter into the build/race pep time of trainning.

    I definitly agree that increasing my threshold require's threshold work, but the basebuliding side of things also seems just as important, at least from what i've read.
    Cannondale '06 Synapse, Michelin Krylion Carbon's
    Cannondale '05 R1000 , Vittoria Rubino Pro Slick
    CycleOps PowerTap Pro
    Home made Free Motion Rollers

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,941
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by krazyderek View Post
    I come from a high intensity sport backround of 15minute runs, and 5 minute sprint canoe racing. There was the ocasional 45 minute endurance steady workout or run,but for the most part we focused on ball busting intervals year round.

    Cycling for 5 years now, racing the past 2 and i'm really getting into specific trainning this year. According to all the charts in every book, my HR should be 130, when i'm putting out 160watts (lower LV2 rides) but it's more like 140.

    I find alot of this, where my HR is higher then it should be for the level of work, but i feel fine. My HR starts to line up with the statistics when i start getting into threshold and over work (LV4 +).

    I've been able to maintain higher then normal HR while climbing and on hard rides(180 for 10-20 minutes, theshold is 170, and max HR is 196), but this has started to fade of the past year a bit.

    Would i be correct in saying that my body preffers carbohydrates over fat as a fuel, hence the higher HR at lower intensities, cause it's burning more carbs then it should be due to my past athletic experiences?

    I've been trainning alot in the lower Lv2, and Lv1 to try and build my aerobic capacity and teach my body to use fat as a fuel a bit more, but of course it's a slow process and i just wanted to see if anyone else had encountered this problem, or had general feedback.

    Derek.
    You don't say where you're getting your HR values from. If they aren't based on testing, they aren't likely to be of much use. Given different sizes of hearts, there is no way to say that you should have a given heart rate at a given wattage.

    My advice is to do a field test (friel's is in a sticky post here, and the carmichael on is someplace), and then use that to set ranges.

    If you've done a lot of high intensity training and not a lot of base aerobic training, it would not be surprising if your body was not as good at using fat at mid-range intensities. I don't think that would have a high correlation with heartrate.
    Eric

    2005 Trek 5.2 Madone, Red with Yellow Flames (Beauty)
    199x Lemond Tourmalet, Yellow with fenders (Beast)

    Read my cycling blog at http://riderx.info/blogs/riderx
    Like climbing? Goto http://www.bicycleclimbs.com

  6. #6
    Ca-na-da? krazyderek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Dartmouth, NS, Canada
    My Bikes
    raleigh grand prix
    Posts
    2,024
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ericgu View Post
    You don't say where you're getting your HR values from. If they aren't based on testing, they aren't likely to be of much use. Given different sizes of hearts, there is no way to say that you should have a given heart rate at a given wattage.

    My advice is to do a field test (friel's is in a sticky post here, and the carmichael on is someplace), and then use that to set ranges.

    If you've done a lot of high intensity training and not a lot of base aerobic training, it would not be surprising if your body was not as good at using fat at mid-range intensities. I don't think that would have a high correlation with heartrate.
    I have done testing for about 2 years using 2x20min, max 30min all out, graduated MAP test, and last year showed up late for a century and rode the whole thing solo as steady and hard as i could and my power drifted from 300-240w over the course of 4.5 hours for the 160km ride. Smaller time's like 1, 5, and 10 minute critical powers i just draw from races and fast group rides.

    The problem is that all these testing's rely on high intensity, the apply a % scale to establish my zones or levels. And all of them say my lv2 should be 160-200w with my HR 130-145, when in fact my HR is always 140-155 for that power range.

    Thus i draw my conclusion that my body is simply more used to running on all cylinders so to speak, and is lousy at the lower end aerobic fitness cause i don't have a great deal of it.

    My last thought was to try and meet with a sports medicin doctor and have my blood lactose levels measured for different levels and see what that show's.... if my body is pumping out the lactose as soon as i enter lv2 (which i beleive is a physical signal that your body tending to burn more carb's than fat), or if it's fairly typical for a intermediate Cat3.
    Cannondale '06 Synapse, Michelin Krylion Carbon's
    Cannondale '05 R1000 , Vittoria Rubino Pro Slick
    CycleOps PowerTap Pro
    Home made Free Motion Rollers

  7. #7
    just another gosling Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Everett, WA
    My Bikes
    CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
    Posts
    7,578
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by krazyderek View Post
    My last thought was to try and meet with a sports medicin doctor and have my blood lactose levels measured for different levels and see what that show's.... if my body is pumping out the lactose as soon as i enter lv2 (which i beleive is a physical signal that your body tending to burn more carb's than fat), or if it's fairly typical for a intermediate Cat3.
    I think you mean lactate, not lactose (milk sugar). Lactate is a fuel, so it's a good thing. Ever notice how you can't really go hard until you bang your legs good a few times? That's why. Different people produce differing amounts of it and vary in their ability to use it for fuel. And that's trainable to a large extent.

    As your HR increases, you actually burn more fat, not less. It's just that you add a lot of carbos to the fuel mix, so the percentage of fat burned drops. Carbs don't outpace fat for fuel until you get into zone 4.
    http://www.heartzones.com/_pdf/FatBu...posted8305.pdf

    For more information on intensity vs. LSD in building aerobic capacity, just google combinations of terms like: high intensity, intervals, cardio, LSD, training, cycling, etc. There are many recent studies. For example, I googled this up in about 15 seconds:
    http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showthread.php?t=512929

    You do hard intervals twice a week and your HR will drop. Mine sure does. The harder thing for me is to recognize too much of a good thing, and rest appropriately.

    If it's about training, and you read it in a book, it's outdated. That's how fast training theory is changing, now that we have the instrumentation to accurately measure improvement, and scientists who are interested in the subject. Probably money is driving the whole thing, but whatever. We all benefit.

  8. #8
    Ca-na-da? krazyderek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Dartmouth, NS, Canada
    My Bikes
    raleigh grand prix
    Posts
    2,024
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quite right, lactate, i always get those two words mixed up.

    I'm not trying to sound stubborn, but i do see flaws in some of these studies. And non of them seem to be looking at the big picture of long term periodical trainning. Other's openly admit their flaws but i guess some just aren't seeing them.

    There's no argument that you burn more total fat in Zone 4. My trainning goals aren't solely to lose weight though.
    Cannondale '06 Synapse, Michelin Krylion Carbon's
    Cannondale '05 R1000 , Vittoria Rubino Pro Slick
    CycleOps PowerTap Pro
    Home made Free Motion Rollers

  9. #9
    bzzzz fuzzthebee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    360
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by krazyderek View Post
    I have done testing for about 2 years using 2x20min, max 30min all out, graduated MAP test, and last year showed up late for a century and rode the whole thing solo as steady and hard as i could and my power drifted from 300-240w over the course of 4.5 hours for the 160km ride. Smaller time's like 1, 5, and 10 minute critical powers i just draw from races and fast group rides.

    The problem is that all these testing's rely on high intensity, the apply a % scale to establish my zones or levels. And all of them say my lv2 should be 160-200w with my HR 130-145, when in fact my HR is always 140-155 for that power range.

    Thus i draw my conclusion that my body is simply more used to running on all cylinders so to speak, and is lousy at the lower end aerobic fitness cause i don't have a great deal of it.

    My last thought was to try and meet with a sports medicin doctor and have my blood lactose levels measured for different levels and see what that show's.... if my body is pumping out the lactose as soon as i enter lv2 (which i beleive is a physical signal that your body tending to burn more carb's than fat), or if it's fairly typical for a intermediate Cat3.
    You have demonstrated one of the pitfalls of training by heart rate. There are way too many variables that can affect heart rate, such as fatigue, caffeine, cadence, stress, etc. You have a power meter; use that to monitor your efforts. I think the heart rate guidelines were included with the power levels only as an after thought.

    Also, for a 160 km solo ride, you might try holding a power output in the mid to high end of L2 if you want to ride at a steady pace. This way, your RPE will gradually increase while your power remains steady during the ride, as opposed to RPE remaining constant with your power gradually decreasing.

    When I got my PT, I didn't even use the HR strap for the first 18 months.

  10. #10
    just another gosling Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Everett, WA
    My Bikes
    CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
    Posts
    7,578
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by krazyderek View Post
    <<>> I'm not trying to sound stubborn, but i do see flaws in some of these studies. <<>>
    The biggest "flaw" is that all these studies of high intensity training assume that one's training time is limited. If one has unlimited time, then one will do much, much more low intensity training for the simple reason that one's body can only handle so much hard training. Distance = strength. I ride with a fellow who rode 32,000 miles last year. There's no way I can stay with him on the climbs. Of course he's 20 or so years younger than I, but still. He's going to dial it way back this year and only ride about 27,000.

  11. #11
    Ca-na-da? krazyderek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Dartmouth, NS, Canada
    My Bikes
    raleigh grand prix
    Posts
    2,024
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by fuzzthebee View Post
    You have demonstrated one of the pitfalls of training by heart rate. There are way too many variables that can affect heart rate, such as fatigue, caffeine, cadence, stress, etc. You have a power meter; use that to monitor your efforts. I think the heart rate guidelines were included with the power levels only as an after thought.

    Also, for a 160 km solo ride, you might try holding a power output in the mid to high end of L2 if you want to ride at a steady pace. This way, your RPE will gradually increase while your power remains steady during the ride, as opposed to RPE remaining constant with your power gradually decreasing.

    When I got my PT, I didn't even use the HR strap for the first 18 months.
    This is entirely true, maybe i am worrying about HR a little to much. There are days when it's very low, there are days like today when i get up, and it's just really really high. But if it's consistently on avg. higher then it should be in all lower ranges then this might be saying something.

    Lol.... The century, i was actually trying to catch the main pack when i took off, i think i was putting out 310w for the first 30 minutes then i realized i had another 4 hours to go and i probably wasn't going to catch them if i didn't have them in sight by now. Typically my 3-4 hour rides are exactly that, Start out at a pace that seems a little to easy, but keep it consistent and finish strong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    The biggest "flaw" is that all these studies of high intensity training assume that one's training time is limited. If one has unlimited time, then one will do much, much more low intensity training for the simple reason that one's body can only handle so much hard training. Distance = strength. I ride with a fellow who rode 32,000 miles last year. There's no way I can stay with him on the climbs. Of course he's 20 or so years younger than I, but still. He's going to dial it way back this year and only ride about 27,000.
    A good point, I am in the same boat, i'll be struggling to put in 400hrs this year (~10,000km). And the reason Distance = Strength is partly due to adaptations, adaptations such as increased glycogen storage (carbs) but also higher efficiency in usage of fat as a fuel.
    Cannondale '06 Synapse, Michelin Krylion Carbon's
    Cannondale '05 R1000 , Vittoria Rubino Pro Slick
    CycleOps PowerTap Pro
    Home made Free Motion Rollers

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,905
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
    Distance = strength.
    It doesn't, but even if it did, strength is irrelevant for endurance cycling.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •