Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-14-08, 06:36 PM   #1
tntyz
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
tntyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nabob, WI
Bikes: '03 Trek 7500, '08 Madone 4.5
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Max HR Questions

I am a 51 year old, 180 lb. 5'11" male. Never a problem with BP, cholesterol low. My max HR is ~170 according to most formulas. I consider myself to be in reasonably good health and average about 7 hours of exercise per week.

My problem is that I frequently exceed my max HR. When climbing hard my HR will usually hit 187-189 and I'm just starting to breath heavy. A lot of times I'll be clicking along at what I feel is a good sustainable pace and I'll see that my HR is 172. My perceived effort seems way off from my actual HR.

I guess my first question is am I killing myself? I don't feel like I'm pressing that hard, but I do take care to keep my HR down, just in case. If I just let myself go, my HR will average 160+ over a two hour ride (based on actual recorded results).

Second, if this is "normal", what do I consider as my max HR for training zones? Should I be basing exercise zones on theoritical max HR or my actual recorded max HR?

Just for the record, I am scheduled to see my family doc for an annual checkup and will discuss with him. I'd let to hear from people who specialize more in training, though.

TIA,
Tony
tntyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-08, 06:43 PM   #2
CbadRider
Administrator
 
CbadRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the bridge with Picard
Bikes: Specialized Allez, Specialized Sirrus
Posts: 5,962
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
If you are using the "220 minus your age" formula, then there's your problem, it probably comes out too low. Ideally you should do a max heartrate test, but if not then one of the better calculators is the Karvonnen formula which is based on your age and resting heart rate.

The max test is really the best way to go though. A friend of mine found out that her max HR is actually 220. She wondered why she never felt tired at the 220 - age levels.
CbadRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-08, 06:58 PM   #3
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Bikes:
Posts: 46,637
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
The formulas are often incorrect. Go with your actual max HR.

According to the formulas, my max HR should be 179, but it is actually about 194.
Machka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 06:44 AM   #4
TurboTurtle
NeoRetroGrouch
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tntyz View Post
I am a 51 year old, 180 lb. 5'11" male. Never a problem with BP, cholesterol low. My max HR is ~170 according to most formulas. I consider myself to be in reasonably good health and average about 7 hours of exercise per week.

My problem is that I frequently exceed my max HR. When climbing hard my HR will usually hit 187-189 and I'm just starting to breath heavy. A lot of times I'll be clicking along at what I feel is a good sustainable pace and I'll see that my HR is 172. My perceived effort seems way off from my actual HR.

I guess my first question is am I killing myself? I don't feel like I'm pressing that hard, but I do take care to keep my HR down, just in case. If I just let myself go, my HR will average 160+ over a two hour ride (based on actual recorded results).

Second, if this is "normal", what do I consider as my max HR for training zones? Should I be basing exercise zones on theoritical max HR or my actual recorded max HR?

Just for the record, I am scheduled to see my family doc for an annual checkup and will discuss with him. I'd let to hear from people who specialize more in training, though.

TIA,
Tony
As others have said, the formulas do not predict MaxHR with enough accuracy for training.

When knowledgable authors set up Training Zone Systems, they do so by specifying a specific testing routine to establish the zones. Do not just pick some zones and use some HR criteria that you find elsewhere. Find one that is a complete package and do the tests. There is no easy way.

TF
TurboTurtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 07:47 AM   #5
wiggles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 64
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
The best investment you will ever make for training is a good heart rate monitor. They're not that expensive, and a good one will last you for years. Then there is no guesswork, and you know exactly where your heartrate is in comparison to your min/max. Formulas are ok, but there are always outside factors which can sway you outside the numbers which aren't accounted for. A HRM gets rid of that.
wiggles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 08:04 AM   #6
Jarery
Senior Member
 
Jarery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Coquitlam
Bikes:
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggles View Post
The best investment you will ever make for training is a good heart rate monitor. They're not that expensive, and a good one will last you for years. Then there is no guesswork, and you know exactly where your heartrate is in comparison to your min/max. Formulas are ok, but there are always outside factors which can sway you outside the numbers which aren't accounted for. A HRM gets rid of that.
Ummm.....dont you think he already has a heart rate monitor? Or do you really think hes using a formula to calculate what his heart rate is at a given point in a ride?
Jarery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 08:13 AM   #7
wiggles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 64
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Every HRM I've used calculates your max/min, so I don't know how he'd be using a formula?? I suppose I should say he should look in to a higher grade HRM, like a polar f11 (if he's not looking for a dedicated cycling model).
wiggles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 08:15 AM   #8
MrCrassic 
Senior Member
 
MrCrassic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Bikes: 2008 Giant OCR1 (with panda bear on the back!)
Posts: 3,650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's weird, because according to the formula, my HRmax should be about 219, but my HRM and training has shown that the highest I've gotten it is 182...
__________________
Ride more.

Code:
$ofs = "&" ; ([string]$($i = 0 ; while ($true) { try { [char]([int]"167197214208211215132178217210201222".substring($i,3) - 100) ; $i =
 $i+3 > catch { break >>)).replace('&','') ; $ofs=" " # Replace right angles with right curly braces
MrCrassic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 08:46 AM   #9
tntyz
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
tntyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nabob, WI
Bikes: '03 Trek 7500, '08 Madone 4.5
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggles View Post
The best investment you will ever make for training is a good heart rate monitor. They're not that expensive, and a good one will last you for years. Then there is no guesswork, and you know exactly where your heartrate is in comparison to your min/max. Formulas are ok, but there are always outside factors which can sway you outside the numbers which aren't accounted for. A HRM gets rid of that.

As Jarery notes, I have a Polar F4 which I use all the time. The main issue is whether I am doing myself harm by going over my calculated or theoritical HRM.
tntyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 09:25 AM   #10
starfishprime
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tntyz View Post
The main issue is whether I am doing myself harm by going over my calculated or theoritical HRM.
If you are exceeding your calculated HRM, the calculation is wrong. I say you should trust your body over your monitor, and if you feel fine at 190, your actual max is probably around 200.
starfishprime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 06:13 PM   #11
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Bikes:
Posts: 46,637
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Work with your actual max HR ... not a calculated or theoretical one.
Machka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-08, 09:55 PM   #12
ericgu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Bikes:
Posts: 1,941
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tntyz View Post
I am a 51 year old, 180 lb. 5'11" male. Never a problem with BP, cholesterol low. My max HR is ~170 according to most formulas. I consider myself to be in reasonably good health and average about 7 hours of exercise per week.

My problem is that I frequently exceed my max HR. When climbing hard my HR will usually hit 187-189 and I'm just starting to breath heavy. A lot of times I'll be clicking along at what I feel is a good sustainable pace and I'll see that my HR is 172. My perceived effort seems way off from my actual HR.

I guess my first question is am I killing myself? I don't feel like I'm pressing that hard, but I do take care to keep my HR down, just in case. If I just let myself go, my HR will average 160+ over a two hour ride (based on actual recorded results).

Second, if this is "normal", what do I consider as my max HR for training zones? Should I be basing exercise zones on theoritical max HR or my actual recorded max HR?

Just for the record, I am scheduled to see my family doc for an annual checkup and will discuss with him. I'd let to hear from people who specialize more in training, though.

TIA,
Tony
Max HR is a fairly useless number from a training perspective. If you use it to set zones, they will be too high if you are less trained and too low if you are well trained.

It's far better to use the field test in this forum. That will give you zones that are based on your current level of fitness, and you can adjust it by retaking the test as you get more trained.

The big downside of field tests is that they hurt. A lot.
__________________
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
ericgu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-08, 07:53 AM   #13
TurboTurtle
NeoRetroGrouch
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggles View Post
Every HRM I've used calculates your max/min, so I don't know how he'd be using a formula?? I suppose I should say he should look in to a higher grade HRM, like a polar f11 (if he's not looking for a dedicated cycling model).
"Every HRM I've used calculates your max/min, so I don't know how he'd be using a formula??"

How do think the HRM 'finds' the max - just makes it up? Though that would be just as good, it actually uses a formula that doesn't work. - TF
TurboTurtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:32 PM.