Road cycling with a heart rate monitor
 

I'm trying to get educated on how to use the heart rate monitor that I am planning to buy soon for road cycling. I am 63 and ride about 45 miles about three times a week with two friends. Based on a treadmill stress test, I think a very conservative guess at my maximum heart rate is about 150.

If zone 2 (aerobic endurance) is about 65-74% of max HR; zone 3 (aerobic threshold) is 75-84% of max HR; and zone 4 (lactate threshold) is 85-91% of max HR, in general terms, how much time should I be spending in each of these zones over the course of 45 miles? I'll start getting specifics soon, and I could be way off, but I'm guessing that I currently spend at least 20% of the ride in Zone 2 (easy talking), no more than 10% of the ride in Zone 4 (hills), and about 70% of the ride in Zone 3 (comfortably hard). So I'm guessing my heart rate is probably averaging 120ish (150 x 0.8) in Zone 3. If that guess is accurate, is that too much time (~70%) in Zone 3? I really enjoy pushing myself but don't want to overdo it without understanding what I'm doing. E.g., I have heard a lot about the downside to strenuous exercise for those in my age group. Thank you for any help you can offer.

Here are a couple tips, I hope any of them winds up being useful. 🙂

How much you should ride in each zone depends on goals, like getting faster (once a long distance or a sprint?), build up a base of fitness, or whatever else.

A good idea is to ride around as normal for a couple weeks collecting data, when you feel like you overdid it take note of the amount of time and ballpark average heart rate. That's only going to go so fast because of other factors like heat but it's a good start.

If you can find your lactate threshold heart rate, your zones will make more sense.

It depends on your goals. Are you thinking about competing, or are you just trying to stay up with your friends, or do you have a goal to ride across the country once you retire, or do you just want to know for your own curiosity?

Nonetheless, here's my advice for anyone who is trying out some new technology (whether heart rate monitor, or power meter, or even a speedometer if you haven't been using one): just ride as you normally do for a few weeks, but start keeping a little notebook about your ride. In your notebook, write down how far you went, how hot or cold it was, how windy, how well you ate or slept before the ride, and, critically, how you felt both during and after the ride. Lots of people use a rating scale of "perceived exertion" on a 1-10 or 1-20 scale.

Importantly, just record those things but don't change anything yet. That's both because you're trying to set a baseline for comparison, and also because you don't yet know enough about your baseline to go changing it.

Best of luck. Enjoy your riding.

For most people, their Max HR is different running than cycling.

I am not a fan of Max HR training anyhow, because it is not constant. Your given max on a given day will be affected by things like sleep, sickness, alcohol in the prior 48 hours, hydration, ambient air temp, humidity, etc., etc. LTHR% work better in my opinion because this changes slowly, down as you become more fit, up as you lose fitness. As for the zones, Andy Coggan’s LTHR zones seem to be the ones that most closely match, for me, PE.... That said I don’t train with HR, I use power meters, because unlike HR, power is instant, HR will lag behind the effort. I do track HR though because it can tell me things that power won’t in terms of my overall condition and ability to train.

It comes down to your goals for using an HRM and what your doc says.

I started using an HRM because I got into my 70s and started having an indescribable problem on some rides - total lack of energy and weird feeling in my chest sometimes, especially riding into headwinds during the 2nd half of some rides. My cardio couldn't find anything wrong with my heart.

By tracking my rides, essentially as suggested by RChung, I found that when I was feeling good I'd go out and get myself to a high HR (130s-140s) for 30-45 minutes. I'd rest at my turnaround point and have no energy left, so the ride home was exhausting. I quickly learned that keeping my HR below 130 on the way out left me plenty of energy for the ride home.

Later I saw some evidence of tachycardia, which resulted in a few bouts of wearing medical-level HRMs for extended periods and a pacemaker plus beta blocker (HR sometimes too slow and sometimes too fast, beta blockers reduce HR). My doc tells me to ride and to let my HR go as high as it goes. Other docs may have different recommendations.

One question you'll have to answer is given you're now riding with two friends, how willing are you to ride alone based on some heart rate based program?

63 y/o here too. For two or three years I've used a heart rate monitor on most rides, runs and walks. And a heart rate variability app.

I can't say that HR and HRV data is reliable every day and workout. I mostly use it to look for patterns over time and many workouts.

As others noted, heart rate can vary depending on rest, diet, medications and supplements, alcohol consumption, and other health issues.

My maximum HR is 173, consistently on tests. I usually avoid pushing more than 160 bpm most workouts, since it takes me longer to recover now. I used to do workouts that might be called mostly tempo or sweet spot -- mostly fast (for my age and condition) group rides -- but wasn't making much progress and probably wasn't adding enough variability and getting enough rest. So I took advantage of the pandemic to skip group rides and try other training methods. I found it easy to do hard workouts (per HR data) and hard to do easy workouts. For example, with running per some training recommendations, the only way I can do 80% lower effort is walking. To do those 80/20 workouts, I'm mostly walking with intermittent sprints or strides. With solo bike rides it's easier to finesse by coasting and soft pedaling between harder efforts. It's impossible to follow that training program in typical club rides because every club ride I've done has been a tempo ride, so my HR is 130-150 bpm 90% of the time, with some harder sprints and short steep climbs into zone 4 territory.

While I do record this stuff most workouts I don't rely on it for my approach to a workout. I just go, see how I feel after a warmup and adjust my workout effort to suit how I feel that day. Occasionally a hard workout ride or run corresponds with HR and HRV data, but not always. Occasionally my faster rides and runs are on days when the HR and HRV data seemed to indicate I should have taken and easy or rest day.

I am approaching 60 and I use the HR monitor to ensure I am not over stressed and over doing it, especially in the heat of the southeast in the summer. In days gone by, I've started long rides too fast and by the time I get to the end, I am dying...so by using the HR as a monitor, I can ensure I stay fresh to the end.

If you're comfortable with computers, Golden Cheetah is excellent, free software for cyclists. You can feed it your bike data and it can help you get a handle for how the HR numbers fit in with the riding you did, and also longer term training load management.

Based on multiple studies, including from the guy who developed the max heart rate formula, I try to exclusively train in zone 2. That's nearly impossible for me since I'm older with a lower max heart rate, so the zones are narrower, but that is my goal. Google mitochondrial efficiency; you'll find some interesting stuff. I don't know for sure but it works for me anyway when century training. If I've only an hour or so to ride I'll blast it though...

What possible relevance could a population average study have to individualized training?

For me defining my heart rate zones is applicable to the training that I want to do. The calculator was actually pretty accurate in my case. Expanding that specific reference to look at studies in general, an informed hypothesis for an n=1 should start somewhere--why not there? Maybe I misinterpreted the question.

I have a broken watch that occasionally has the correct time.

If you are going to use HR for setting your zones, then go by LTHR or FTHR.... It tells you here how to do that.. https://www.trainingpeaks.com/learn/...setting-zones/

Max HR is a poor way to set your zones as your max HR any ride you do might be entirely different. And 220 - age is not any where near what most of us that have been riding or doing other work or play that requires some cardio work.

Yes, no doubt. My inability to convey my real point led folks astray. I believe the guy who started the max heart rate thing was Maffetone. It was his training theory that I was attempting to draw attention to, not his heart rate thing. My bad.

Which is import for my training, at least I think so. The zone 2 training from what I gather should improve the lactic clearance.

​​​​​​I think his idea is that 80% of your rides should be zone 2 and the other 20% should be zone 4 or 5. That isn't something everybody in the world agrees with, partly because everyone has their own goals. But something everybody can take away from that idea is different intensities are good, and if you want to do the hard stuff you need to be recovered enough to really do it. A lot of people try to go balls out all the time, make some progress at first, then plateau below their potential.

I have a Polar FT1 heart rate monitor (with the chest strap). I used it maybe several times then stopped. Just one less thing to distract me from watching out for four wheelers and road debris. I can go the whole trip ignoring my Garmin Edge 500. Looking ahead and behind to me is more important.

Same age as the OP.

I agree with the idea of gathering information for a few weeks and then making some decisions. Over the winter I use a smart trainer and power meter pedals and a HRM. I put the pedals on my road bike so there is consistency. I have noticed on the few group rides so far this year that my HR is higher on group rides as well as w/kg. I do push hard on my trainer.

I have two years of HR data. I had until yesterday considered my max HR to be 180 but last night hit a high of 187. I personally don't look for training zones as much as using my HR as an indication of how long before I run out of gas or do I have enough to pick up the RPMs? I'm probably missing out on a great opportunity to improve my performance by not taking all of this more seriously but it is way too easy for me to get lost in the numbers forest and I want to keep this as simple as possible.

I'd also like to add that HR profiles will vary between people even for a given exertion level. If you have a strong weightlifting background but not a lot of endurance, you could feasibly see much higher average heart rates than someone with good cardio and low strength.

When I did a century with my triathlete buddies, I averaged 153bpm for 5.5 hours of moving time. 70% of my ride was spent in zone 4 or above (148 bpm to 192bpm). 153 bpm isn't actually that high for me. I'm doing 110 when I just sit on the bike. But for others, 153bpm for 5+ hours would be tough.

Basically what I'm saying is that you shouldn't take things like "you can't hold zone 5 for more than 5 minutes" at face value. It's totally dependent upon the balance between your legs and pump.

For example, all I have to do hit my max HR is sprint for 30 seconds. But I have friends who simply cannot hit their max HR on the bike because they run and have developed really good cardio.

Also. Is there any agreement upon what defines HR zones? Wahoo seems to make the increments for zones really low. 148bpm is the low end for Z3 according to Strava.

The simplest and quickest thing to do is to find your ventilation thresholds, VT1 and VT2. Figure your lactate threshold heart rate (LTHR) is just below VT2 and the top of Zone 2 is just above VT1.
https://www.acefitness.org/fitness-c...2-and-vo2-max/
https://acewebcontent.azureedge.net/...VT_Testing.pdf

In the past 25 years, I've done very few HR tests, relying on the above for what is really more accurate information than a test will produce. Never use max HR (MHR) to set your zones. Useless, no matter how you get it.

I don’t wear a heart rate monitor much anymore. I find power more accurate for my needs. I do use one when doing some structured works to help determine rest intervals.

Joe Friel wrote a book titled "Fast After Fifty" that would be helpful for you I think.

I wear one for all rides pretty much. Power drops over time, and when targeting a specific power it's very easy to go too hard after a while. The rising HR warns me I need to lower my power output a little. So effectively I pace on power OR HR, whichever effectively caps me. For short rides it's power, for longer rides after a couple of hours it's HR. I do plan my rides, including how to pace them and where put effort and where to coast, but it's not an exact science and it's important to be able to adjust plans on the go.