First go with a heart rate monitor

[perpetual dan]

We've got a Garmin forerunner at work, which I borrowed the other day for a ride. I don't usually ride with a heart rate monitor, so I don't really have any context for what I've got out of it...



As you can see I was out about an hour and live up a hill. The end of the graph shows the start of recovery. Away from the ends of the ride things were gently undulating and elevation and heart rate go up and down together. It was a brisk ride (road, night, mountain bike with only a couple of red traffic lights), but not a race and I didn't fall over at the end from exhaustion. My computer battery had died and the forerunner was awkward to read while riding, so I didn't have any gadgets prompting my pace.

I'm 37, at the higher end of normal weight. My resting heart rate doesn't go much below 80 (something to deal with by riding more often methinks). A couple of weeks ago my GP said he was "envious" of my blood pressure. I was quite surprised by how high my heart rate went on this ride as the rules of thumb had me thinking my maximum would be around 185.

Those of you that use these things regularly: is that kind of heart rate variation usual, or will going further be aided by calming down a bit on the hills? Is there anything else I could be reading into this?

As a general observation, the forerunner wasn't very comfortable or useful on the bike and I'm not sure I'd want to be looking at graphs after every ride. However, I am now wondering whether HRM on a computer to pace myself would be useful.

[MSeries]

It depends on what you are aiming to achieve. I used one for a while for no real reason other to see what was happening. I wasn't very fit at the time compared to now and I thought it might help me gauge my effort to stop me blowing up and thus allow me to ride for longer. I learned to judge my effort based on how I feel. I got obsessed with the numbers though thinking I should be able to ride at 90% max or something and when  couldn't it demoralised me. 

What are you trying to achieve ? decide that then determine the tools you need to do that. Perhaps some time using a HRM will help you get to know your body better.

[Manotea]

Ooh, pretty graphs!

I used a basic HRM last weekend, first time for  long time, and topped out at 170bpm (must try harder). If you're doing serious training then a whizz bang HRM is really useful, otherwise a basic unit does fine. All you really need is the BPM and you soon get a feel how to judge effort accordingly. I find that for audax purposes, they're most useful for confirming that I'm working way to hard!

[Chris S]

Like MSeries says, HRMs are really handy if you know what you're trying to achieve.

Most recently, I've been using mine to (a) measure my approx lactate threshold (take average HR for a 30 minute ride at TT pace), then (b) pace myself on intervals.

FWIW, I pretty much ignore most of the stats it gives me - Calories burned for example, seems to be some kind of fiction; at least double what I would estimate.

I'd quite like to measure my HR against power output though - just for larfs.

[perpetual dan]

I haven't got as far as any specific things I'd like to achieve, but:

• Loose a few kilos, drop my resting heart rate a bit, live longer, make up for all those years smoking etc.
• Have a better idea of what pace I can sustain on longer rides ... not that I've had a real problem lately. I used to do 50 mile hikes as competition when I was younger and reading about Audaxes here has given me ideas.

[mike]

I use mine for 2 things - to make sure I'm not working too hard uphill, and to make sure I'm working hard enough on long intervals.  I could never make any use of the graphs afterwards.

[ChrisO]

I like mine - I use it to vary the type of training I do, as I am not commuting now, only training and it would get boring riding on the same roads doing the same thing every day.

So I have a number of set exercises based around heart rate, which I alternate with ones based around speed.

During a week I would do:

• 2 mins at 85% of max HR and then 2 mins at 75% for an hour.
• 1 ride of about 40km at a fairly constant 80% of max HR (my max HR BTW is about 180)
• Pyramids around a 3km circuit - one at >70% one at >80% one at >90%. Three sets of those.
• A club ride of between 120-140km, so varying heart rate. I tend to have an average around 135 and a standard deviation of about 15-16.
• An easy ride the day after - about 70% of max HR, no more than 75.
  

I have no idea if that is making me any fitter or faster but it keeps me occupied and I quite like uploading all the stats afterwards.

[gonzo]

Most importantly, you need to find your maximum cycling HR. The preferred method is a very painful lab test. Next is the hill test; find a very steep hill, start hard at the bottom and then keep pushing harder and harder as you up. About 50meters from the top, stand and sprint out of the saddle. The max number that was shown on the graph (you won't be able to see properly at the time!) will be within a couple of beats of your max.

To test the values you've got, you should be able to just about talk in full sentences at 75%max without heaving for breath. You should also be able to breathe through only your nose.

• 1 ride of about 40km at a fairly constant 80% of max HR (my max HR BTW is about 180)

This one jumped out at me as being a little pointless. It's not really achieving anything. At lower HRs, you're increasing your distance ability and baseline speed. Stuff over 85% will start working on lactate threshold stuff and you'll improve your ability to go fast when you really go for it.

[GruB]

My normal cycling computer has a built in HRM.  I use it daily but don't plot graphs or anything like that.  I have enjoyed watching my HR decrease etc. and will look at my HR when going up hills to guage how I am feeling.
On Friday going in to work was another time I consciously checked my HR as I was riding into a stiff head wind and it felt really hard to keep my time up.  My HR was 25 b bpm higher than normal.
I also used mine a lot to monitor and teach myself about LSD riding. 

Overall, an essential part of my bike experience for the nerdy type I am.

[ChrisO]

• 1 ride of about 40km at a fairly constant 80% of max HR (my max HR BTW is about 180)

This one jumped out at me as being a little pointless. It's not really achieving anything. At lower HRs, you're increasing your distance ability and baseline speed. Stuff over 85% will start working on lactate threshold stuff and you'll improve your ability to go fast when you really go for it.

Do you mean I'd be better to do the same distance at a lower HR% ? My idea was to do one ride which is just miles and not anything difficult but are you suggesting that I'm falling between the cracks there ?

I haven't really looked into it so I was just doing what felt OK.

How does one work out lactate threshold - and what is it exactly ?

[gonzo]

Lower your training HR or higher it. <75% will increase your muscle fatigue resistance and you'll be able to go faster for the same HR over time. Most useful for all aspects of cycling when the rides are over an hour.

>85% deals with the lactate threshold. This is roughly the HR which you can maintain for a 10mile time trial. It's essentially the limit past which your muscles produce more lactic acid than they can deal with. Improving this will result in increased ability to hold top end speed.

I've yet to find a purpose for training in the 75-85% region.

[inc]

For most cyclists a HRM is not needed or even desirable. The HRM gives your HR at that particular time, interpretation of that data is the essential part and that takes some experience. For example you could be travelling at the same speed or climbing a hill at a lower HR than before and think you are fitter but in fact be overtrained. This is partly why cyclists who need this output data now tend to use power meters as there are less factors that can influence HR .  The original ( Peter Keen) basic theory is you work in one of four zones based on your max HR, which is very individual. Training will not affect your max HR but should in time reduce your resting HR ( but not always). How or why you train in these zones depends on what you want to achieve. For specific events like a 25 mile tt this training method can be very effective but for general cycling it is just an interesting device and perceived effort (PE) is probably as effective.

[mattc]

I find it intriguing the different attitudes people have to training, turbos, HRM etc ...

2 mins at 85% of max HR and then 2 mins at 75% for an hour.

I'm really keen on using HR to tune my training rides, but doing the above session would drive me bonkers! I prefer to do a route/duration that I fancy, then try to keep in the optimum zones most of the time. If I do intervals, i will tend to set myself a 'real-world' end-point
e.g. that bridge is about 2/5/10 minutes away, I'll ride hard until there.

To do some of the strict sessions you see in the literature, I'd end up doing stupid things like walking the 2nd half of a hill I know I can ride up!
Constant checking a computer just distracts me from enjoying the ride. (rather like having to check a map every minute).

Each to his own!

[perpetual dan]

Thanks, all, for your comments. My riding tends to be a response to having nothing more urgent to do this evening, rather than planned around a training schedule. But, next time I can justify a new toy maybe I'll get a computer with one, to use as basic feedback and to feed my nerdiness  Saving for a new bike right now, so this may wait a while.

[ChrisO]

Yeah I don't mean to sound too anal about it - I probably wouldn't ride like that if I was in London/UK because I would have different routes and more variations.

In my case it's actually the HR monitor that adds interest to the ride, rather than being a despotic instrument.

I ride the same route four times a week, the only other route being the club ride on Fridays. I can't ride anywhere else because of traffic so my only variation might be windspeed.

I only ride for training, not commuting (except when I'm back in London) but apart from two or three events in a year I'm not racing or doing TTs.

In those circumstances I have found my Polar monitor to be something that gives me targets and benchmarks - HR, cadence etc - purely to have something other than "Right I'm going on the same ride I did yesterday and another 150 times this year."