Author Topic: Finally got an HRM reading under stress  (Read 2044 times)

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« on: June 09, 2009, 12:40:09 am »
I saw a post from greenbank saying this: "but for cyclists the best fit may be obtained by doing something like 235-age"

Today at the Velodrome gave me a Max reading of 217.

Am I 18?  ;D
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Manotea

  • Where there is doubt...
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2009, 12:50:51 am »
After reporting chest pains to my GP I was wired up and put on a treadmill. I was just getting warmed up when they stopped the test having reached the target of 150bpm, 80% of max for my age...

Oh, I was fine. I think I had simply strained an intercostal muscle or something like that.

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2009, 12:54:24 am »
I saw a post from greenbank saying this: "but for cyclists the best fit may be obtained by doing something like 235-age"

Taken out of context a bit. I was saying that the 210-age formula may be the best fit formula for the average (i.e. not very fit) person in the UK, and that cyclists tend to be fitter (and that casual observations make me think that cyclists have higher maximum heart rates), therefore the best fit may be something closer to *plucks figure from air* 235-age.

The best fit formula for my single data point (age 33, HRmax of 205) is 238-age. That's absolutely guaranteed to work for me although I may need to revise it should my age or recorded HRmax change. It may not work for anyone else though...

I got 250bpm again the other day. Bloody London buses kicking out 2.4GHz.
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2009, 01:00:57 am »
I was a bit surprised at the reading. I've only reached  180ish during exercise (with the HRM) before.

However I do have an odd heart. It can go from 45 to 200 and back to 45 without me doing very much.
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

gonzo

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2009, 10:25:57 am »
Max HR doesn't depend on fitness. It is, however, dependant on sport.

inc

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #5 on: June 09, 2009, 10:35:29 am »
Max heart rate is a personal thing and may or may not fit one formula or other. The best way to get an accurate figure is a ramp type test when well rested, it has to be progressive or you will blow before getting an accurate reading.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #6 on: June 09, 2009, 10:44:50 am »
I saw a post from greenbank saying this: "but for cyclists the best fit may be obtained by doing something like 235-age"

Taken out of context a bit.
No need to defend yourself. Even taken out of context it's still true - as long as Dear Reader understands what "best fit" means.
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #7 on: June 09, 2009, 12:09:25 pm »
No need to defend yourself. Even taken out of context it's still true - as long as Dear Reader understands what "best fit" means.

You'd be surprised how many people say "210-age is just rubbish, it doesn't work for me at all".

:)
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

inc

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2009, 12:48:37 pm »
I was saying that the 210-age formula may be the best fit formula for the average (i.e. not very fit) person in the UK, and that cyclists tend to be fitter (and that casual observations make me think that cyclists have higher maximum heart rates),

I missed this bit, max heart rate is not dependent on fitness or sport, it cannot be improved by exercise and it decreases .5 to 1 beat per year but this also varies. Resting heart rate can be lowered by exercise as the stroke volume generally improves but not always. Why would anyone interested in their maximum heart rate for training purposes use any formula as there will always be an error of some sort. Both 210 and 235 give figures more than 5 bpm out for me which could put me in the wrong training zone and I expect that would be the same for most people.

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2009, 12:53:47 pm »
I guess I should have put a smiley in my first post.  ;)
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #10 on: June 09, 2009, 01:07:00 pm »
I was saying that the 210-age formula may be the best fit formula for the average (i.e. not very fit) person in the UK, and that cyclists tend to be fitter (and that casual observations make me think that cyclists have higher maximum heart rates),

I missed this bit, max heart rate is not dependent on fitness or sport, it cannot be improved by exercise and it decreases .5 to 1 beat per year but this also varies.

And I wasn't saying it can be. It's pre-selection. I'm suggesting that people with higher maximum heart rates tend to cycle (and, in general, be more physically active) than people with lower maximum heart rates. This is based on nothing else than observation of people posting their max HRs and ages on cycling forums.

Why would anyone interested in their maximum heart rate for training purposes use any formula as there will always be an error of some sort.

Because it gives you an initial idea in the absence of any proper information. Lots of people don't have an HRM and check their pulse with their fingers. You can't get an accurate HRmax measurement measuring your pulse with your fingers.

Both 210 and 235 give figures more than 5 bpm out for me which could put me in the wrong training zone and I expect that would be the same for most people.

But 210-age has been proven by various studies to be the best fit of any equation of the form 'x-age' for the general population. Higher order polynomials will provide an even better fit but the minute you put a little 2 above one term then most people's eyes glazeth over.
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #11 on: June 09, 2009, 01:16:34 pm »
Max heart rate is a personal thing and may or may not fit one formula or other. The best way to get an accurate figure is a ramp type test when well rested, it has to be progressive or you will blow before getting an accurate reading.

Inded I think my old turbo trainer (a Tacx one) had a ramp test built into the software. I never felt fit enough to test it!

We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2009, 01:22:45 pm »
Both 210 and 235 give figures more than 5 bpm out for me which could put me in the wrong training zone and I expect that would be the same for most people.
Well it doesn't matter TOO much. 5 bpm too high or low REALLY won't ruin your training program! Zones are zones i.e. ranges of HR. You're probably not spending much time 4bpm or less from the boundaries.. :)

There are bigger differences between the regimes quoted by "experts".
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

inc

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2009, 03:45:27 pm »
Both 210 and 235 give figures more than 5 bpm out for me which could put me in the wrong training zone and I expect that would be the same for most people.
Well it doesn't matter TOO much. 5 bpm too high or low REALLY won't ruin your training program!

There are bigger differences between the regimes quoted by "experts".

The problem is I don't have a measured current max hr so said more than 5 bpm as I knew it easily was. Now using my last proper one and doing the sums gives an error of 17 bpm low for the 210 formula and 8 high for the 235 formula. This same formula error that gives me more than 5 bpm difference could well be magnified at higher ( 200+) rates.
Years ago when I was racing I had my max pulse measured as part of some power testing at the Human Performance Laboratory,  it is hard and you need to be motivated. I thought I knew my max pulse from attempts I had done myself before but I was 5 bpm low.Louis Passfield the BCF physiologist who did the tests said getting an accurate max hr is critical for effective training. He is an expert I am quite prepared to believe, he took over his position from Peter Keen who developed probably the best training system to date. So use a formula the figure it gives will almost certainly be wrong and you may well not be maximising your training. If it is not that important then why bother with pulse rates at all just ride your bike.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #14 on: June 09, 2009, 03:56:27 pm »
So use a formula the figure it gives will almost certainly be wrong and you may well not be maximising your training. If it is not that important then why bother with pulse rates at all just ride your bike.
Sure, I agree it's important - but GB's formula will get you pretty close. Close enough to give useful training zones.

The zones are arbitrary - nothing magical happens as you cross 90% (or whatever). Your body doesn't know you're in "Zone 2". People that train a LOT will find it worthhwile to spend the time/effort to get a more accurate figure.

(Endurance riders won't do much training in the highest zones - it's almost a waste of time. So that reduces the effect of any 'error' in HRmax. If you train a lot >95%, then you will get a pretty good figure for your HRmax just through experiment! :) )
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

inc

Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2009, 06:55:43 pm »

The zones are arbitrary - nothing magical happens as you cross 90% (or whatever). Your body doesn't know you're in "Zone 2". People that train a LOT will find it worthhwile to spend the time/effort to get a more accurate figure.


It really doesn't matter whether you train a lot or a little, you need to be in the zone you are meant to be in to get that specific training benefit. If someone is not motivated enough to find their max hr I doubt they will be motivated enough to devise or follow an effective training plan.The Keen (BC) method does not use a % of max it uses max  minus a figure. Your body may not know what the zone is called but it does know how to produce power and the physiological processes for that load and they are different between zones. The zones are not arbitrary The original Keen system has a 10 bpm buffer between zones, specifically built in to make it easier to stay in the right zone out on the road. Straying between zones minimises the effectiveness of that training session. Say you went out for 1 hour at level 2 but because of hills spent 10 minutes in level 3 you would think that is 50 mins at level 2 and 10 min at level 3 but because your body doesn't change energy pathways instantly the level 2 time will be  reduced much more because of the continual adaptation.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Finally got an HRM reading under stress
« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2009, 07:05:53 pm »
If someone is not motivated enough to find their max hr I doubt they will be motivated enough to devise or follow an effective training plan.
I think we're saying the same thing on that point!

Quote
The original Keen system has a 10 bpm buffer between zones, specifically built in to make it easier to stay in the right zone out on the road.
That's a good idea.

It means that those people whose zones are wrong by 5pm should be OK anyway :)

What I _think_ I'm trying to say is that many people could make a good start on 'getting faster' by reading one of the many articles about training zones, then estimating those zones using the 'popular' age-related formula.

If they decide they are going to stick at it, and want to get serious, they can do the more accurate HR-max testing you describe, and perhaps pay for some serious zone-based training plans. It's all good ...
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles