Heart Rate Zone Reality Check
30
Member
318 days
jacmun posted 42 weeks ago.
What is your resting HR? (Say taken sitting still for at least 5 min although there are several ways to get this)
71
Member
793 days
bgreinke posted 42 weeks ago.
When I've just been sitting around in the middle of the afternoon, it's high 60's/low 70's. I'm not sure what my true resting HR is (ie, right when you get out bed in the morning).
Braden
477
Member
1605 days
trainDaBrain posted 42 weeks ago.
One thing to keep in mind is that heart rates tend to 'catch-up' over a given effort. Meaning, that your average HR for your first split might be lower than the last two because your system takes a while to ramp up.
2837
Member
1227 days
bluebirdbiker posted 42 weeks ago.
Do an HRmax test (HR max test) or do a 10k full out run, as fast as you can. The HRavg of this 10k fullout run should be, will be your LT, or around your LT (give or take a few bpms). That way you can use this data for the Friel equation to set your zones for further work. Here is the sheet. (Morbius). Another way to set things for running is to use Jack Daniel's formula's for your run paces. Use a 10k race to set the run VDOT. Here are the VDOTs
BBB
There are no excuses - so don't look for them. As a product of your own choices, you directly determine your life outcomes.
Don't think, just do.
My Blog
71
Member
793 days
bgreinke posted 42 weeks ago.
Great information. It sounds like what I did was basically a modification of the TT that results in a LTHR for use int he Friel equations. My only concern was that the result was much higher than I expected and I was just curious if that meant I likely did something wrong or if the conventional wisdom I've always heard (ie 220-age) is really just BS.
Braden
2837
Member
1227 days
bluebirdbiker posted 42 weeks ago.
220-age is for the common folk that sits on a couch and eats cheetos.
BBB
There are no excuses - so don't look for them. As a product of your own choices, you directly determine your life outcomes.
Don't think, just do.
My Blog
30
Member
318 days
jacmun posted 42 weeks ago.
Your max HR is at the higher end but everyone is different. My resting HR is 34 bpm BUT my max in a supervised stress test is only 176. 220 -my age is 190 so I am way off. Sounds like your test was a TT. I assume you have looked at the training tips on this website, the article by Brendon Downey is pretty good. His zones of easy, hard, damn hard etc have served me pretty well. I would try a few and see how you feel.
Also don't worry about crawling along at a set aerobic level when you start training in this manner. This willl improve over time, the aerobic base you aquire will serve you well.
46
Member
394 days
kxux posted 42 weeks ago.
jacmun;85244 wrote:
Your max HR is at the higher end but everyone is different. My resting HR is 34 bpm BUT my max in a supervised stress test is only 176. 220 -my age is 190 so I am way off. Sounds like your test was a TT.
Same here - according to the 220 - age formula my max comes at about 7 beats higher than what it actually is. Resting HR is 35, max 179. Early in the season I did the test Friel explains in his HR book. I repeated the test later in the season to adjust the zones, but it was just a small adjustment. The zones worked fine for my traiing for long distance races. Recently I switched to pace based training for the run to improve the speed. The HR zones are not of much help during interval training and I'm training in higher HR zones in both long runs and tempo runs. But I do not do any serious bike or swim training - I do some biking as cross training. We shall see in 2 weeks if this approach works - I'm closing the season with 5k now that all triathlons are done for the season.
By the way the HR zone training according to Friel's book helped me to achieve 2nd in AG in HIM and 3rd in AG in sprint - this is my first season doing triathlon (and before this I only started running about a year ago). So the HR zone training seem to work quite well - at least for me.
Jan
1636
Member
1003 days
tri-ac posted 42 weeks ago.
bluebirdbiker;85239 wrote:
220-age is for the common folk that sits on a couch and eats cheetos.
[hmmmm cheetos!]
i happen to fit the generic formula, but not everyone does...it definitely doesn't mean you did something wrong. you should repeat the test every so often and see if/how it changes, and that will tell you more about your own system
5
Member
299 days
mikericci posted 42 weeks ago.
Personally, I don't like to use Max HR for determining zones. I address this in one of my articles on my site.
http://www.weather.com/outlook/homeandgarden/home/tenday/80304?from=36hr_fcst10DayLink_home
The protocol I use for determining training zones is here:
http://www.d3multisport.com/articles/determinezones.html
Cheers,
Mike Ricci
USAT Level III Coach
D3Multisport.com
71
Member
793 days
bgreinke posted 42 weeks ago.
It sounds like the test I did was pretty similar to the run test Mike described in his link. I just took the data point I got (LTHR) and used it to calculate a max HR vs using it to calculate the training zones as he described. I guess it's good to hear that the multiple authorities advocate the testing method.
Braden
5
Member
299 days
mikericci posted 42 weeks ago.
bgreinke;85312 wrote:
It sounds like the test I did was pretty similar to the run test Mike described in his link. I just took the data point I got (LTHR) and used it to calculate a max HR vs using it to calculate the training zones as he described. I guess it's good to hear that the multiple authorities advocate the testing method.Braden
Braden
How do you calculate MAX HR from an LT test and why do you think you need to know it? It varies based on a lot of factors, and I don't deem it very reliable or necessary.
71
Member
793 days
bgreinke posted 42 weeks ago.
Looking at an old issue of Inside Triathlon, it indicated the LTHR was 85-90% or HRmax. The rest of the zones listed were based on a percentage of HRmax. I simply divided LTHR by 90% and then calculated the remaining zones. The spreadsheet I found on the D3 website did the same thing - The top end of zone 5++ was 110.7% of LTHR. This was then the upper limit of zone 5++ which, if I read the decriptions right, corresponds to 10/10 on an RPE scale. This may not be exactly HRmax, but seems to be close. I know I'm probably not getting the definitions exactly correct, but what I calculated was used solely for the use as a reference point from which the other zones could be calculated.
If you compare descriptions, it seems the zones I calculated based on the inside triathlon article match up reasonably close (though not exactly) to what was calculated by the excel sheet on the D3 webstie.
5
Member
299 days
mikericci posted 42 weeks ago.
That all makes sense to me - my point is that you don't really need to know the max in order to be training correctly. Your LT is your LT and if you can plan your workouts based on that, then you'll improve.
71
Member
793 days
bgreinke posted 42 weeks ago.
I agree. BTW, thanks for the link to the D3 site. Looks like lots of good info. Now I just need to find time to read it.
Braden
5
Member
299 days
mikericci posted 42 weeks ago.
Thanks Braden - most of our articles are here on TriFuel as well. :)
4212
Member
1558 days
kylie posted 42 weeks ago.
Great info Mike -- thanks for joining in and posting!
Miles of Life --- Powered by MarkyV
I decided that to train for my next race, I'm going to use a HR monitor and training zones to hopefully avoid overtraining (which I think I've done in the past). I used the LTHR test in the most recent issue of Triathlete to get my LTHR for running as a start. From there, I figured I could estimate my max HR and other training zones.
After the warm-up, I did the 30 minute hard run and got an average HR over the last 20 minutes. My average was 194 BPM and max was 201 BPM. That translates to a max HR of 216 (LTHR @ 90% max). As a reality check, I roughly figured my distance traveled in each ten minute segment (below). They are pretty close together and the overall average fits with the splits. So if I didn't slow down, I take that to mean that I was not in a higher HR zone for part of the test and therefore did not artificially inflate my numbers. With as high as these numbers are (way above 220-age), I just wanted to see if anyone with more HR training experience saw any holes what I've done. I did do a run the other day keeping below 80% of my "220-age" max HR and I felt like I was crawling (9:30 min/mi). Oh, I'm almost 30 BTW.
Split 1 1.28 miles, 10 min, 7:48 min/mi
Split 2 1.21 miles, 10 min, 8:15 min/mi
Split 3 1.26 miles, 10 min, 7:56 min/mi
Total 3.75 miles, 30 min, 8:00 min/mi
Note that the split distances were rough as I had to ID landmarks and then track on USATF.org (i.e. googlemaps). The total distance should be pretty accurate.
Thanks for the help.
Braden