Polar Monitors

[quote="chn68b"]Hi
My fitness level cam back as 34, or POOR...


[font=Comic Sans MS]Hey! This is why I don’t use these damnfangled gadjets, [/font]

[font='Times New Roman'][font=Comic Sans MS]When I’m out there exercising i don't need some electronic gadget criticising me,[/font][/font]

chn68b said:

Hi

Just purchased a Polar F5 HM watch and did the standard walktest with the watch (a 2km walk as fast as you can within the set heart beat range). My fitness level cam back as 34, or POOR...

I have been cycling an average of 125 miles per week, 12.5 miles each way to work, 5 days a week since August of last year, averaging about 18mph. I'm 32 and extremely dissapointed to say the least.

My BMI is 24, normal.

Any advice please!!!!!

It sounds like you are much better at riding than you are at walking, at least based on a very general test of your walking. No worries. By now you already know what the cycling has done for your fitness so keep at it. Use your HRM for other things besides the fitness "test".

chn68b said:

My BMI is 24, normal.

By the way BMI is hopelessly inaccurate and doesnt take into account body structure and muscle mass.

The polar tests also are based on very generic principles and cant be applied to everyone. Rather use it for its designed purpose i.e. giving you a readout of your heart rate and listen to your body, you will soon find it is just a useful guide to how you are performing and not much more.

chn68b said:

Hi

Just purchased a Polar F5 HM watch and did the standard walktest with the watch (a 2km walk as fast as you can within the set heart beat range). My fitness level cam back as 34, or POOR...

I have been cycling an average of 125 miles per week, 12.5 miles each way to work, 5 days a week since August of last year, averaging about 18mph. I'm 32 and extremely dissapointed to say the least.

My BMI is 24, normal.

Any advice please!!!!!

I don't know if it's at all related to what you are going through, but according to my polar HRM, the test where you lay down gives me a pretty good score. I can also ride pretty well on the bike. Running however, I don't know if I could even run a mile. I think things like this could be very sport specific.

-Matt

chn68b said:

Hi

Just purchased a Polar F5 HM watch and did the standard walktest with the watch (a 2km walk as fast as you can within the set heart beat range). My fitness level cam back as 34, or POOR...

I have been cycling an average of 125 miles per week, 12.5 miles each way to work, 5 days a week since August of last year, averaging about 18mph. I'm 32 and extremely dissapointed to say the least.

My BMI is 24, normal.

Any advice please!!!!!

Don't pay attention to general guides, you may just have a different anatomy. For example, I am 40 but can see 215-218 as a max rate after a tough hill on a long ride. I am cruising along in the high 170s but can carry on a complete conversation and am pretty comfortable. I also have a very low resting. Initially, I thought my monitor was broken and replaced it. And I ride with other guys of similar age and fitness that have very different levels. They rarely see levels much above 160 and a peak of 180 or more would be highly unusual.

When I first started using a monitor regularly, I got so worried by these high levels that I saw a doctor who performed a stress test. He said that yes, I record unusually high levels but rebound normally but that there was no real problem. I would like to tell you that I am a freakishly strong rider to go along with my freakish heart rate, but I am generally just a strong recreational cyclist. I was one of the faster local club riders in my twenties, particularly on hills, but have never even been a national or world class rider. And I get regulalry trounced in the sprints by guys that have normal heart rates. BTW, my father has a very low resting and performs well on stress tests even though he he significantly overweight and is not fit. My best geuss is that it is genetic.

Also, running is different than cycling. I can get to a higher target rate much quicker running (within a few minutes) and If I do sprints on the track I can get really high max readings (224).

Get a good training manual for the HR monitor, there are a bunch of them with a few different methods for calculating your max and target rates. Use it regulalry on your rides and try and get a handle on your own personal rates. Otherwise, you are using a tool to make yourself crazy.

When these monitors first came out, my favorite trick was to pull very close to another rider with a Polar monitor and make him think his heart rate was crazy high. It doesn't work with the newer monitors.

Will not ever buy a Polar because when the friggin battery is flat you cant replace it yourself (or you are not supposed to) and have to return the unit to the retailer or distributor.

I have an Oregon, just replaced CR2032 battery...$2.95
Easy job, no dramas.
The Oregon purchase price was $99 (in Aussie $$)

Aussie Steve said:

Will not ever buy a Polar because when the friggin battery is flat you cant replace it yourself (or you are not supposed to) and have to return the unit to the retailer or distributor.

I have an Oregon, just replaced CR2032 battery...$2.95
Easy job, no dramas.
The Oregon purchase price was $99 (in Aussie $$)

True, the battery is a pain, but I have a chest strap by a knockoff company that is compatible with the Polar, and I can replace the battery in that strap. The watch that went with the strap was a piece of [censored]. The other thing bad about Polar is that there water resistance is not great.