Heart rate zones

Had it done in a lab and then used the chart on page 42 of Joe Friels training bible to get my zones.

Had a VO2 test done last year and they worked it out for me

Very interesting since their reccomendations were quite different to what the books were suggesting.

Basically through the normal calculation of 220 - age and then did a fitness test with my hrm. Max was lower.

I sat on a trainer and used percieved effort while a pal looked at the monitor and wrote down what it said. Good idea?

Performed an all-out uphill test of about 20 minutes... recorded average HR and submitted the results to 53x12.com and got the training intensities according to Michele Ferrari's protocols...

The 220-age is totally s***... and with max HR is not so reliable.

My maximum (actual) is way above the predictor 220 minus age, by over 20 beats. For years I wondered why I did not get fitter, was not getting as much excercise as I thought I should be but I was backing out before I reached 70% of max thinking Iwas going through the 90% level. Measure your resting heart rate, do a maximal exertion test in a sports science lab or on the road, then apply the Karvonen formula to get reliable training zones. (note maximum rates are sport specific, my cycling max is higher than my running max but lower than my paddling max)

Just checked out the Karvonen calculators, and found that the % zones computed differ quite a bit from the % of my max HR.

I'm a 56 year old male, with a resting rate of 50 and max of 184 (from road tests). Here's the results I get:

Aerobic 60-75% 130-150

AT 75-85% 150-163

LT 85-100% 163-184

Sorry, hit reply key before finishing. Anyway, the straight %'s of my MHR, which I had been using for zones, are quite a bit lower.

EG, a straight 60-75% of my MHR is 110-138. For the LT point, 85% of my 184 MHR is 156, not 163 as Karvonen calculates.

Actually, the Karvonen points seem to be more in line with my on the road experiences....the straight % seem too low when used to set zones.

Dan

I am 38 was fairly fit ( waterpolo player in 20's ) and maintained some form of fitness up to present day (cycling, weight's, swimming etc). However last year during medium to hard effort rides with my mate my HRM showed 196 ( fairly regulary) and sometimes over the 200 in places on climbs. I have never had a proper max heart rate test but would assume that mine is perhaps as high as 240-250, would anyone have any ideas on this. For your info l am 6ft tall and 230 lb's and before you all start, yes l know it's heavy, but it's not all fat! thanks guys. KWIKKWAK

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Leon
How do you determine your heart rate training zones ?

Rode very hard for 25 min. to a very steep, but mercifully short hill.
My 220 age number was off by 18 beats (my max was higher). When I get that tingly, light headed feeling and the lungs are crawling out of my chest it must be close to max. I think 220 - age thing cheats a lot of athletes.

Sounds similar to my experience. 220-my age would be 164 max; at my true max of 184, I'm 20 bpm higher.

Dan

I don't use HR zones.

Do the hrt training zones change after you get fitter? if your resting hrt lowers does'nt your max get lower also? as i put more time in on the bike i find it harder to reach my max. im 37 and have a hard time getting over 180.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Leon
How do you determine your heart rate training zones ?

220 minus your age is your maximum heart rate.

I did the field test per CTS (chris carmichael's program). Basically a distance (3 miles) or time (8 minute) all out interval repeated twice minus a 10 minute warmup, 10 minute recovery between sets, and 15 minute recovery to end it. Interesting enough, my avg. HR was 179 and 180 bpm with a max hr of 191 bpm. For me, the calculation was right on with the 200-age formula (I'm 29 years old).

The 220-age formula is based on regression formulas. You can't use it for an individual, only a population.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by chriskinney
I sat on a trainer and used percieved effort while a pal looked at the monitor and wrote down what it said. Good idea?

I kinda did it that way ...at least for my LT. I can't find my VO2 without doing an expensive lab test......that you make an appointment for.....that.... where they stick needles in you to draw blood.
EEEEEW! Isnt biking painful enough?? haha.
hey maybe that would make you pedal harder....the threat of needles. ...

I did this LT test though and it was fun. I got on a friends Computrainer in his 'dungeon'. he did a CONCONI test. rpms were steady around 90-95 and he logged my HR for each interval of Wattage increase. He did this incrementally every 1 min. Eventually I stopped riding because my legs would break if I did and he graphed it out and there was the LT. It kind of plataues on the graph.
its interesting. But I kinda knew my LT was there. That 220 minus age thing is pretty close.
I guess Chris Carmicheal has a similar approach with his Time Trial suggestion of finding an average

but I dont know my VO2 what is it average..I think for women around 38 and for men around 48 ish. ((i am talking cycling dudes not the average joe)))

I did a Conconi test on a computrainer. Incremental uppings of watts while you pedal at 90-95 rpms. steady rpms. your HR starts to climb as the watts go up each minute. you record the HR . then you can't pedal anymore and you stop! the graph you make shows a plataue and that is your range for you LT.

I dont want to get the VO2 because the stick needles in you and take your blood. ick and poo.
though it would be ideally nice to know that. ha

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by JuneBug
I did a Conconi test on a computrainer. Incremental uppings of watts while you pedal at 90-95 rpms. steady rpms. your HR starts to climb as the watts go up each minute. you record the HR . then you can't pedal anymore and you stop! the graph you make shows a plataue and that is your range for you LT.

I dont want to get the VO2 because the stick needles in you and take your blood. ick and poo.
though it would be ideally nice to know that. ha

Just to clarify, for a VO2 max test no blood needs to be taken, all that needs to be measured is power output (cycling) / velocity (running) and expired respiratory gases.

To measure lactate, blood *MUST* be taken as you're measuring the lactate within the blood.

A lactate test is a submaximal test as lactate threshold occurs at quite a low intensity, whilst a VO2 max test is a maximal test to exhaustion.

Frequently, (at least in labs in the UK), the two (lactate and Vo2 max) are measured within one test

Ric