New HR Zones Needed?

if you really did all that on the rollers then you are SUPER FIT !
sorry im not familiar with ___TrIMP of 825 and a 'Friel Conversion' TSS of 282.48___ concept,
however considering how seriously you train i think you should start thinking about a powermeter, people say it is far more precise than any other parameter - like HR - to optimize training.
I am a HR guy and planning to stay with HR since i dont race anymore,

Thanks for the reply... This post went over about as well as a turd in a punch bowl... 249 views and you're the first reply... I guess it's the 'if you really did that' part... Shades of SillyOldTwit perhaps...

I posted because the numbers seemed high to me as well and was hoping someone with experience could tell if they were based in reality or if my LTHR was way off... I can't ever seem to hit the same HR on the trainer that I can outdoors...

Friel goes over the Advanced TrIMP in his 'Total Heart Rate Training' book (Page 99). It's just the number of minutes in the Zone multiplied by the Zone number and summed for the total workout. I haven't seen anyone post using TrIMP scores so I have no idea where mine are in comparison.

Here is the article that Friel wrote over at Training Peaks that explains how to 'convert' HR time in Zones to TSS:

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/articles/cycling/estimating-training-stress-score-%28tss%29-by-joe-friel.aspx

I started tracking this last year in an effort to make my numbers comparable to power numbers. Everyone talks in CTL, ATL,TSS and TSB and being that the TrIMP numbers aren't 'normalized' I didn't have a good idea what was going on until I started using the conversion. And yes, the conversion is a gross estimation, but it seems to be at least qualitatively correct. I just use Excell to crunch all this.

I would love to have a power meter but I can't afford one... I get to ride a lot as an unemployment benefit, but there aren't any funds for any new stuff, so I'll have to make the best out of what I have...

Thx,
Dave

Dave->I do not think it has to do with the shades of SOT but simply that most people here train with power as easy to measure and get a good degree of accuracy. Probably a post will come similar to your own observation that HR is too variable for training as there are so many factors that can affect it outside the training session.

-js

Much like folks having issues with setting their FTP outdoors and riding at that indoors, I'd go outside and set whatever HR zones you need to set there. Things change in response to fitness and environmental factors.

I know from riding based on HR back in the 90s with the ol' trusty Polar SportTester that I used to be ~5bpm more in warmer weather for a given effort. Not only did that effect things on a seasonal basis but also on a daily one - some TT's started at 0dark30 while some in the same weekend started mid afternoon...

1. If you read Friel's books, he often suggests testing every 4-6 weeks when not racing. You need to do that.
2. Not a chance you did over an hour in Z5 (anaerobic) during the course of more than three hours riding. Your LTHR is incorrect, see number one.
3. TRIMP works fine for giving you a guide on training stress. It's not as accurate as power and you can't really compare directly with other riders, but by yourself and all but short, very intense efforts it's a fine way to help add structure to your training.
4. Grab Golden Cheetah and set up the heart rate zones. It'll calculate training loads for you so you don't have to do it manually. http://goldencheetah.org/
5. Swampy is correct that indoors you will likely suffer more from cardiac drift.
6. I like numbered lists.

Thanks guys(gals?)... All of the Z5 time is what had me thinking my LTHR was bogus and thus the post...

Any suggestions for someone that _really_ sucks at testing? The longest climb around here is less than an hour, and it's not a steady grade at that. Or perhaps I should just use the highest HR I've seen on a ride (which is 184...) 90% of which would be 165 as LTHR? I dunno how exact I need to be for this to be useful...

Thanks for the heads up about Golden Cheetah... I know Training Peaks has started providing the manager software HR based but you have to have a paid account...

Thanks again,
Dave

The idea is that you want a steady, constant, repeatable effort. If you have a trainer, use that. If you have a difficult time pacing yourself, have someone donate 30 minutes of their time and talk you through it. Using an arbitrary number and using a random percentage of it is actually what you are seeking to prevent.

Remember, the quality of your training directly relates to the accuracy of your testing. Plus, by doing it you get a decent little threshold workout.

And yeah, Golden Cheetah is quite nice for a free product and it even runs on three different platforms (Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux). Try the version three beta as it has the most heart rate-based metrics available.

If you have any questions, just ask!

I too, misinterpreted originally.

When he says rollers, he means rolling hills.

Apparently rolling hills is about as flat as it gets in his area.

I, did do 3 hr 20 min on the indoor trainer two saturdays ago.
When you drink 1600 calories of glycogen the day before,
you have to do some thing with it.

Lightning is nothing to fool arond with so had to ride indoors.

The tests we've used to determine an HR zone starting point have never been over 20 minutes.

The main thing is that you're fully recovered.

Then you run the test and base zones off the results.

I'm unusally fit but my test results were so consistently similar over ten years,
we stopped running them and stopped adjusting the zones.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by vspa [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

if you really did all that on the rollers then you are SUPER FIT !
sorry im not familiar with ___TrIMP of 825 and a 'Friel Conversion' TSS of 282.48___ concept,
however considering how seriously you train i think you should start thinking about a powermeter, people say it is far more precise than any other parameter - like HR - to optimize training.
I am a HR guy and planning to stay with HR since i dont race anymore,

Yes, rolling hills... I apologize for the confusion... My typical training loops are 3800' climbing in ~45mi all 'rolling hills' and 3700' climbing in ~35mi which includes 3 climbs that go from ~2mi to ~7mi in length...

The problem I see with testing on the road here is that the climbs aren't a steady grade and especially on the 'rolling hills' it's nigh on impossible not to spin out on the down hill... I may be able to get ~20min of uninterrupted pedaling on one of the climbs if I do it in the reverse direction than I usually do, I'll have to try it...

I usually do recovery rides on the trainer, 90min - 2hr. I've done Z2 stuff on it but it feels way harder than the HR would indicate... Zone 3 feels like death, I don't think I can get any kind of a useful LT test on it ...

dsb137 ---

You don't tell us how old you are or what physical shape you are in but ...

184 for a max heart rate seems a bit low. If 130-146bpm (Z3) feels like death, your 184 max seems a bit high.

Perhaps your age and physical condition would help resolve the numbers problem.

---

Heart rate is not the best number to watch. Perhaps you could borrow a power meter and watch both your power and heart rate for a while.

(I knew what riding "rollers" meant.)

Haha I saw that and gasped. I've got about 10 minutes patience for indoor roller riding.

Age is important to know for HR. I'm 43, an active Cat4 in good shape, and have an absolute max of 185... ten years ago it was in the 190's.

Sorry... I'll be 49 in August... Currently I'm 207# at 6'1", two years ago on this date I was 255# so some progress... Last year I rode 763 hours between the road and trainer. I lost a good 4 weeks due to 2 crashes last summer, and gained back some weight (I was 202# this time last year...)... I was on the trainer basically from last September until May of this year. The ride I posted to start this thread was the first I had done on the road this year.

This year to date I have 365 hours in between the trainer and on the road. My longest ride is about 6 hours. I normally do 3 rides a week in the 35 - 65 mile range with recovery rides in between for a total of 6 a week.

The 'feels like death' statement probably is more a reflection of the psychological effect of the trainer than anything physiological...

I have recorded the 184 HR this year, a few times... I think the highest I saw last year was 192...

Yes, I really have spent _way_ to much time on the trainer... and yes it sucks...

I'd be surprised to find that this is any secret recipe; here is the test we ran to determine MLSS:

[FONT= courier new]TEST: [/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]Warm Up: 5min Spin zone 1-2 [/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]5min gradually build to zone 3 4 x :30 HARD / :30 ez [/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]3min Spin[/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]TEST SET = 2 x 8min Time Trial (on trainer) @ 85-90 rpms seperated by 5min soft pedal[/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]**record HR @ :02,:04,:06,and:08 and AVG HR for entire session. [/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]These efforts should be as hard as you can go for 8min.[/FONT]

[FONT= courier new]Warm Down as needed [/FONT]

You average the recorded HRs, and that's your AT.

MLSS is 10 bpm below.

Below is a letter I saved from Dirk and Joe Freil. I don't remember where or when.

[FONT= verdana]Joe and Dirk Friel[/FONT]

[FONT= verdana]Dear Mr. Ludden, [/FONT]

[FONT= verdana]I hope your half marathon went well and you are recovering. Trying to determine your lactate threshold HR from the last 20 or 30 minutes of a half marathon is probably not accurate. The length of that event is long enough to have built up fatigue and soreness which would not allow you to maximize your effort. It can however be an indicator of a lower limit of lactate threshold and give you feedback as to where your LTHR might be. [/FONT]
[FONT= verdana]A strong 30-minute time trial when you are fresh and motivated will yield a higher average heart rate as compared to the last 30 minutes of your half marathon. [/FONT]

[FONT= verdana]The same can be said for a longer road cycling event, unless the tie trial effort is performed at the beginning. [/FONT]

[FONT= verdana]One suggestion may be to incorporate your test into the beginning of a build or base phase before you have lingering fatigue from previous weeks. Be sure to make the test workout early in the week following a rest week.[/FONT]

[FONT= verdana]Good luck this season,[/FONT]

[FONT= verdana]Joe and Dirk Friel [/FONT]

OK... Last Wednesday was my last day out, I did ~3hrs with 3694' climbing and an average HR of 137...

Then I did a 'recovery' spell:
Thur- 90min on the trainer with an av HR of 97...
Fri- 3hrs on the trainer, ~ 50% 'Zone 2' , av HR of 113
Sat- 1hr45min on the trainer with an av HR of 93
Sun- 3hrs on the trainer, ~50% 'Zone 2' , av HR of 115
Mon- 90min on the trainer with an av HR of 93

Thinking that I'm 'rested' I went out today to do a 'Field Test' ...
My warm up consisted of about 3 miles of rolling hills followed by some ~7% climbing with some false flats and slight descents...
Total time of warm up: 21:04.55...

Then for the 'Test' portion I tried to finish the climb as hard as I could...
I don't watch my HR out on the road, so I had no idea what I did until I came home and downloaded my data...

Time: 26:27.70
Average HR: 167
Max HR: 174

I think I paced pretty well, I was definitely going hard...

So... I guess I should be using 167 as my LTHR to set up my zones?
Does this seem like a valid way to do a Field Test?

Thanks,
Dave

I ran the data from the originally posted ride through the new zones (Coggin zones based on 167 bpm LTHR...) and got the following:

Zone 1 - 0 (I forgot to start my computer at the beginning of the ride...)
Zone 2 - 22:29
Zone 3 - 1:15:46
Zone 4 - 1:33:57
Zone 5 - 9:39

Which works out to a TrIMP of 696.32, and an estimated TSS of 250.36...

Looks like it may be more based on reality?

Thanks,
Dave

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by dsb137 [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

I ran the data from the originally posted ride through the new zones (Coggin zones based on 167 bpm LTHR...) and got the following:

Zone 1 - 0 (I forgot to start my computer at the beginning of the ride...)
Zone 2 - 22:29
Zone 3 - 1:15:46
Zone 4 - 1:33:57
Zone 5 - 9:39

Which works out to a TrIMP of 696.32, and an estimated TSS of 250.36...

Looks like it may be more based on reality?

Thanks,
Dave

Yes, your testing method and results sound good and your new zone placement looks much more reasonable.

Once you do the next test (the end of your next rest week would be a good time for it) should help confirm and further refine what you are using right now.