Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
I was doing only 1,000 miles per year or so for a few years and I was resting about 60bpm. Last year I upped it to 2750 or so and I'll have done approaching 4,500 by the end of the year. Proof that cycling makes you fit(ter)!
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
I was doing only 1,000 miles per year or so for a few years and I was resting about 60bpm. Last year I upped it to 2750 or so and I'll have done approaching 4,500 by the end of the year. Proof that cycling makes you fit(ter)!
How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
-- Simon
42-60 depending on how much training I've been doing. It's probably quite relative to your own fitness, but not to other peoples' fitness or their performance.
42-60 depending on how much training I've been doing. It's probably quite relative to your own fitness, but not to other peoples' fitness or their performance.
Aww don't spoil my fun! It's just a healthy obsession with numbers!
When fit mine is about 44-50. It only compares you with yourself, as it varies from person to person. It is thought to be due to increased parasympathetic (slowing type of autonomic nerves) activity, and not heart size, as you might imagine. It is also thought to protect against arrhythmias. (I am a doctor!)
Low 50's normally, but a low of 30 when I measured it after waking (I suspect it's due to an interesting medical condition rather than fitness tho) :-P
"Simon Proven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48.
Blimey! I'd have to be asleep to get that low. If my wife's went that low, her pacemaker would kick in.
Bradycardia aside, it probably means you outdo me on the cardiovascular front. So likely on the body mass index front too. And the body fat ratio. But enough about me. More power to you!
--
Richard
--------------------
Individual replies to [email hidden]
less the Misdirections (and note the underscore after r246)
"Mark Thompson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
Low 50's normally, but a low of 30 when I measured it after waking (I suspect it's due to an interesting medical condition rather than fitness tho) :-P
That's about the same as me (Due to Beta Blockers), apart from the 30 bit, I've never measured after waking. I have seen it go below 40 when I'm working (I like to save staring out the window for the afternoon) ;o)
If you're medical condition is the same it is probably more interesting to discuss long term high work heart rate (you know not absolute max at the top of a hill but the sustainable rate it tends towards when steadily working hard), mine seems to vary between 130 and 160 depending on the time of day and when I took my pill.
"Simon Proven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48.
Blimey! I'd have to be asleep to get that low. If my wife's went that low, her pacemaker would kick in.
Bradycardia aside, it probably means you outdo me on the cardiovascular front. So likely on the body mass index front too. And the body fat ratio. But enough about me. More power to you!
You've probably already seen the comments that it's only useful on a personal fitness level.
There are things like VO2max measures which are useful measures of fitness. I had a decent score before I bought a car, it dropped after I got the thing, but it will have improved with the increased mileage I'm doing again. I should get it tested.
In the end, if we're trying to get fitter, we should be comparing with ourselves rather than each other (if that's the right phrasing).
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
I was doing only 1,000 miles per year or so for a few years and I was resting about 60bpm. Last year I upped it to 2750 or so and I'll have done approaching 4,500 by the end of the year. Proof that cycling makes you fit(ter)!
How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
-- Simon
42-60 depending on how much training I've been doing. It's probably quite relative to your own fitness, but not to other peoples' fitness or their performance.
38 when dozing in my heavy cycling days (HRM set to alarm below 40...)
60 sitting at my computer now, having done no exercise for 3 years.
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
At 48 BPM you have only a spare capacity of 48 beats until you are dead.
At 65 BPM I have a spare capacity of 65 beats so am further away from death than you.
-- Remove my Bra to reply "Simon Proven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
I was doing only 1,000 miles per year or so for a few years and I was resting about 60bpm. Last year I upped it to 2750 or so and I'll have done approaching 4,500 by the end of the year. Proof that cycling makes you fit(ter)!
How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
-- Simon
Mine is also around 48 at rest (I am 54 Years old) but my Max whilst still in the saddle peaks at 198 that blows the 220 minus your age theory out of the water. But I don't know whether I am fit or dying.
: How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
Mine was 48 this morning just before I got out of bed.
Arthur
-- Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt "Blogs are neither necessary nor sufficient for evil to triumph. They're just what we call an enabling technology" - Danny O'Brien
"Simon Proven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48.
Blimey! I'd have to be asleep to get that low. If my wife's went that low, her pacemaker would kick in.
Bradycardia aside, it probably means you outdo me on the cardiovascular front. So likely on the body mass index front too. And the body fat ratio. But enough about me. More power to you!
Yes, he's rather annoyingly fit, very lean, and scampers up hills all too easily ;-)
My lowest's been around 52, iirc. And highest seen (whilst still in saddle, since I can't climb hills out of it) was 198 too. And based on what I felt like, I'm pretty sure previously I beat that high on a different hill.
And I'm not lithe, slim, fit, or the sort that can even pretend they might be scampering up a hill on a bike ;-)
Oh, and I'm early thirties, too, so like you say, it blows the 220-age out of the water again.
"Cliff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Mine is also around 48 at rest (I am 54 Years old) but my Max whilst still in the saddle peaks at 198 that blows the 220 minus your age theory out of the water. But I don't know whether I am fit or dying.
The 220 minus your age formula is nothing more than a myth. It is widely believed and is often parroted by people, including fitness professionals, who should know better, but there is no scientific basis for it whatsoever. See <http://www.css.edu/users/tboone2/asep/Robergs.doc>. (This is a Word document rather than an html page unfortunately.)
"Cliff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
-- Remove my Bra to reply "Simon Proven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
I was doing only 1,000 miles per year or so for a few years and I was resting about 60bpm. Last year I upped it to 2750 or so and I'll have done approaching 4,500 by the end of the year. Proof that cycling makes you fit(ter)!
How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
-- Simon
Mine is also around 48 at rest (I am 54 Years old) but my Max whilst still in the saddle peaks at 198 that blows the 220 minus your age theory out of the water. But I don't know whether I am fit or dying.
48BPM to 198BMP seems like a big range to me.
Yours truly Quite concerned. (Middlesbrough)
I am 40yrs young and cycle about 3 times a week mainly to keep fit and my resting heart rate is 44 / 45.
I find it really hard to get my heart rate above 170 so 198bmp seems phenominal to me.
"Cliff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
-- Remove my Bra to reply "Simon Proven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Mine's plumbed new (for me) lows. I was sat around the house being idle today and noticed it was quite slow so I put the HRM on and it was swinging between 45 and 50bpm, with an average around 48. I've cycled over 4,000 miles this year, might that have something to do with it? :-)
I was doing only 1,000 miles per year or so for a few years and I was resting about 60bpm. Last year I upped it to 2750 or so and I'll have done approaching 4,500 by the end of the year. Proof that cycling makes you fit(ter)!
How does 48 compare to the rest of you lot, then?
-- Simon
Mine is also around 48 at rest (I am 54 Years old) but my Max whilst still in the saddle peaks at 198 that blows the 220 minus your age theory out of the water. But I don't know whether I am fit or dying.
48BPM to 198BMP seems like a big range to me.
Yours truly Quite concerned. (Middlesbrough)
I am 40yrs young and cycle about 3 times a week mainly to keep fit and my resting heart rate is 44 / 45.
I find it really hard to get my heart rate above 170 so 198bmp seems phenominal to me.
Maybe I am not training as hard as I thought 🙁
Well, I started this thread. The highest I have ever managed was 195bpm but these days (aged 32) I don't seem to be able to get above about 181.
42-60 depending on how much training I've been doing. It's probably quite relative to your own fitness, but not to other peoples' fitness or their performance.
Aww don't spoil my fun! It's just a healthy obsession with numbers!
I have to say that even knowing what your heart rate is seems to me unhealthily /keen/.
Heart Rate Monitor? What would I want one of those for?
