General Discussion Triathlon Talk » HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Rss Feed  
Moderators: jmk-brooklyn, Ron Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 23
 
 
2013-05-03 6:13 PM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Champion
6285
50001000100100252525
Sarasota, FL
Bronze member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

x2  Best thread on HR training ever.

Mark

 



2013-05-08 2:30 PM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Regular
228
10010025
Levittown, PA
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Wow, can't believe I just read this entire thread from front to back.  A friend at work has a HR monitor and said I can use it for as long as I want.  Going to do my LT test next week and start this low zone training.  I had my first tri (sprint) ever 2 weeks ago and my run didn't go as well as planned.  I had a great swim and bike, but it caught up to me on the run.  I am determined to improve my run.  Can't wait.  Thanks to Mike on starting this thread.  Great info provided.

 

Also, once I get my max heart rate should I ............................ j/k

2013-05-09 9:04 AM
in reply to: #4733612

User image

Official BT Coach
8565
5000200010005002525
Boulder, Colorado
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
spiderjunior - 2013-05-08 1:30 PM

Wow, can't believe I just read this entire thread from front to back.  A friend at work has a HR monitor and said I can use it for as long as I want.  Going to do my LT test next week and start this low zone training.  I had my first tri (sprint) ever 2 weeks ago and my run didn't go as well as planned.  I had a great swim and bike, but it caught up to me on the run.  I am determined to improve my run.  Can't wait.  Thanks to Mike on starting this thread.  Great info provided.

 

Also, once I get my max heart rate should I ............................ j/k

 

Spider that is funny but after all this info on HRs, I JUST got an email from a guy about his HR for his upcoming IM and he said here's my LT, based on my MAX - I almost lost it. Well, I did lose it, but now we'll get him squared away and he'll have a great race.

2013-05-09 9:46 AM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Veteran
403
100100100100
Maryland
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Mike another question for you.  I had tested my HR zones recently probably about a month ago per your protocol.  Bike 147/run 159.  done on a trainer/treadmill respectively.

This weekend I raced a sprint.  The swim was tough, cold/choppy and mentally draining.

I did really well on the bike/run (PR for both) but my avg hr was 167/177 respectively.

Was this a factor of me not pushing as hard as I should have for the testing? Outdoor vs Indoor? If so, should these be my new numbers?  I have been using virtual power mainly on bike, so concerned more about run. 

Thanks for your thought/advice as always!

bg

2013-05-15 7:43 AM
in reply to: #237705

User image

Regular
228
10010025
Levittown, PA
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Ok, did my lactate test today and now have a few questions.  First of all, what a great workout that test was.  I definitely gave it all I had.  I finished my test with the last half mile of my run at a high 7 min pace which I have only hit a 7 min pace probably once ever before.  I felt completely drained at the end of the test and was able to negative split the test by breaking my run down into essentially 3 different 7 min periods for the 20 min test portion.  Ok, now that I have my numbers, here is my question.  My avg heart rate was 180.  I went to the page http://beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/training/create-hrzones.as... and there were 4 fields to enter my numbers.  I entered 180 in the "Lactate Test" area and hit calculate.  I assume this is the one I wanted to use.  I got the below info:

 

1 - Recovery                       119-152

2 - Extensive Endurance    154 - 163

3 - Intensive Endurance     164 - 172

4 - Sub-Threshold               173 - 179

5a - SuperThreshold           180 - 184

5b - Anaerobic Endurance   185 - 190

5c - Power                           191 - 199

 

Ok, so using 180 as my average I came up with the above numbers.  So it looks like my optimum training zone is 154 - 163 in zone 2.   Now I know that Mike has said to not pay attention to your max heart rate, which is fine, I am not going to do any type of work related to my heart rate max, but my only question is that during my test my average was 180 and my max was 185.  Why does this chart above go all the way to 199?    Does it assume that under different conditions my max could increase, maybe due to heat, anxiety, etc.....    Just wondering.  Anybody know?

 



Edited by spiderjunior 2013-05-15 7:56 AM
2013-12-10 12:06 AM
in reply to: Guest

User image

Regular
439
10010010010025
SF Bay area
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Mike, probably asked and answered 100 times, but when one of the training plans says "Keep HR in zone 1-2", that seems like a pretty big spread (1.0 - 2.9) and it seems like there has got to be more to it. I tend to push the upper end of the boundary in these types of broad definition so am wondering if I'm missing something. Does this mean that if you are coming off a really hard workout the day before keep it in the 1's but if you are feeling strong go for the 2.9? Or it is a simple answer of anything under 2.9 will accomplish the goal of the workout so it is athlete's choice?


2013-12-10 7:18 AM
in reply to: spiderjunior

User image

Expert
1918
1000500100100100100
Greenville, SC
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Originally posted by spiderjunior

Ok, so using 180 as my average I came up with the above numbers.  So it looks like my optimum training zone is 154 - 163 in zone 2.   Now I know that Mike has said to not pay attention to your max heart rate, which is fine, I am not going to do any type of work related to my heart rate max, but my only question is that during my test my average was 180 and my max was 185.  Why does this chart above go all the way to 199?    Does it assume that under different conditions my max could increase, maybe due to heat, anxiety, etc.....    Just wondering.  Anybody know? 

yes it is assumed that you did not push your heart to its absolute maximum rate during your test.  your maximum is the most your heart can do. period. under any circumstances. i'm not sure how it is calculated but i'm sure it uses some extrapolation based on the data from your test.  i did a test last week and my max came back at 196 even though i never got above 185.

2013-12-10 10:36 AM
in reply to: Clempson

User image

Official BT Coach
8565
5000200010005002525
Boulder, Colorado
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Originally posted by Clempson

Originally posted by spiderjunior

Ok, so using 180 as my average I came up with the above numbers.  So it looks like my optimum training zone is 154 - 163 in zone 2.   Now I know that Mike has said to not pay attention to your max heart rate, which is fine, I am not going to do any type of work related to my heart rate max, but my only question is that during my test my average was 180 and my max was 185.  Why does this chart above go all the way to 199?    Does it assume that under different conditions my max could increase, maybe due to heat, anxiety, etc.....    Just wondering.  Anybody know? 

yes it is assumed that you did not push your heart to its absolute maximum rate during your test.  your maximum is the most your heart can do. period. under any circumstances. i'm not sure how it is calculated but i'm sure it uses some extrapolation based on the data from your test.  i did a test last week and my max came back at 196 even though i never got above 185.

That's your theoretical max. If We put you on a steep hill and had you run all out until you collapsed, you'd probably hit it. It's just a 'number'.

2013-12-10 10:40 AM
in reply to: TTom

User image

Official BT Coach
8565
5000200010005002525
Boulder, Colorado
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Originally posted by TTom Mike, probably asked and answered 100 times, but when one of the training plans says "Keep HR in zone 1-2", that seems like a pretty big spread (1.0 - 2.9) and it seems like there has got to be more to it. I tend to push the upper end of the boundary in these types of broad definition so am wondering if I'm missing something. Does this mean that if you are coming off a really hard workout the day before keep it in the 1's but if you are feeling strong go for the 2.9? Or it is a simple answer of anything under 2.9 will accomplish the goal of the workout so it is athlete's choice?

Tom

My answer is  'it depends'. I like to see athletes find a comfort zone that they can run in, all day - not really all day, but day after day for sure. I call this the "Law of Repeatability" - meaning if you can't repeat an easy workout the next day, you did it too hard the day before.

So, if you look around 20-30 beats below LT, you'll find your sweet spot. I am typically about 30 beats below LT for my nice easy runs. If I want to run faster, I'll run closer to 20 beats below. This is all trial and error and if you keep pushing towards the top of Z2 - one of two things will happen:

1. You will get tired, burned out or worse, injured.

2. You need to retest b/c you didn't achieve a true LT number.

Good luck!

2013-12-10 10:57 AM
in reply to: mikericci

User image

Expert
1918
1000500100100100100
Greenville, SC
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Originally posted by mikericci

Originally posted by Clempson

Originally posted by spiderjunior

Ok, so using 180 as my average I came up with the above numbers.  So it looks like my optimum training zone is 154 - 163 in zone 2.   Now I know that Mike has said to not pay attention to your max heart rate, which is fine, I am not going to do any type of work related to my heart rate max, but my only question is that during my test my average was 180 and my max was 185.  Why does this chart above go all the way to 199?    Does it assume that under different conditions my max could increase, maybe due to heat, anxiety, etc.....    Just wondering.  Anybody know? 

yes it is assumed that you did not push your heart to its absolute maximum rate during your test.  your maximum is the most your heart can do. period. under any circumstances. i'm not sure how it is calculated but i'm sure it uses some extrapolation based on the data from your test.  i did a test last week and my max came back at 196 even though i never got above 185.

That's your theoretical max. If We put you on a steep hill and had you run all out until you collapsed, you'd probably hit it. It's just a 'number'.

i believe you, but i'm not going to test that out

2013-12-10 2:15 PM
in reply to: Clempson

User image

Official BT Coach
8565
5000200010005002525
Boulder, Colorado
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!

Originally posted by Clempson

Originally posted by mikericci

Originally posted by Clempson

Originally posted by spiderjunior

Ok, so using 180 as my average I came up with the above numbers.  So it looks like my optimum training zone is 154 - 163 in zone 2.   Now I know that Mike has said to not pay attention to your max heart rate, which is fine, I am not going to do any type of work related to my heart rate max, but my only question is that during my test my average was 180 and my max was 185.  Why does this chart above go all the way to 199?    Does it assume that under different conditions my max could increase, maybe due to heat, anxiety, etc.....    Just wondering.  Anybody know? 

yes it is assumed that you did not push your heart to its absolute maximum rate during your test.  your maximum is the most your heart can do. period. under any circumstances. i'm not sure how it is calculated but i'm sure it uses some extrapolation based on the data from your test.  i did a test last week and my max came back at 196 even though i never got above 185.

That's your theoretical max. If We put you on a steep hill and had you run all out until you collapsed, you'd probably hit it. It's just a 'number'.

i believe you, but i'm not going to test that out

It's pretty painful. I did bunch of 30 sec hill repeats on a steep hill a few years back and I'm sure I hit my max. I was toast for a few days too. Not recommended.



2013-12-11 12:17 AM
in reply to: mikericci

User image

Regular
439
10010010010025
SF Bay area
Gold member
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH!
Originally posted by mikericci

Originally posted by TTom Mike, probably asked and answered 100 times, but when one of the training plans says "Keep HR in zone 1-2", that seems like a pretty big spread (1.0 - 2.9) and it seems like there has got to be more to it. I tend to push the upper end of the boundary in these types of broad definition so am wondering if I'm missing something. Does this mean that if you are coming off a really hard workout the day before keep it in the 1's but if you are feeling strong go for the 2.9? Or it is a simple answer of anything under 2.9 will accomplish the goal of the workout so it is athlete's choice?

Tom

My answer isĀ  'it depends'. I like to see athletes find a comfort zone that they can run in, all day - not really all day, but day after day for sure. I call this the "Law of Repeatability" - meaning if you can't repeat an easy workout the next day, you did it too hard the day before.

So, if you look around 20-30 beats below LT, you'll find your sweet spot. I am typically about 30 beats below LT for my nice easy runs. If I want to run faster, I'll run closer to 20 beats below. This is all trial and error and if you keep pushing towards the top of Z2 - one of two things will happen:

1. You will get tired, burned out or worse, injured.

2. You need to retest b/c you didn't achieve a true LT number.

Good luck!

Thanks for the reply Mike, it is good guidance. Right now I'm working on the "easy" part of the hard/easy equation as I've struggled to keep it easy as well as I should have in the past and yup, gotten to the injuries you refer to above. This is especially important to me as this year I'll be doing my first IM distance and know I'll have to keep thing easier than I feel I could be doing, especially in the first parts of the bike and run. That does beg another HR related question however. The course (Vineman) is rolling hills for a good portion. How does one account for that when running to a HR target since it will be a constant (no pun intended) uphill/downhill battle. For example, on the run if the plan was to stay in Z2, should you really try to stay under 3.0 on the uphills or do you allow yourself a little space there, say up to 3.2, as you'll be getting a bit of a HR break on the backside of the hill? Most of my marathons were on relatively flat courses so this is a new part of the equation for me.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 23