HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! (Page 17)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2009-04-21 5:11 AM in reply to: #2099074 |
Resident Curmudgeon 25290 The Road Back | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! newy14 - 2009-04-21 5:05 AM Gday Mike I know this is an old article but I have been trying to determine how you calculate the heart rate zones using the LT method. I know how to get my LT but how do I calculate the percentages of this to put into the individual zones? For Eg; Zone 2 is 136-139bpm, but what percentages have you used to calculate this? I have also been unable to find any info on the training bible on the website and it's calculations. Cheers Damian Use the HR feature in the logs here on BT, or input your LTHR into this spreadsheet (which has the percentages built in: Attachments ---------------- HR_Zones.xls (22KB - 82 downloads) |
|
2009-04-22 5:01 AM in reply to: #2099075 |
2 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Thanks for the info 'The Bear'. This a great website with extremely detailed information - and you don't have to pay for the priviledge every time. Anyone out there recommend the Silver membership? |
2009-05-23 8:17 AM in reply to: #2101832 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! bump |
2009-07-06 1:06 AM in reply to: #237705 |
166 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Greetings Mike, Im a few months from 50, have done two sprint-tris and a duathlon in last 10 weeks, am a lifetime runner, have a regular weight, resting heart rate of 50 bpm, and a typical 40-minute run at 9:00 pace has me logging around 150 bpm (I do live in a very hot/humid climate, so I would probably be around 140-150 bpm in regular weather circumstances). And when I train, my Recovery Heart Rate is around 40 for two minutes (20 per minute), so I felt safe doing the test. Tried your test on a spinning bike last weekend, in an air-conditioned facility. Wasn't sure what to expect. Test was REAL TOUGH. I couldn't get through it. I did a rigourous warmup for 15 minutes (maybe too rigorous), by the time that I hit the start of test I was going 140 bpm. When I clicked on my timer after 10 minutes into the 30-minute routine, I was around 152 bpm, and fading fast, I knew that I was over the edge....within minutes got up to 156, and inside of 3:30 of the 20 minutes timing period, I had to back off; could not deal with the tempo....tried to come back several times over the last 20 minutes to bring my heart rate back as high as I could, but I could only get up to the low 150s, before muscle pain/failure made me back off again...THIS IS NOT A TEST FOR THE FAINT OF HEART...I started it during spin class, told my instructor what I was doing that day, so I had the spinners all around me for motivation...about halfway into it, even added MP3 headphones with my favorite music to keep me energized....that helped for about a minute, but muscle failure was soon to follow anyway. Do you think that I was able to reach my lactate threshold (156 bpm)?...I think I did....I think I just found it sooner than having to bike an additional 17 minutes would indicate. In hindsight, I wish that I had warmed up a bit slower, and let myself ease into the 30-minute session, (perhaps starting that first 10 minute period at 120 bpm, not 140!), but still, I think I probably reached the treshold....simply sooner. Any thoughts on this? I was all out to get to 156 bpm. I have done treshhold tests before, in a doctors office, usually walking/jogging on a treadmill, but's its been years, and have forgotten the numbers. Never on a bike. This was different. By staying on the seat, I isolated the pain to my legs, and eventually it radiated out to the rest of the body, until I had had enough. Bottom line: do you think that my test was good enough to get close to my lactate threshhold? Phil |
2009-07-06 8:18 AM in reply to: #2263690 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! scholar - 2009-07-06 12:06 AM Greetings Mike, Im a few months from 50, have done two sprint-tris and a duathlon in last 10 weeks, am a lifetime runner, have a regular weight, resting heart rate of 50 bpm, and a typical 40-minute run at 9:00 pace has me logging around 150 bpm (I do live in a very hot/humid climate, so I would probably be around 140-150 bpm in regular weather circumstances). And when I train, my Recovery Heart Rate is around 40 for two minutes (20 per minute), so I felt safe doing the test. Tried your test on a spinning bike last weekend, in an air-conditioned facility. Wasn't sure what to expect. Test was REAL TOUGH. I couldn't get through it. I did a rigourous warmup for 15 minutes (maybe too rigorous), by the time that I hit the start of test I was going 140 bpm. When I clicked on my timer after 10 minutes into the 30-minute routine, I was around 152 bpm, and fading fast, I knew that I was over the edge....within minutes got up to 156, and inside of 3:30 of the 20 minutes timing period, I had to back off; could not deal with the tempo....tried to come back several times over the last 20 minutes to bring my heart rate back as high as I could, but I could only get up to the low 150s, before muscle pain/failure made me back off again...THIS IS NOT A TEST FOR THE FAINT OF HEART...I started it during spin class, told my instructor what I was doing that day, so I had the spinners all around me for motivation...about halfway into it, even added MP3 headphones with my favorite music to keep me energized....that helped for about a minute, but muscle failure was soon to follow anyway. Do you think that I was able to reach my lactate threshold (156 bpm)?...I think I did....I think I just found it sooner than having to bike an additional 17 minutes would indicate. In hindsight, I wish that I had warmed up a bit slower, and let myself ease into the 30-minute session, (perhaps starting that first 10 minute period at 120 bpm, not 140!), but still, I think I probably reached the treshold....simply sooner. Any thoughts on this? I was all out to get to 156 bpm. I have done treshhold tests before, in a doctors office, usually walking/jogging on a treadmill, but's its been years, and have forgotten the numbers. Never on a bike. This was different. By staying on the seat, I isolated the pain to my legs, and eventually it radiated out to the rest of the body, until I had had enough. Bottom line: do you think that my test was good enough to get close to my lactate threshhold? Phil Hi Phil, Where did you get the 156 HR from? Running? Typically we see the Bike LT 10 beat BELOW run LT -so 145 may have been more in your range of bike LT. I would re-test in a week, and warm up slowly - use the protocol we have on this site and then be warmed up, but not fried for the actual test. Also, I would do the test outside, since that's where you'll be racing. HRs tend to be different from inside to outside. I hope this helps. |
2009-07-06 10:04 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! It sounds like you simply didn't pace the effort properly. Reaching your physical limit and having to back off doesn't mean you were at LT. You were cooked at ~14min into a 30min test which means you were likely above LT effort regardless of what your HRM was reading. Like Mike said, give it another shot but start more conservative and don't look to your HRM for guidance based on some pre-conceived concept of what your HR should be. The point of the TT is to go as hard as you can for 30min and see what you end up with for HR data. |
|
2009-07-08 6:24 PM in reply to: #237705 |
New user 34 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! So what does a higher LTHR mean as opposed to a lower one? Does it mean you are less fit, or more fit? Or does it just have to do with bodies being suited to different types of training? I did the test last night and came up with a LTHR of 174bpm. (Running) |
2009-07-08 6:40 PM in reply to: #2271448 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! abdekel - 2009-07-08 5:24 PM So what does a higher LTHR mean as opposed to a lower one? Does it mean you are less fit, or more fit? Or does it just have to do with bodies being suited to different types of training? I did the test last night and came up with a LTHR of 174bpm. (Running) It's kind of like shoe size. If you have a big foot, it doesn't mean you run any faster - same thing with LT - it's personal - yours is what it is and the goal is to be able to run faster at the same or lower HR. |
2009-07-16 4:11 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Member 32 Seattle, WA | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Amazing post, really answered all of my HR questions! |
2009-07-16 4:21 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Master 2571 Tiger's Den | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! I really think this should be a sticky... we pull it up and link to it at least once a week around here. |
2009-07-16 5:11 PM in reply to: #2290224 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! SuzanneS - 2009-07-16 3:21 PM I really think this should be a sticky... we pull it up and link to it at least once a week around here. Where is here? |
|
2009-07-16 5:13 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Extreme Veteran 495 Denton | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Hahahahaha I just love how freaking long this is. We should all, as endurance athletes, be aware of the fact that this formula is only mildly accurate 50% of the time. It can be right. But it's just as likely that it won't be. No great odds as far as science is concerned. If you want real accuracy, metabolic testing (or field testing, if cash is low) is the only way to go. |
2009-10-11 9:28 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Bump |
2009-10-29 2:04 PM in reply to: #2454346 |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! bump |
2009-11-01 10:34 PM in reply to: #237705 |
Master 1810 Morse Lake, Noblesville, Indiana | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Bump. People asking ??? on other threads... |
2009-11-01 11:02 PM in reply to: #237705 |
3 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Hello All! |
|
2009-11-02 7:01 AM in reply to: #2492562 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! HammerChile - 2009-11-01 10:02 PM Hello All! Kevin Congrats on the HM race! Do you know your LT? That should tell you what HR to hold. I don't put much stock in a max HR - I just go with the LTHR as described in this thread. Congrats again! |
2009-11-03 1:58 AM in reply to: #237705 |
New user 45 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Just stumbled onto this thread and I was very surprised at how accurate it was for me. I just did the bike test for the first time and it confirmed my avg HR at the Longhorn HIM of 145 as being a comfortable pace for me. My LT was 163 after the test and it felt spot on. Someone told me you should ride on the cusp of zone 2/3 for HIM/IM and I didn't believe it at first but after some long rides I got to thinking he was right. |
2009-11-03 6:52 AM in reply to: #2494582 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Gawaine79 - 2009-11-03 12:58 AM Just stumbled onto this thread and I was very surprised at how accurate it was for me. I just did the bike test for the first time and it confirmed my avg HR at the Longhorn HIM of 145 as being a comfortable pace for me. My LT was 163 after the test and it felt spot on. Someone told me you should ride on the cusp of zone 2/3 for HIM/IM and I didn't believe it at first but after some long rides I got to thinking he was right. Keep in mind Z3 on the bike at a HIM only if you have the fitness to run well off the bike. What did you run at Longhorn? |
2009-11-04 9:33 PM in reply to: #237705 |
1 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Hey Mike, I have been enjoying reading this thread, thanks for all the great info. I do have a question though. I did a bike LT test today on a bike in the gym, and it was about 160. It may be a few beats off since I couldn't find any option to get an average on the bike I was using. I also don't have a monitor but by holding onto the handlebars the machine told my my HR, so I don't know how accurate that is. My question is this though. I am following the 3x balanced 20 week workout on here for a triathlon that I will run in march. I am a bit at a loss on how to apply my zones to that plan. I am just starting out training so from what i read it should be a base year, but I have played soccer all my life and am starting with a pretty good level of conditioning and want to employ HR training. I gather that most of my workouts should be in z1 and z2, but when if at all should I be pushing it and doing more speed based workouts? Thanks for your help. |
2009-11-05 12:10 AM in reply to: #2498390 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! bhouse - 2009-11-04 8:33 PM Hey Mike, I have been enjoying reading this thread, thanks for all the great info. I do have a question though. I did a bike LT test today on a bike in the gym, and it was about 160. It may be a few beats off since I couldn't find any option to get an average on the bike I was using. I also don't have a monitor but by holding onto the handlebars the machine told my my HR, so I don't know how accurate that is. My question is this though. I am following the 3x balanced 20 week workout on here for a triathlon that I will run in march. I am a bit at a loss on how to apply my zones to that plan. I am just starting out training so from what i read it should be a base year, but I have played soccer all my life and am starting with a pretty good level of conditioning and want to employ HR training. I gather that most of my workouts should be in z1 and z2, but when if at all should I be pushing it and doing more speed based workouts? Thanks for your help. I would maybe borrow a HRM from a friend to get your correct HR LT - I am not very confident in those hand held HR monitors. Once you have your LT, you can plug the number into your HR calculator. The harder efforts come after a good base is built up. If you have experience training, you could do some harder workouts earlier. Start with some hill repeats and then a tempo run once a week too. OR you could jump into a 5k or 10k if that's an option as well. I hope that helps! |
|
2009-11-05 12:10 AM in reply to: #2494693 |
New user 45 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! mikericci - 2009-11-03 6:52 AM Keep in mind Z3 on the bike at a HIM only if you have the fitness to run well off the bike. What did you run at Longhorn? For IM, Zone 2 is more than enough for most people. The only people going Z3 are the ones who are looking to go around 10:20 or better overall. Yea my running has always been my worst leg of the Tri, I did about 1.5 minutes slower at the HIM than at Olympic distances. Immediately off the bike running was probably the worst part of the run for me. I felt that I was going faster later on in the run. I could probably stand to drop to upper 130's in the HIM distances. |
2009-11-05 7:22 AM in reply to: #2498475 |
8763 Boulder, Colorado | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! Keep in mind that if OLY distance is right at LT on the run, a HIM run is about 15 beats below that for the above average person, 5-8 beats below LT for the really fit person (30"a mile slower than open HM pace). For a newbie, I would recommend about 20 beats lower than LT for the run. |
2010-01-07 10:03 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Veteran 248 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! bump, cause this has to be one of the most informative threads i've read on ANY forum. Is there a handy cross reference chart that maps RPE to Z1 thru 5c ? Cant easily find it now... Edited by MillMan221 2010-01-07 10:09 AM |
2010-01-07 11:11 AM in reply to: #237705 |
Veteran 248 | Subject: RE: HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! I found the cross ref. |
|