HR Zones: 220-Age - the TRUTH! (Page 19)

Ok, I did this and found my max HR was either 171 or 178 (couldn't see it well) and my 20 min (after 10 min wu) average HR was 154.  How did you determine the zones?

mikericci - 2011-03-27 11:59 PM

kathy caribe - 2011-03-27 9:48 PM

mikericci - Example: Johnny has an average of 156 heart rate for his 30 minute bike TT. If I calculate Johnny's zones using his LT and the Training Bible zones, this is what I come up with: Zone 1 - 102-125 Zone 2 - 136-139 Zone 3 - 140-145 Zone 4 - 146- 155 Zone 5a - 156-159 Zone 5b - 160-164 Zone 5c - 165-170 Peace, Mike

 

Ok, I did this and found my max HR was either 171 or 178 (couldn't see it well) and my 20 min (after 10 min wu) average HR was 154.  How did you determine the zones?

Please read the thread.
You don't need your max. It's useless.
The 154 is what you need to know.
In your BT training log, there is a calculator to determine zones. What you need to know is that about 20 beats below your LT (131-140 for you) is where you need to do 80% of your run training.

For cycling you'll have to do the same test. Good luck and let me know if you have questions.

thanks.  I've read the thread in bits and pieces and the link that shows your example (D3 tips and articles) but the example has a range and the D3 article just says to subtract 35 for z1, 25 for z2, etc.  I'll try to read all the pages of the thread and see what I missed where).  And I'm an old fart, so this was my cycling LT.     I'll see if I can find the BT zones also.  Thanks so much!   I could probably cheat and use Johnnie's numbers (as they're very close to mine) though.    Ok, found it.  Looking over my logs I see I'm doing most of my rides in Z1 but it sure seems like I've been working them.  I need to do most of most rides over 131 though, eh?

Also, one other question, I did this test in winter conditions (prolly 26C and low (under 70%) humidity).  NOrmal training is 30C + and 80% + humidity and when I run I definitely see a rise in HR on the warm days.  Should I retest in our normal weather?

I did my first race a couple weeks ago (Sprint) and my bike HR was right in there at 157ish and I was Really Working Very Very Hard and almost totally backed off the pace the last 1/2 of the 3rd lap.  I was pretty tired.  So that leads me to believe the test I did was somewhat accurate.  Unlike everyone else, however, I need to HTFU and increase my working instead of back off. 

Thanks so much for your most excellent advice!

I did my first race a couple weeks ago (Sprint) and my bike HR was right in there at 157ish and I was Really Working Very Very Hard and almost totally backed off the pace the last 1/2 of the 3rd lap.  I was pretty tired.  So that leads me to believe the test I did was somewhat accurate.  Unlike everyone else, however, I need to HTFU and increase my working instead of back off. 

Thanks so much for your most excellent advice!

Thanks.  I pushed harder today even though I didn't feel like it until about 40 min in and averaged 135. 

Did you see my question about (my perceived discrepancy) between the article and the calculated zones or am I totally misunderstanding?

Hi Kathy

The spreadsheet is a calculation and the article talks in more general terms. Personally, I would use 25-30 beats below if that feels easier. 20 beats below LT is a pretty solid effort, so maybe try that 1-2x per week. On the plans we have on BT, there are bike workouts that might be something like the followin: 20' Warm up in Z1, then 3x20' at Z2, with 5' recovery. 20' cool down. That's around a 1:45 ride, but those 20' efforts are pretty tough and that's probably the same effort you are trying to ride now at Z2. So, back off on the HR, and 1 or 2x per week throw in a few 15-20' efforts within a workout at Z2. My best advice is to get on a plan here at BT and this will all be much easier and you'll improve faster in the long run.

Just a reinforcement (And I've read the studies, I know how much a myth it is), but at 44 years old, I hit 198 bpm at the end of a set of 10 1 minute hill repeats. Recovered to below 150 inside of a minute.

Didn't feel gassed, didn't feel like I was about to explode (Well, kinda in the legs), and finished with another 2 miles for a warmdown.

John

I'm new to HRM training and triathlon training.  I received a Garmin HRM for Mother's Day, and it has totally changed my training.  I tried the LT test by running a 5k at max effort and pushing all the way to the end.  It said my average heart rate was 194, maxing at 202.  At 10 min, it was at 193, and continued to bounce up and up until the end.  Is that completely crazy?  The calculations would be:

Z1:  164

Z2: 176

Z3: 185

Z4: 193

Z5: 198

Z5+: 204

I was very concerned after examining my heart rate, and have been training since then mainly at zone 2 and sometime zone 3 on the Garmin standardized settings.  Unfortunately, the Garmin zone 2 is 117-137, and it feels like a painful, crawling speed to me.  Zone 3 is 137-157.  I'm new to training, but I am a very fit 5'6", 110 lb, 30 year old woman.  I did have blood pressure issues with my pregnancies, though.  

I want to be as efficient as possible with my training, but I feel that when I'm training with the Garmin settings it is slow and painful.  Basically, should I go with the 194 LT, or is that an unhealthy number to justify my training?

Thanks so much for the help!

Mike, I've read through this entire thread and I'm really trying to make sense of all this stuff, but it  doesn't entirely make sense to me why my "LT" would be best to tailor my zones from.

Let me explain why: If me and a friend both do this test, only one of us, at most, will have an accurate test. This is because I know I will be trying a lot harder than he is. Since the "psychological effect," as you talked about earlier in this thread, is stronger with me than most (says me), then how do I know my LT test will be accurate? I thought the point of training in particular zones was to maximize efficiency in training. My psychological advantage should not factor in to a physiological test, since its very purpose is to ensure I am not running too fast in training, right? Or, are you supposing that any psychological effect on heart rate will not be large enough to skew the results?

I spend a lot of time training and I just want to make sure, as far as I can, than I am doing the best training for my body. Thanks!

Also, please explain the below

I know your question is for Mike and I am sure he will respond but I will offer my two cents on your question.  I think your addressing the test as a one shot deal which is not the way to approach this... You should take the test several times and probably quarterly there after...  You will start to see that your numbers keep coming back very close to the previous test assuming you give it the ole quarterback try ever time.....   You can go to a medical professional and have them draw blood while performing a test but that is costly...  Mike is offering a field test that while not as precise is free and if taken multiple times you should see consistency in your numbers.   Anyway my two cents, this has worked great for me, probably done a dozen test and my numbers are always very close now....