|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Be still my speeding heart
On Apr 17, 6:49*pm, wrote:
On Apr 17, 1:06 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Apr 17, 12:56 pm, wrote: On Apr 16, 6:16 pm, Mike wrote: In article , says... Nor is it only "outliers" who need to know their MHR. No exercise regime can be devised without consideration of heart rate zones, and those are all defined as percentages of MHR. Regardless of the respective pros and cons of utilising heart-rate monitors to maximise the benefits of excercise, this is just wrong. It is only over the last decade that heart-rate monitors have become readily available for the general population (and not that much longer for the elite athelete). But prior to this, successful excercise regimes were devised and used. And for the average 'weekend' sportsperson (and for almost any sport), it is still usually sufficient to just choose a sensible mixture of resistance, endurance, and sprint training without measuring, monitoring or even considering MHR. Common sense, and a little advice from a trainer if you really think you need it, is usually enough for most of us. Heartrate-shmeartrate... Mike The latest Cycle Sport has an interview with Remy DiGregorio, from the Francaise de Jeux pro team, who says that he almost never races or trains with a heart monitor or computer. *If you don't need to know your heart rate to solo off the front wire to wire in a Dauphine stage, you certainly don't need it to ride around the block. One thing wrong with this rose-tinted picture. You aren't Remy DiGregorio, *and you will never be: you'll never "solo off the front wire to wire in a Dauphine stage". -- AJ Perhaps not, but I will ride around the block. *And I won't do it with my eyes glued to my heart rate monitor listening intently for it to beep telling me to slow down. *Somehow, I might even enjoy the experience of being on the bike. "With my eyes glued to my heart rate monitor listening intently for it to beep" -- do you listen with your eyes? That's some trick! |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Be still my speeding heart
On Apr 17, 6:46*pm, wrote:
On Apr 17, 12:18 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Apr 16, 6:07 pm, wrote: On Apr 16, 9:58 am, Andre Jute wrote: On Apr 16, 2:05 pm, wrote: On Apr 15, 8:26 pm, Andre Jute wrote: On Apr 11, 7:22 am, " wrote: Using a formula to figure your max HR is like fitting your shoes based on measuring the circumfrence of your head. Some correlation for a population probably, but near usless for an individual. The only way to find out what max HR is is to induce it. Joseph Congratulations, Joseph. Your reckless attitude has just put more people off cycling than the entire membership of RBT. Medical advice is that maximum heartrate should be established under medical supervision. Inducing maximum heart rate any old how, without any idea of what approximately it can be or should be, is very likely a recipe for pain or hurt or worse for an entire age group of wannabe cyclists (an age group pretty well represented on RBT, it seems). As it happens, I was taking various tests for my heart, and asked the people administering the treadmill test to establish my maximum heartrate, and learned from them that a pretty good correlation exists between the population and some of the more complicated formulae than the idiot's mnemonic of 220 minus age (most people leave off the necessary "plus/minus ten per cent" which defines the limits of confidence of this shortcut). Here's a formula that works well: Maximum heart rate approaches: 210 - (half age in years) - (0.11*(weight in kg)) + 4 Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING.html That's still off by nearly 10 beats per minute in my case, which is not acceptable. *The problem with statistical correlations like that is that they're based on the average population. The advantage of the statistical determination of the normal distribution of some universe, in this case maximum heart rate by age subdivisions of the populace, is that it is a scientific method, unlike the anecdotal witterings of self-declared "experts" in virtual space. But nobody claims that statistical methods lead to perfect judgements: their very nature is to provide a guideline within defined limits of confidence. And here I thought that the scientific method had something to do with actually testing a hypothesis rather than trying to infer the answer from someone else's tests on a potentially unrelated sample group. I can understand why you're "Unforgiven" and very probably unforgivable. You just don't pay attention when people speak. If the hypothesis is, "The mean (more likely median) heart rate of Everyman differs by gender and by age brackets." then the correct scientific method is to investigate a sample from the universe, divided proportionately to each sub-universe by gender and age. No "inference" is required because the answer is directly to the point of the question. If someone else has done the work, and it is statistically sound, who do it again? It is childish to point out the tautological truth that tests might be on "a potentially unrelated sample group" -- do you really think that I didn't enquire closely into the sample group? (More pointedly, that you behave like an idiot is no reason for assuming the rest of us do.) If the sample group is determined to be the right one, than the dumb debater's "potential" sampling error is just that, a numbingly dumb debating trick. Even electrical engineers are smarter than to try such kindergarten tricks when there are adults around .Beyond these jerk-up stupidities in the single paragraph above, you offer no facts, no argument, nothing, just your McCarthyite suspicion of "potential" sampling error. You're wasting my time. Andre Jute Deeply disappointed Anyone who actually needs to know their max heart rate is most likely an outlier in one direction or another. And that is where this thread started, when I twitted Joseph on giving advice that John Q Public would see as reckless, coming down, as Joseph's advice does, to "run until you fall down and that is your max heart rate". Because we are not talking about athletes and suchlike (those who are already "outliers") but about getting Jane Doe to take up cycling or some other form of exercise. And most Jane Does will fall right under the bulge of the Bell Curve. Nor is it only "outliers" who need to know their MHR. No exercise regime can be devised without consideration of heart rate zones, and those are all defined as percentages of MHR. Furthermore, the anecdotal evidence of those whose anecdotal evidence has the value of experience (say RBT posters) in this case almost certainly arises from a group in which individuals know their MHR pretty closely. They may thus be "outliers" but they are not *ignorant* outliers as you're trying to claim. I think it very likely that exactly the opposite of your statement is true, that those who need to know their MHR in most cases already know their MHR. This is a storm in a chamberpot that blew up because Joseph overstated a case that only required the words "for regular cyclists" or some such to be added to be acceptable. Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING..html If the mean is the hypothesis. *If the question is maximum heart rate for an individual, you either test it or you make up excuses not to. You really are mindlessly intent on having the last word. The median in the age/gender subuniverse is the question for the individual as a first approximation for his individual MHR; there is no conflict between the concepts. You're the only one making excuses -- for not having your mind in gear. Are we nearly done yet? Andre Jute http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stopped for speeding? | [email protected] | UK | 1 | April 12th 07 02:01 PM |
How does a heart rate monitor pickup my heart beat and transmits? | [email protected] | UK | 1 | February 14th 06 06:02 PM |
How does a heart rate monitor pickup the heart bear and transmit? | [email protected] | UK | 1 | February 14th 06 05:41 PM |
Another speeding idiot | Zog The Undeniable | UK | 23 | January 3rd 05 08:25 PM |
Caught speeding | DRS | Australia | 23 | February 19th 04 05:57 AM |