#11
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
On Apr 10, 6:18 pm, Andrew Price wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:12:40 -0700 (PDT), datakoll wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/he...ST.html?adxnnl... "As for my husband, he knows that my fixation on whose heart rate is higher is ridiculous. Still, I wish I knew what he thinks his maximum is and how he knows it." I was always told the rule of thumb was "220 less your age" - until I came across this formula today: 210 - (half age in years) - (0.11*(weight in kg)) + 4 Unless you're Chalo when he still weighed 400 pounds plus, and maybe even then, the new formula puts all the brackets about 9% of the old number higher up the scale. My Ciclosport HAC4 HRM broke after only three years, so I replaced it with a cheap Sigma PC9 HRM. The HAC4 had to have the max respiration rate and the breakpoints of exercise regions fed manually; I did it by the old formula. The PC9 does it automatically, and as usual I just busked the new equipment with a hack and a prayer rather than RTFM (I have sixteen shelf-feet of high- level computer software manuals still shrinkwrapped -- if I need a manual, it is too difficult for me to use), so I missed the bit where the PC9 automatically set up a 9% higher max than I had on the HAC4, with the brackets correspondingly shifted. It's important, since I regulate my entire riding regime not by cadence or even traffic conditions ("Coming through!") but by putting my heart rate on 80 per cent of max and holding it there; in short, I go for the max that falls within the endurance/aerobic bracket, just short of generating lactic acid in that useless bracket from 80-85 where you take all the pain you masochists yearn for but gain none of the power benefits that are supposed to pay for the acid burn. Shortly, in as little as a week or two after I fitted the new cheap HRM, the Sigma PC9, I noticed that I spent less time on favourite rides, and less time in each bracket too, but that I was riding faster -- and feeling better for opening my lungs out that extra bit. Since then I've lengthened all my favourite short rides by around ten per cent distance, so that the time taken is the same as before but the benefit is greater. So, on the whole, I think that, for me at least, the new formula is A Good Thing. Since I paid zero attention to the world class sports medicine authorities working with the teams I played on when I was young (kick own arse for wasting opportunity), I'd be interested in hearing which heart rate brackets RBTers favour and why. Andre Jute http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
Per datakoll:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/he...xAtCmoDZu+EXPg Did I skim that article too fast, or did it not say anything about the amount of blood a given heart can more per stroke? -- PeteCresswell |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
Per (PeteCresswell):
Did I skim that article too fast, or did it not say anything about the amount of blood a given heart can more per stroke? Oops, now I see it. But only a passing reference. The idea that some hearts can have larger chambers/more muscle/larger inflow/outflow vessels seems tb missing. -- PeteCresswell |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
On Apr 10, 9:12 am, datakoll wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/he...ST.html?adxnnl... Border line disinformation. For me HRM is a bit like metronome - it is not to see how fast I can get but to keep steady manageable tempo. If I understand the idea correctly - effective burning of carbs and any burning of fat needs steady oxygen supply - so it is better to keep yourself in mostly aerobic zone. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
I was always told the rule of thumb was "220 less your age" - until I
came across this formula today: 210 - (half age in years) - (0.11*(weight in kg)) + 4 That is amazingly close. The "traditional" 220-age has always given me a heart rate too low. It also comes very close for me, closer, in fact, than the estimate that my Polar heart rate monitor produced. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
Andrew Price wrote:
210 - (half age in years) - (0.11*(weight in kg)) + 4 Are tou sure you put the brackets right? Seems a bit pointless to separate 210 + 4. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
On Apr 10, 10:45*pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:20:31 +0100, Dan Gregory wrote: Andrew Price wrote: I was always told the rule of thumb was "220 less your age" - until I came across this formula today: 210 - (half age in years) - (0.11*(weight in kg)) + 4 It's about 30 low for me! 16-18 beats too low for me. *Just a bit above my AT HR. Clearly you need to eat LOT more ice cream. Joseph |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
On Apr 11, 1:50*am, Andre Jute wrote:
On Apr 10, 6:18 pm, Andrew Price wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:12:40 -0700 (PDT), datakoll wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/he...ST.html?adxnnl.... "As for my husband, he knows that my fixation on whose heart rate is higher is ridiculous. Still, I wish I knew what he thinks his maximum is and how he knows it." I was always told the rule of thumb was "220 less your age" - until I came across this formula today: 210 - (half age in years) - (0.11*(weight in kg)) + 4 Unless you're Chalo when he still weighed 400 pounds plus, and maybe even then, the new formula puts all the brackets about 9% of the old number higher up the scale. My Ciclosport HAC4 HRM broke after only three years, so I replaced it with a cheap Sigma PC9 HRM. The HAC4 had to have the max respiration rate and the breakpoints of exercise regions fed manually; I did it by the old formula. The PC9 does it automatically, and as usual I just busked the new equipment with a hack and a prayer rather than RTFM (I have sixteen shelf-feet of high- level computer software manuals still shrinkwrapped -- if I need a manual, it is too difficult for me to use), so I missed the bit where the PC9 automatically set up a 9% higher max than I had on the HAC4, with the brackets correspondingly shifted. It's important, since I regulate my entire riding regime not by cadence or even traffic conditions ("Coming through!") but by putting my heart rate on 80 per cent of max and holding it there; in short, I go for the max that falls within the endurance/aerobic bracket, just short of generating lactic acid in that useless bracket from 80-85 where you take all the pain you masochists yearn for but gain none of the power benefits that are supposed to pay for the acid burn. Shortly, in as little as a week or two after I fitted the new cheap HRM, the Sigma PC9, I noticed that I spent less time on favourite rides, and less time in each bracket too, but that I was riding faster -- and feeling better for opening my lungs out that extra bit. Since then I've lengthened all my favourite short rides by around ten per cent distance, so that the time taken is the same as before but the benefit is greater. So, on the whole, I think that, for me at least, the new formula is A Good Thing. Since I paid zero attention to the world class sports medicine authorities working with the teams I played on when I was young (kick own arse for wasting opportunity), I'd be interested in hearing which heart rate brackets RBTers favour and why. Andre Jutehttp://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/BICYCLE%20%26%20CYCLING.html 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 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
HEART RATE
On Apr 11, 2:47*am, Woland99 wrote:
On Apr 10, 9:12 am, datakoll wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/he...ST.html?adxnnl... Border line disinformation. For me HRM is a bit like metronome - it is not to see how fast I can get but to keep steady manageable tempo. If I understand the idea correctly - effective burning of carbs and any burning of fat needs steady oxygen supply - so it is better to keep yourself in mostly aerobic zone. Fats and carbs will be burned at higher intensities as well, but I agree that using HR is a nice way to keep the intensity at a level that doesn't waste time by being too easy, nor too hard which could result in less total work due to burnout. Joseph |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HEART RATE | datakoll | Racing | 104 | April 16th 08 04:52 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 |
Max heart rate again...? | Preston Crawford | General | 31 | December 30th 04 10:46 PM |
Heart Rate Help | Warren Wilson | Australia | 6 | September 14th 04 12:35 PM |