Age and Heart Rates

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 8:50:15 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 12:50:21 AM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 11:22:19 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-05 09:21, wrote:
I am seldom riding with the local old folks group because they have a
habit of racing all the time. Then 3/4ths of the way into a ride they
get really tired and are dragging up the final hills.

I don't like climbing as fast as possible nor trying to keep up on
the flats to people 5 years older than me that are maintaining heart
rates at 90%. And this is directly out of the box with not one minute
of warm-up.

Now I like to exercise at elevated rates so riding with the "easy"
groups is out. But I don't riding with people whose objective is to
beat someone else to the top of the hill as if this proves them
superior. And this soon degenerates into not waiting for the slower
members.

Unfortunately, these acts of proving one's self better than others
can significantly shorten the live's of those over 55.

If you are one of those that must prove yourself on every ride there
is a target rate on
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Health...1_Article.jsp#

If you regularly ride above these rates you are a heart attack
waiting to happen. Not to mention that often you are pulling the
entire group above their safe zones.

Let's ride as smart as well as fast.


What is a good way to gauge the heart rate if the bike is not equipped
with a whole smorgasbord of medical devices such as pulse meters? Taking
one hand off the bar and counting wrist pulses isn't very safe in most
places around here.

I sometimes get carried away on long boring stretches and find myself
riding full tilt. Whatever "the engine" can deliver goes into the
pedals. But I usually don't become tired after an hour. Or two. Or four.
Is that a good enough indicator to be in the healthy zone?

Actual heart rate varies considerably between individuals and even
among rating systems. The calculation for "max heart rate" depends, to
an extent, on what system you are using. Most people, if they are
athletic at all can produce a heart rate that is higher than the
calculated maximum heart rate.

Heart rate is usually used as a part of a training schedule, i.e., 30
minutes at 100% followed by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.

Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.
--
cheers,

John B.

The only accurate way of determining the actual max heart rates per individual is instrumented on a treadmill in a lab. But the differences are pretty slight - a maximum of about 5% between the calculated and the actual.

100% is NEVER used save in sprints. 20 seconds or more at 100% can be fatal to even young athletes. Though not often. Muscle lactose is very rapidly depleted and your most powerful muscle is your heart. Anaerobic metabolism utilizes lactose.

"Full tilt" is the output at which you can continue using your metabolic digestive rate to continue supplying carbs to your muscles. These days a great many younger riders are "spinners" and actually use too low a gear and are passed not because they don't have more power than someone else but because a lot is wasted spinning and using too low a gear.

I should add that I am making a very bad riding mistake that I have to figure out some way of overcoming. I do not eat nor drink on even long rides unless I stop at a coffee shop. I have often done metric centuries without a drink or a bite. This means that I'm tired all the time and my riding suffers. But I have done this since my recovery from my concussion since I cannot ride with one hand anymore. I have no balance aside from that of the bike itself.

On 2016-12-13 08:56, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 8:50:15 AM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 12:50:21 AM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 11:22:19 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-05 09:21, wrote:
I am seldom riding with the local old folks group because
they have a habit of racing all the time. Then 3/4ths of the
way into a ride they get really tired and are dragging up the
final hills.

I don't like climbing as fast as possible nor trying to keep
up on the flats to people 5 years older than me that are
maintaining heart rates at 90%. And this is directly out of
the box with not one minute of warm-up.

Now I like to exercise at elevated rates so riding with the
"easy" groups is out. But I don't riding with people whose
objective is to beat someone else to the top of the hill as
if this proves them superior. And this soon degenerates into
not waiting for the slower members.

Unfortunately, these acts of proving one's self better than
others can significantly shorten the live's of those over
55.

If you are one of those that must prove yourself on every
ride there is a target rate on
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Health...1_Article.jsp#



If you regularly ride above these rates you are a heart attack
waiting to happen. Not to mention that often you are pulling
the entire group above their safe zones.

Let's ride as smart as well as fast.


What is a good way to gauge the heart rate if the bike is not
equipped with a whole smorgasbord of medical devices such as
pulse meters? Taking one hand off the bar and counting wrist
pulses isn't very safe in most places around here.

I sometimes get carried away on long boring stretches and find
myself riding full tilt. Whatever "the engine" can deliver goes
into the pedals. But I usually don't become tired after an
hour. Or two. Or four. Is that a good enough indicator to be in
the healthy zone?

Actual heart rate varies considerably between individuals and
even among rating systems. The calculation for "max heart rate"
depends, to an extent, on what system you are using. Most people,
if they are athletic at all can produce a heart rate that is
higher than the calculated maximum heart rate.

Heart rate is usually used as a part of a training schedule,
i.e., 30 minutes at 100% followed by 10 minutes at 20%", or
whatever, and is a method of determining the intensity of the
exercise.

Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same
thing by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can
go followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that.
What you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can
maintain for some period. If you really were to exert 100% you
might get a quarter of a mile before you collapsed. -- cheers,

John B.

The only accurate way of determining the actual max heart rates per
individual is instrumented on a treadmill in a lab. But the
differences are pretty slight - a maximum of about 5% between the
calculated and the actual.

100% is NEVER used save in sprints. 20 seconds or more at 100% can
be fatal to even young athletes. Though not often. Muscle lactose
is very rapidly depleted and your most powerful muscle is your
heart. Anaerobic metabolism utilizes lactose.

"Full tilt" is the output at which you can continue using your
metabolic digestive rate to continue supplying carbs to your
muscles. These days a great many younger riders are "spinners" and
actually use too low a gear and are passed not because they don't
have more power than someone else but because a lot is wasted
spinning and using too low a gear.


That is a trend I also notice and maybe the reason why I sometimes pass
much younger athletic guys. Me on my mud-caked old road bike, in jeans
shorts and an old T-shirt, sometimes with a fedex box riding above the
panniers. I am probably doing it wrong in the other direction though by
riding in a very high gear and mashing a lot. Also lazy in shifitng
because my road bike still has down-tube shifters.


I should add that I am making a very bad riding mistake that I have
to figure out some way of overcoming. I do not eat nor drink on even
long rides unless I stop at a coffee shop. I have often done metric
centuries without a drink or a bite. This means that I'm tired all
the time and my riding suffers. But I have done this since my
recovery from my concussion since I cannot ride with one hand
anymore. I have no balance aside from that of the bike itself.


Consider a hose like on a drinking bladder. I believe they can also be
fitted to bottles. Draped over a shoulder you just have to turn the head
a little, bite down on the valve and drink like from a straw. The body
can forgive lack of food unless you bonk and I never want to experience
that again. Liquid is way more important and longterm or permanent
damage can result from frequent dehydration. I always drink as much as
needed so I have to relieve myself every 2-3h. This gets planned out
according to where I can find fountains (on trails, playgrounds, sports
fields, schools, churches). On MTB rides in summer I often carry a
gallon or more because there are usually no safe refill options. On
really long rides I used to also carry a few tiny chlorine "pills" so I
can draw from a creek in case I had to walk out a busted bicycle.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2016-12-13 08:37, wrote:
On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 1:25:57 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-10 13:13, wrote:
On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 11:22:06 AM UTC-8, Joerg
wrote:
On 2016-12-05 09:21, wrote:
I am seldom riding with the local old folks group because
they have a habit of racing all the time. Then 3/4ths of the
way into a ride they get really tired and are dragging up the
final hills.

I don't like climbing as fast as possible nor trying to keep
up on the flats to people 5 years older than me that are
maintaining heart rates at 90%. And this is directly out of
the box with not one minute of warm-up.

Now I like to exercise at elevated rates so riding with the
"easy" groups is out. But I don't riding with people whose
objective is to beat someone else to the top of the hill as
if this proves them superior. And this soon degenerates into
not waiting for the slower members.

Unfortunately, these acts of proving one's self better than
others can significantly shorten the live's of those over
55.

If you are one of those that must prove yourself on every
ride there is a target rate on
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Health...1_Article.jsp#





If you regularly ride above these rates you are a heart attack
waiting to happen. Not to mention that often you are pulling
the entire group above their safe zones.

Let's ride as smart as well as fast.


What is a good way to gauge the heart rate if the bike is not
equipped with a whole smorgasbord of medical devices such as
pulse meters? Taking one hand off the bar and counting wrist
pulses isn't very safe in most places around here.

I sometimes get carried away on long boring stretches and find
myself riding full tilt. Whatever "the engine" can deliver
goes into the pedals. But I usually don't become tired after an
hour. Or two. Or four. Is that a good enough indicator to be in
the healthy zone?

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Your heart rate will increase linearly as long as you're in the
aerobic zone. If you go into the anaerobic zone it will only
increase a little. At this time the muscles start burning lactate
that is stored in the muscles and this is difficult to do for
more than half a minute or so.

This represents your actual max heart rate. But that is not you
healthy heart rate with is 220-age.

This practical heart rate has to do with your metabolic heart
rate and will be below your true max heart rate.

If you are over 50 and operate for any amount of time over 90%
of your max metabolic heart rate you are starving the heart
muscles of it's very small storage of lactate. That is, your
heart is operating in it's anaerobic. Since the older you are the
slower you can reload your muscles (and the heart is a muscle)
with lactate and the most chance you have of it seizing up.

Bicycling is an endurance sport and that means you must always
operate within your aerobic zone.

If you start breathing harder and when you back off a little it
takes awhile for your heart rate and breathing to come back down
you are going too hard. If you are in your aerobic zone when you
back off your breathing will almost immediately back down as
well.


Maybe that's the sign. For me heavy breathing usually slows down
within 5-10sec so I guess that counts as "immediate".

Sometimes I pass road bikers on fancy machines decked out in
expensive lycra and it seems some don't like it when a guy above 50
passes them in T-shirt and jeans on an old steel frame bike. "This
is not going to happen!" and then they start following me,
breathing hard. Until they drop back, and that's probably pushing
it too hard in their cardiac department. Sometimes it's the other
way around and I try to follow but when I realize that the guy or
gal is doing a sustained 25mph I drop back. Too old for that.

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Two years ago I did 5 miles at 28 mph with a stop light at every mile
marker that was always red. When it changed I would accelerate up to
28 again and hold that steady until I would JUST miss the next light.


That's a power ride. A neighbor who is very athletic can hold an average
of 25mph for more than an hour. Once we went on a road bike ride
together and I kept up with him. However, after about an hour I was
really finished. Not bonked or anything but he had to cycle back for a
business meeting, I continued for another 2h and this time at a much
slower pace than usual.


When I pulled into the parking lot my breathing dropped down pretty
rapidly but I had burned up ALL of my lactose and couldn't find my
car for almost 10 minutes. I kept riding around in a haze unable to
get my bearings. I won't do that again.


That is scary. I wouldn't do it again either. The closest one I came to
that status was my first long MTB ride after a hiatus of almost two
decades. We got a late start, I had to be home 5h later, my friend is a
well-trained road biker and so we both stepped on it. After 4h I bonked,
hard. My achievable speed dropped to 30% of normal almost instantly and
nothing, neither water nor energy packages, brought that back for the
remainder of the ride. I didn't even want to see a bicycle for the next
two days.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:54:13 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-12 16:24, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:21:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-11 00:50, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 11:22:19 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-05 09:21, wrote:
I am seldom riding with the local old folks group because they have a
habit of racing all the time. Then 3/4ths of the way into a ride they
get really tired and are dragging up the final hills.

I don't like climbing as fast as possible nor trying to keep up on
the flats to people 5 years older than me that are maintaining heart
rates at 90%. And this is directly out of the box with not one minute
of warm-up.

Now I like to exercise at elevated rates so riding with the "easy"
groups is out. But I don't riding with people whose objective is to
beat someone else to the top of the hill as if this proves them
superior. And this soon degenerates into not waiting for the slower
members.

Unfortunately, these acts of proving one's self better than others
can significantly shorten the live's of those over 55.

If you are one of those that must prove yourself on every ride there
is a target rate on
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Health...1_Article.jsp#

If you regularly ride above these rates you are a heart attack
waiting to happen. Not to mention that often you are pulling the
entire group above their safe zones.

Let's ride as smart as well as fast.


What is a good way to gauge the heart rate if the bike is not equipped
with a whole smorgasbord of medical devices such as pulse meters? Taking
one hand off the bar and counting wrist pulses isn't very safe in most
places around here.

I sometimes get carried away on long boring stretches and find myself
riding full tilt. Whatever "the engine" can deliver goes into the
pedals. But I usually don't become tired after an hour. Or two. Or four.
Is that a good enough indicator to be in the healthy zone?

Actual heart rate varies considerably between individuals and even
among rating systems. The calculation for "max heart rate" depends, to
an extent, on what system you are using. Most people, if they are
athletic at all can produce a heart rate that is higher than the
calculated maximum heart rate.

Heart rate is usually used as a part of a training schedule, i.e., 30
minutes at 100% followed ...


Wow. I thought that long at redline would be damaging to the heart
muscles. But I am not an expert, all I did so far is design electronics
for cardiac diagnostics.

I thought it was obvious that the example you quoted was an example
not an exact recommendation :-)

The "maximum heart rate" as usually used in training is just a
formula. The basic formula is 220 - age = maximum heart rate, or maybe
208 - (0.7 x age in years), or maybe 206.9-(0.67*Age), or maybe one of
calculation that various studies have developed. These various
calculations apply to individuals only in a general way.

Then we have the formula to calculate level of effort: "
Target Heart Rate = ((max HR x resting HR) × %100) + resting HR.


... by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.


Sounds like what cyclists call intervall training.

It is. If you add in the long rides. For example, Monday 1 min at 90%
followed by 1 min walk (continue until you vomit); Tuesday 1 hour at
race intensity, Wednesday rest, and so on. The long days can be
thought of single intervals.


I think it's different, more like what Lee said. Where a sprint maxes
out the muscles. I don't max out mine much, meaning I could hammer up a
hill faster but then I'd be pooped for many minutes and the ride would
no longer be an enjoyable one.

It gets very complicated. For example, there are fast twitch muscle
fibers and slow twitch fibers. Doing sprints certainly causes the fast
twitch fibers to grow but has a lesser effect on the slow twitch
fibers. On the other hand, a series of stresses placed on the legs,
for instance, certainly strengthens all the leg muscles.

I used to do hill climbs. A hill ling enough that I ran out of breath
and start in the lowest gets and ride to a certain place, coast back
down to the bottom, shift up a gear and do the same thing.

Theoretically this is a fast twitch exercise good for sprinters but it
also improved my average speed for a 2 - 3 hour ride.


Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.


Yes, that is what I think as well. My limitation is more the breathing
and I don't enjoy being totally out of breath for a long time. I was
always an endurance kind of guy, never a good sprinter.

Yes, endurance is generally determined by oxygen intake. Yes, runners
and bicycle sprinters can perform at higher intensities but only for
short times. A "miler" will run three laps at about maximum oxygen
intake and the last lap he will accelerate and go into oxygen
deficiency.


Seen it but I was never good at that. Even in the army my better times
were long-haul. 5km on the sports field, xx kilometer on "hikes" in full
gear. With cycling it is similar. Yesterday was 43mi or 69km, to pick up
a $1.75 item in the valley that I urgently need. About 30% of that ride
was extra and just for fun. However, after this discussion I tried some
muscle max-out phases and paid for that the last 10mi which are almost
all uphill.

Sure, you exceeded the effort that you can maintain for the entire
ride.

I see that sometimes where guys blast by me at high speed and then on
the next long hill I pass them.

I also see that sometimes guys blast by me at high speed and then go
on out of sight :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 6:43:32 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:

I also see that sometimes guys blast by me at high speed and then go
on out of sight :-)

If I'm riding solo and ride up to someone that is only a bit slower I don't like to pass them as if to show that I'm faster. So I'll tag along four or five lengths back. I have to be careful though because this will often spur them on to ride harder than they can do and they will abruptly slow down as they reach their limits that they wouldn't do if I'd just carefully passed them.

It's always a problem. If you pass them too slowly they take it as a challenge. If you pass them too rapidly, an insult.

Once in awhile someone will come by me very fast and get up a little way and slow down showing that they had strained to pass you. I tend to let them go but once in awhile I'll see them pass too closely to someone else on the road and will run them down and pass them. This is especially effective near the top of a hill since most people can't stay with me on the downhills.

On 2016-12-13 18:43, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:54:13 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-12 16:24, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:21:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-11 00:50, John B. wrote:

[...]

... by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.


Sounds like what cyclists call intervall training.

It is. If you add in the long rides. For example, Monday 1 min at 90%
followed by 1 min walk (continue until you vomit); Tuesday 1 hour at
race intensity, Wednesday rest, and so on. The long days can be
thought of single intervals.


I think it's different, more like what Lee said. Where a sprint maxes
out the muscles. I don't max out mine much, meaning I could hammer up a
hill faster but then I'd be pooped for many minutes and the ride would
no longer be an enjoyable one.

It gets very complicated. For example, there are fast twitch muscle
fibers and slow twitch fibers. Doing sprints certainly causes the fast
twitch fibers to grow but has a lesser effect on the slow twitch
fibers. On the other hand, a series of stresses placed on the legs,
for instance, certainly strengthens all the leg muscles.

I used to do hill climbs. A hill ling enough that I ran out of breath
and start in the lowest gets and ride to a certain place, coast back
down to the bottom, shift up a gear and do the same thing.

Theoretically this is a fast twitch exercise good for sprinters but it
also improved my average speed for a 2 - 3 hour ride.


With me that hasn't helped much. I get "natural climb training" every
time I return from the valley which is once or twice a week. The last
10mi are up, down, up, down, a lot. My muscles are strong, the
limitation seems to be that I simply run out of breath and general
energy. I am not complaining since I am usually among the faster riders.
Certainly not race material though.

My problem is that I can't convince anyone to join me for a ride unless
I promise to keep it under 25mi. Those are often people who like to
hammer it which I don't like to do.


Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.


Yes, that is what I think as well. My limitation is more the breathing
and I don't enjoy being totally out of breath for a long time. I was
always an endurance kind of guy, never a good sprinter.

Yes, endurance is generally determined by oxygen intake. Yes, runners
and bicycle sprinters can perform at higher intensities but only for
short times. A "miler" will run three laps at about maximum oxygen
intake and the last lap he will accelerate and go into oxygen
deficiency.


Seen it but I was never good at that. Even in the army my better times
were long-haul. 5km on the sports field, xx kilometer on "hikes" in full
gear. With cycling it is similar. Yesterday was 43mi or 69km, to pick up
a $1.75 item in the valley that I urgently need. About 30% of that ride
was extra and just for fun. However, after this discussion I tried some
muscle max-out phases and paid for that the last 10mi which are almost
all uphill.

Sure, you exceeded the effort that you can maintain for the entire
ride.


Yup. Or in other words my age begins to show.


I see that sometimes where guys blast by me at high speed and then on
the next long hill I pass them.

I also see that sometimes guys blast by me at high speed and then go
on out of sight :-)


Oh yeah :-)

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:54:13 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-12 16:24, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:21:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-11 00:50, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 11:22:19 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-05 09:21, wrote:
I am seldom riding with the local old folks group because they have a
habit of racing all the time. Then 3/4ths of the way into a ride they
get really tired and are dragging up the final hills.

I don't like climbing as fast as possible nor trying to keep up on
the flats to people 5 years older than me that are maintaining heart
rates at 90%. And this is directly out of the box with not one minute
of warm-up.

Now I like to exercise at elevated rates so riding with the "easy"
groups is out. But I don't riding with people whose objective is to
beat someone else to the top of the hill as if this proves them
superior. And this soon degenerates into not waiting for the slower
members.

Unfortunately, these acts of proving one's self better than others
can significantly shorten the live's of those over 55.

If you are one of those that must prove yourself on every ride there
is a target rate on
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Health...1_Article.jsp#

If you regularly ride above these rates you are a heart attack
waiting to happen. Not to mention that often you are pulling the
entire group above their safe zones.

Let's ride as smart as well as fast.


What is a good way to gauge the heart rate if the bike is not equipped
with a whole smorgasbord of medical devices such as pulse meters? Taking
one hand off the bar and counting wrist pulses isn't very safe in most
places around here.

I sometimes get carried away on long boring stretches and find myself
riding full tilt. Whatever "the engine" can deliver goes into the
pedals. But I usually don't become tired after an hour. Or two. Or four.
Is that a good enough indicator to be in the healthy zone?

Actual heart rate varies considerably between individuals and even
among rating systems. The calculation for "max heart rate" depends, to
an extent, on what system you are using. Most people, if they are
athletic at all can produce a heart rate that is higher than the
calculated maximum heart rate.

Heart rate is usually used as a part of a training schedule, i.e., 30
minutes at 100% followed ...


Wow. I thought that long at redline would be damaging to the heart
muscles. But I am not an expert, all I did so far is design electronics
for cardiac diagnostics.

I thought it was obvious that the example you quoted was an example
not an exact recommendation :-)

The "maximum heart rate" as usually used in training is just a
formula. The basic formula is 220 - age = maximum heart rate, or maybe
208 - (0.7 x age in years), or maybe 206.9-(0.67*Age), or maybe one of
calculation that various studies have developed. These various
calculations apply to individuals only in a general way.

Then we have the formula to calculate level of effort: "
Target Heart Rate = ((max HR x resting HR) в %100) + resting HR.


... by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.


Sounds like what cyclists call intervall training.

It is. If you add in the long rides. For example, Monday 1 min at 90%
followed by 1 min walk (continue until you vomit); Tuesday 1 hour at
race intensity, Wednesday rest, and so on. The long days can be
thought of single intervals.


I think it's different, more like what Lee said. Where a sprint maxes
out the muscles. I don't max out mine much, meaning I could hammer up a
hill faster but then I'd be pooped for many minutes and the ride would
no longer be an enjoyable one.


Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.


Yes, that is what I think as well. My limitation is more the breathing
and I don't enjoy being totally out of breath for a long time. I was
always an endurance kind of guy, never a good sprinter.

Yes, endurance is generally determined by oxygen intake. Yes, runners
and bicycle sprinters can perform at higher intensities but only for
short times. A "miler" will run three laps at about maximum oxygen
intake and the last lap he will accelerate and go into oxygen
deficiency.


Seen it but I was never good at that. Even in the army my better times
were long-haul. 5km on the sports field, xx kilometer on "hikes" in full
gear. With cycling it is similar. Yesterday was 43mi or 69km, to pick up
a $1.75 item in the valley that I urgently need. About 30% of that ride
was extra and just for fun. However, after this discussion I tried some
muscle max-out phases and paid for that the last 10mi which are almost
all uphill.

Running out of TP always sucks

On 2016-12-14 14:25, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 7:54:13 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-12 16:24, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:21:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-11 00:50, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 11:22:19 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-05 09:21, wrote:
I am seldom riding with the local old folks group because they have a
habit of racing all the time. Then 3/4ths of the way into a ride they
get really tired and are dragging up the final hills.

I don't like climbing as fast as possible nor trying to keep up on
the flats to people 5 years older than me that are maintaining heart
rates at 90%. And this is directly out of the box with not one minute
of warm-up.

Now I like to exercise at elevated rates so riding with the "easy"
groups is out. But I don't riding with people whose objective is to
beat someone else to the top of the hill as if this proves them
superior. And this soon degenerates into not waiting for the slower
members.

Unfortunately, these acts of proving one's self better than others
can significantly shorten the live's of those over 55.

If you are one of those that must prove yourself on every ride there
is a target rate on
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Health...1_Article.jsp#

If you regularly ride above these rates you are a heart attack
waiting to happen. Not to mention that often you are pulling the
entire group above their safe zones.

Let's ride as smart as well as fast.


What is a good way to gauge the heart rate if the bike is not equipped
with a whole smorgasbord of medical devices such as pulse meters? Taking
one hand off the bar and counting wrist pulses isn't very safe in most
places around here.

I sometimes get carried away on long boring stretches and find myself
riding full tilt. Whatever "the engine" can deliver goes into the
pedals. But I usually don't become tired after an hour. Or two. Or four.
Is that a good enough indicator to be in the healthy zone?

Actual heart rate varies considerably between individuals and even
among rating systems. The calculation for "max heart rate" depends, to
an extent, on what system you are using. Most people, if they are
athletic at all can produce a heart rate that is higher than the
calculated maximum heart rate.

Heart rate is usually used as a part of a training schedule, i.e., 30
minutes at 100% followed ...


Wow. I thought that long at redline would be damaging to the heart
muscles. But I am not an expert, all I did so far is design electronics
for cardiac diagnostics.

I thought it was obvious that the example you quoted was an example
not an exact recommendation :-)

The "maximum heart rate" as usually used in training is just a
formula. The basic formula is 220 - age = maximum heart rate, or maybe
208 - (0.7 x age in years), or maybe 206.9-(0.67*Age), or maybe one of
calculation that various studies have developed. These various
calculations apply to individuals only in a general way.

Then we have the formula to calculate level of effort: "
Target Heart Rate = ((max HR x resting HR) в %100) + resting HR.


... by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.


Sounds like what cyclists call intervall training.

It is. If you add in the long rides. For example, Monday 1 min at 90%
followed by 1 min walk (continue until you vomit); Tuesday 1 hour at
race intensity, Wednesday rest, and so on. The long days can be
thought of single intervals.


I think it's different, more like what Lee said. Where a sprint maxes
out the muscles. I don't max out mine much, meaning I could hammer up a
hill faster but then I'd be pooped for many minutes and the ride would
no longer be an enjoyable one.


Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.


Yes, that is what I think as well. My limitation is more the breathing
and I don't enjoy being totally out of breath for a long time. I was
always an endurance kind of guy, never a good sprinter.

Yes, endurance is generally determined by oxygen intake. Yes, runners
and bicycle sprinters can perform at higher intensities but only for
short times. A "miler" will run three laps at about maximum oxygen
intake and the last lap he will accelerate and go into oxygen
deficiency.


Seen it but I was never good at that. Even in the army my better times
were long-haul. 5km on the sports field, xx kilometer on "hikes" in full
gear. With cycling it is similar. Yesterday was 43mi or 69km, to pick up
a $1.75 item in the valley that I urgently need. About 30% of that ride
was extra and just for fun. However, after this discussion I tried some
muscle max-out phases and paid for that the last 10mi which are almost
all uphill.

Running out of TP always sucks


I didn't need any toilet paper :-)

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 09:48:08 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-13 18:43, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:54:13 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-12 16:24, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:21:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-11 00:50, John B. wrote:

[...]

... by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.


Sounds like what cyclists call intervall training.

It is. If you add in the long rides. For example, Monday 1 min at 90%
followed by 1 min walk (continue until you vomit); Tuesday 1 hour at
race intensity, Wednesday rest, and so on. The long days can be
thought of single intervals.


I think it's different, more like what Lee said. Where a sprint maxes
out the muscles. I don't max out mine much, meaning I could hammer up a
hill faster but then I'd be pooped for many minutes and the ride would
no longer be an enjoyable one.

It gets very complicated. For example, there are fast twitch muscle
fibers and slow twitch fibers. Doing sprints certainly causes the fast
twitch fibers to grow but has a lesser effect on the slow twitch
fibers. On the other hand, a series of stresses placed on the legs,
for instance, certainly strengthens all the leg muscles.

I used to do hill climbs. A hill ling enough that I ran out of breath
and start in the lowest gets and ride to a certain place, coast back
down to the bottom, shift up a gear and do the same thing.

Theoretically this is a fast twitch exercise good for sprinters but it
also improved my average speed for a 2 - 3 hour ride.


With me that hasn't helped much. I get "natural climb training" every
time I return from the valley which is once or twice a week. The last
10mi are up, down, up, down, a lot. My muscles are strong, the
limitation seems to be that I simply run out of breath and general
energy. I am not complaining since I am usually among the faster riders.
Certainly not race material though.

The thing is that there are really two equations that apply. One is
VO2 max as Lee (I think) mentioned, and the other is strength. If you
are Atlas (with the world on your shoulders) than the percentage of
total strength being expended at, say 25 mph, going up hill is so low
that you never even breath hard.

But having said that if you are Atlas than you weigh more so you have
more to carry up hill and thus must expend more energy.

As I said, it is complicated and there probably is a reason that the
hill-climbers are usually small light guys while sprinters are usually
heaver with bigger muscles :-)


My problem is that I can't convince anyone to join me for a ride unless
I promise to keep it under 25mi. Those are often people who like to
hammer it which I don't like to do.


Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.


Yes, that is what I think as well. My limitation is more the breathing
and I don't enjoy being totally out of breath for a long time. I was
always an endurance kind of guy, never a good sprinter.

Yes, endurance is generally determined by oxygen intake. Yes, runners
and bicycle sprinters can perform at higher intensities but only for
short times. A "miler" will run three laps at about maximum oxygen
intake and the last lap he will accelerate and go into oxygen
deficiency.


Seen it but I was never good at that. Even in the army my better times
were long-haul. 5km on the sports field, xx kilometer on "hikes" in full
gear. With cycling it is similar. Yesterday was 43mi or 69km, to pick up
a $1.75 item in the valley that I urgently need. About 30% of that ride
was extra and just for fun. However, after this discussion I tried some
muscle max-out phases and paid for that the last 10mi which are almost
all uphill.

Sure, you exceeded the effort that you can maintain for the entire
ride.


Yup. Or in other words my age begins to show.


I see that sometimes where guys blast by me at high speed and then on
the next long hill I pass them.

I also see that sometimes guys blast by me at high speed and then go
on out of sight :-)


Oh yeah :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Wednesday, December 14, 2016 at 9:48:05 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-13 18:43, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:54:13 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-12 16:24, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:21:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-12-11 00:50, John B. wrote:

[...]

... by 10 minutes at 20%", or whatever, and is a
method of determining the intensity of the exercise.


Sounds like what cyclists call intervall training.

It is. If you add in the long rides. For example, Monday 1 min at 90%
followed by 1 min walk (continue until you vomit); Tuesday 1 hour at
race intensity, Wednesday rest, and so on. The long days can be
thought of single intervals.


I think it's different, more like what Lee said. Where a sprint maxes
out the muscles. I don't max out mine much, meaning I could hammer up a
hill faster but then I'd be pooped for many minutes and the ride would
no longer be an enjoyable one.

It gets very complicated. For example, there are fast twitch muscle
fibers and slow twitch fibers. Doing sprints certainly causes the fast
twitch fibers to grow but has a lesser effect on the slow twitch
fibers. On the other hand, a series of stresses placed on the legs,
for instance, certainly strengthens all the leg muscles.

I used to do hill climbs. A hill ling enough that I ran out of breath
and start in the lowest gets and ride to a certain place, coast back
down to the bottom, shift up a gear and do the same thing.

Theoretically this is a fast twitch exercise good for sprinters but it
also improved my average speed for a 2 - 3 hour ride.


With me that hasn't helped much. I get "natural climb training" every
time I return from the valley which is once or twice a week. The last
10mi are up, down, up, down, a lot. My muscles are strong, the
limitation seems to be that I simply run out of breath and general
energy. I am not complaining since I am usually among the faster riders.
Certainly not race material though.

My problem is that I can't convince anyone to join me for a ride unless
I promise to keep it under 25mi. Those are often people who like to
hammer it which I don't like to do.


Back in the primitive days people used do essentially the same thing
by training by distance, i.e., a quarter as hard as you can go
followed by a quarter at a walk, and so on.

As for your full tilt for hours, you really aren't doing that. What
you are doing is riding at an energy output that you can maintain for
some period. If you really were to exert 100% you might get a quarter
of a mile before you collapsed.


Yes, that is what I think as well. My limitation is more the breathing
and I don't enjoy being totally out of breath for a long time. I was
always an endurance kind of guy, never a good sprinter.

Yes, endurance is generally determined by oxygen intake. Yes, runners
and bicycle sprinters can perform at higher intensities but only for
short times. A "miler" will run three laps at about maximum oxygen
intake and the last lap he will accelerate and go into oxygen
deficiency.


Seen it but I was never good at that. Even in the army my better times
were long-haul. 5km on the sports field, xx kilometer on "hikes" in full
gear. With cycling it is similar. Yesterday was 43mi or 69km, to pick up
a $1.75 item in the valley that I urgently need. About 30% of that ride
was extra and just for fun. However, after this discussion I tried some
muscle max-out phases and paid for that the last 10mi which are almost
all uphill.

Sure, you exceeded the effort that you can maintain for the entire
ride.


Yup. Or in other words my age begins to show.


I see that sometimes where guys blast by me at high speed and then on
the next long hill I pass them.

I also see that sometimes guys blast by me at high speed and then go
on out of sight :-)


Oh yeah :-)

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

You don't get ANY training at all unless you have a really easy warm-up period of about 10 minutes. You can only go anaerobic for maybe 30 seconds for a non-athlete to perhaps a minute for a trained athlete. the "80%" mark is what changes with training.

If you don't warm-up at perhaps 50-60% for the first ten minutes you are mostly riding anaerobically and eating up your lactate reserves. Now if after you warm up you ride well below your threshold you can restore these reserves but it is VERY slow. One of the reasons I stopped riding with my local group because their idea of a warm-up was riding across the parking lot and out onto the street.

Within a couple of minutes they would be going flat out up a 7% grade. And the guys that got to the top first would be figiting to leave before the last arrived.