How Many Of Us Use Heart Monitors

[old] MollyDoodle · Post by **[old] MollyDoodle** » December 28th, 2004, 11:58 am

I need help and I don’t know who to ask. I have had trouble with HRM in the past doing step aerobics in that the watch receiver only picked up the transmissions intermittently. I had hoped since the receiver was stationary with the erg I would have had more consistent results. I use electrode gel but if I don't sit perfectly straight and still the signal will drop out. I am overweight but making progress. (Lost 17 lbs so far since October thanks to the HC and new eating habits--Currently 197 lb at 5'8"). I also have a large chest (no jokes, please!). Any suggestions? I have severe plantar fasciitis and have been very sedentary but I am thrilled that my feet can tolerate rowing!

[old] Bayko · Post by **[old] Bayko** » December 28th, 2004, 12:25 pm

Hi Molly, A friend of mine had open heart surgery and thereafter would also get intermittent signals from his HRM. His Doctor suggested that he mount it a bit off-center, a couple of inches to the left or right. For him it works fine in that position. Rick

[old] Coach Gus · Post by **[old] Coach Gus** » December 28th, 2004, 12:43 pm

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (MollyDoodle @ Dec 28 2004, 07:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> I have had trouble with HRM in the past doing step aerobics in that the watch receiver only picked up the transmissions intermittently.  </td></tr></table> We've had that problem with some athletes using the stiff plastic Polar chest strap. Their body shape would cause them to lose contact with the sensors in the inflexible plastic piece. Now that Polar has come out with a completely flexible fabric chest strap, the problem was solved after switching to the new belt. It's also much more comfortable.

[old] Kudos · Post by **[old] Kudos** » December 28th, 2004, 1:21 pm

I have a polar 810i, love it and the software. Expensive as hell, but I use every part of it and rowpro data to log and print my workout data. Really not all that confusing if you spend 30 mins to read the manual. Anyway, the point of this post was to sing the praises of using transmitter gel on the transmitter. I used to have all sorts of problems with losing signal and getting weird readings until I used the gel regularly. Kind of annoying at first, you have to remember to bring the stuff with you, but worth the trouble if your HR data means anything to you, plus it is less gross than using your own saliva and doesn't evaporate like water. I have only lost a signal a handful of times since using the gel. I have not tried the new soft transmitter yet, but it is being shipped to me as I type. Unfourtunatly Molly I can't offer you much advice. I have some large lats so mine sometimes slips downward a little, but I strap it quite tight to my chest, maybe you could try the same? I'm sure I am being redundant to things you have already tried. How about the Polar transmitter sport bra? I am not a woman, so I don't really know if it works or not, but maybe someone can give you some advise on it. Maybe use a little les transmitter gel? Just a dab will do ya, too much and it maybe will slip out of position. Maybe a newer/higher quality HRM? I've never had a cheap model, only mid-high level models of Polar from the past 4 years or so. Sorry I couldn't be more help, just thought I would throw some things out there.

[old] johnnybike · Post by **[old] johnnybike** » December 28th, 2004, 2:58 pm

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (phowd @ Dec 28 2004, 10:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> Did 7700 or so, my average heart rate for the row was 173. Started in the upper 150's (HR and pace), it was near 183 at the end when I pushed the pace down to the low 1:50's. HR dropped back down below 100 in 2-3 minutes.  </td></tr></table> Peter, I am also 47 but not quite as heavy (168lbs) but I would be concerned if my HRM was reaching those sort of figures. Not used a HRM on the erg but racing hard on the road I would only get to the low 150s and a good fast training pace is about 145. I do understand that rowing generates a lower HR than running so having done 30 minutes and felt reasonably good I would not expect my HR to be above about 140ish. Your distances and times are much better than mine but I really would be careful. Occasionally if I am feeling rough and go out running I get up to the 160s and I tend to ease off then and go home. My resting rate is 50ish

[old] DavidA · Post by **[old] DavidA** » December 28th, 2004, 4:27 pm

I am just a couple of years younger (I'm 44), and lighter still (67 kg) but I usually get my HR up to 171 by the end of a fairly hard 30 min piece, and I don't think that is out of the ordinary. I think 140ish would be an easy row.

[old] DavidA · Post by **[old] DavidA** » December 28th, 2004, 4:30 pm

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (GeorgeD @ Dec 28 2004, 12:37 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> Where does the Cardiologist get the idea to use 190-age is THR and the heart is working at 85%. For me this would be 121BPM and I am just warming up, 85% of my max is about 145 and 85% of my working HR is 152 which is 30 bpm higher and based on percieved exertion, more like it.  </td></tr></table> George, Your signature says that you are 46, so 190 - age = 144, not 121, and 144 is about 145.

[old] TomR/the elder · Post by **[old] TomR/the elder** » December 28th, 2004, 4:45 pm

I use the monitor daily and find my readings consistent from one session to the next. If I see a high rate for the given session (a UT1 session in which my HR gets up to 90%, for example) that often is a signal that I need rest. I've heard people talk about variability in HR readings, but I haven't had that experience. Of course, if I work outside during the day and then train in the evening, I'll get slighly higher HR readings when training than if I hadn't done physical labor, but that result is what you would expect. I use the Heart Rate Reserve method when determining HR %. Tom

[old] drkcgoh · Post by **[old] drkcgoh** » December 28th, 2004, 5:09 pm

HRMs and training zones should be used only as a rough guide; listening to your body is best. HRMs have their limitations, from the very early belts with their replaceable batteries, then the thick stiff belts to the slim belts, the coded belts, & now the Wearlink coded soft textile belts that mould to the chest wall. Testing the Max HR is always more accurate than using any of the Predicted MaxHR formulae, among which, the 220-age devised by Dr. William Haskell is the most inaccurate. The step test is a good test on the Erg. Using the ECG gel gives best results for contact, but it is an added expenditure, and it needs to be regularly washed off before it cakes up & accumulates on the belt. Even with the Wearlink coded belt, the tension of the elastic strap needs to be properly adjusted, & sometimes when it is too tight, missed beats can happen, as my last few HRM tracings on the S810 & the latest S625x have shown on hour-long rows. I have been downloading workouts on Running (marathon, sprinting), Racewalking, Weight Training, Erging, Tennis, Dancing, Cycling, Racing, on all the Polar models, from the Polar Sport, the Accurex, to the S810, & now the S625x for >7 years, but I keep it in perspective, and don't always believe in it or train with it exclusively now. Easy rowing at a 2:35 pace for 3 hours keeps the HR at 105, but an all-out effort at 2:07 pace for 2k can maintain an HR of 171 for >8min, while my resting HR has dropped to 41, and Ownindex jumped up to 54. Going by the 220-age formula, I would have been limited to a theoretical MaxHR of only 157 for a 63 year old, but that is way below my racing HR of 171 when erging, or 164 when racewalking 10K at 67min only 2 weeks ago. I go more by the spikes above the 171 that occur with poor physical conditioning, and always revert to lsds for a week to bring the HR tracking back to a steady flat curve when training hard. For weight control it is a simple matter to keep the HR around 110 for lsds of around 3 hour rows. That was how I managed >350K for the HC in spite of slotting in a 5K & a 10K race, an 11K & a 7K fun run, with all the tapering down. KC63

[old] Porkchop · Post by **[old] Porkchop** » December 28th, 2004, 9:17 pm

Two of the best books on the subject are Precision Heart Rate Training by Edmund Burke and Heart Monitor Training for the Compleat Idiot by John L. Parker. Another author on the subject (whom I don't particularly care for) is Sally Edwards. Neither Burke nor Parker writes specifically for rowers, but their approaches should be readily adaptable. Both provide methods for determining maximum heart rate and approximating lactate thresholds for those who are interested.

[old] MollyDoodle · Post by **[old] MollyDoodle** » December 28th, 2004, 11:45 pm

Thanks fo the suggestions. I will try off center and less gel. The more I got intermittent signal the more gel I would slather on! If that doen't work, I will try the new flexible chest band. I am glad to hear that it works for some where the rigid one did not. It is easier to justify the extra expense. I won't be home until the weekend. (On holiday and my husband wouldn't pack the erg ) Molly

[old] GeorgeD · Post by **[old] GeorgeD** » December 28th, 2004, 11:48 pm

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (DavidA @ Dec 29 2004, 09:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (GeorgeD @ Dec 28 2004, 12:37 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'> Where does the Cardiologist get the idea to use 190-age is THR and the heart is working at 85%. For me this would be 121BPM and I am just warming up, 85% of my max is about 145 and 85% of my working HR is 152 which is 30 bpm higher and based on percieved exertion, more like it.  </td></tr></table> George, Your signature says that you are 46, so 190 - age = 144, not 121, and 144 is about 145.  </td></tr></table> Sorry David, my mistake I did not read closely enough . I read it as 190-age then 85% of that. I use 152bpm as 85% of my working HR which is about 75% of VO2 max - George