What does this result say about me?

TomR · Post by **TomR** » July 12th, 2006, 4:39 pm

Jeff--

Your resting HR surprises me. Has it come down since you started erging? Mine was in the 60s when I started erging in my 50s, having done no significant endurance training, and is now in the high 40s five years later.

Tom

mpukita · Post by **mpukita** » July 12th, 2006, 5:37 pm

Wow, mine's 52 ... at the same age. I am quite a bit shorter, if that has anything to do with it (and I believe it does in some manner). Been erging since May 2005. Interesting. Appears you just idle faster, and have a higher redline!

Zoom zoom zoom ...

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » July 12th, 2006, 7:51 pm

Jim Ryun had a very high resting heart rate. I don't recall what it was exactly but was somewhere around 60 or 70. His max was probably over 200.

Lasse Viren's max heart rate was also around 200. The same for Lance Armstrong.

World Class runner Anne Audain's max heart rate was 156.

The formulas don't mean anything. The only thing that matters is your own physiology.

GeorgeD · Post by **GeorgeD** » July 13th, 2006, 5:52 am

John Rupp wrote:Jim Ryun had a very high resting heart rate. I don't recall what it was exactly but was somewhere around 60 or 70. His max was probably over 200.

Lasse Viren's max heart rate was also around 200. The same for Lance Armstrong.

World Class runner Anne Audain's max heart rate was 156.

The formulas don't mean anything. The only thing that matters is your own physiology.

You have hit the nail on the head there John we are all different. Our max HR's are based on a myriad of factors affecting the heart. I would guess also that a declining resting HR has as much to do with how efficently our body processes oxygen as it does the heart getting stonger and a little bigger.

I think a key to success for the athletes you mention may not have much to do with their Max HR's but the efficency that their bodies operated at under stress as they approached this 'max'. The ability to work at a higher percentage of ones Vo2max is a key component in improving performance as it delays the onset of lactate build up.

In my case my max HR is about 170 which is pretty close to the theoretical but I know a top 50 year old erger for whom this is only about their AT level.

George

ragiarn · Post by **ragiarn** » July 13th, 2006, 8:25 am

Doc:

I bought a heart monitor from Concept2 last September (over 2 million meters ago). I used it twice. I became concerned when it displayed just under 190 at the end of a very hard 1K, since 220 minus 56 is 164. My obvious (at least to me) concern was "is it bad to exceed your theoretical max heart rate?" What happens? Do you bust/burst something? So, I looked all around for the meaning of "max heart rate" to see if I should be concerned. When I could not find anything relating to "what happens when you exceed your theoretical max heart rate", I put my heart monitor away and continued to row, figuring that my body would tell me if something was seriously wrong.
So, I'm guessing that I could get my heart rate over 190 and may very well be doing so during the last 100 meters of any attempt at a distance PB. Is this "high" rate a good thing, a bad thing or something of indifference? My resting heart rate is around 65.

Jeff

First of all disregard the maximum heart rate estimates that you see ont he various graphs and forget the formula. They were never meant to be used to estimate the maximum heart rate for healthy individuals but as a best guestimate for older individuals undergoing cardiac stress tests.

There are individual differences for maximum heart rates and each person needs to find their own maximum heart rate. There are graded tests you can do to find your maximum heart rate. However it is generally hard to find your maximum heart rarte in non competitive activity since most individuals will naturally back off before they reach their true maximum heart rate while training. In the competitive situation when adrenaline is pumping and our mind is focused on the task at hand rather than how we are feeling, we can often disregard the extreme discomfort if we can see the finish is near.

If your heart is healthy then nothing will happen to your heart when it reaches it's max- it just will not go any faster. As stated in my earlier post if you have any concerns about your heart then speak to your physician and consider having a stress test especially if you are relatively new to strenuous exercise and have a family history of heart disease or you have other risk factors for heart disease. Being a male over 40 is in an of itself a risk factor.

You definitely do not want to reach your maximum heart rate unless you are at the very end of your race or your training interval. As your heart rate nears its maximum rate it becomes inefficient. There is a point of diminishing returns. In order for your heart to pump the blood to the rest of the body it first has to fill its chambers with blood. As the heart increases speed there is less time for the heart chambers to fill as a result there is relatively less blood being pumped per stroke even though the total cardiac output/minute is increasing. It is like trading stroke/rate for pace. The same can be said for breathing rate and lung volume.

The heart monitor can be a very valuable tool as a training monitor, just as watts and pace can be valuable tools once your learn to how use it properly. My advice is to use it all the time initially just observing how you feel and how you perform at various intensities and heart rates. In time your heart rate will be able to tell a great deal about your training. Unfortunately every one wants simple answers to very complex physiolgical variables. There are no simple answers.

Just as maximum heart requires certain conditions to exist to be evaluated so does resting heart rate. Resting heart rate is ideally found fisrt thing in the morning while laying down quietly for about 5 minutes.
This is the rate your heart pumps while supplying your body with he amount of blood required for your BMR.

The maximum heart rate is the maximum that your heart can beat to meet the maximum oxygen demand of your body.
Any effort that exceeds your maximum heart rate is anaerobic.

The difference between your resting heart rate and your maximum heart rate is called the cardiac reserve or the range your heart can work for everything other than your BMR. If your resting heart rate is 60 and your maximum is 190 then your cardiac reserve is 130. That is the range you use for daily acitivities. I have seen athletes whose resting heart rate is as low as 35 and maximum at 200 for a cardiac reserve of 165. The cardiac reserve can be used to calculate % of VO2max.

At 65 my maximum observed heart rate during compeition is 167. My resting heart rate observed under resting conditions is 45. The true sign of fitness improvement is not how fast or how slow your heart rate is but rather how quickly your heart rate and breathing rate recover after a hard effort. As your fitness improves you will find that your heart rate will return to 100 faster and your breathing will recover faster for a given interval intensity.

I could probably go on for several more pages at this point but I think I have said enough for today. I would be more than happy to adress any questions. I have been using HRM for more than 20 years, long before it became a fad. I have successfully used the HRM to train bicycle racers and triathletes. Unfortunately most individuals purchasing these items have no idea of what the HRM is telling them and often end up putting them in a drawer and forgetting all about them. I also find that most trainers are totally ignorant when it comes to using the HRM and generally give out bad advice. A tool is only as good as the skill of the person using the tool.

The following articles I found while reading Concept2 UK forum:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... gewanted=1 :
http://www.nia.nih.gov/HealthInformatio ... pter02.htm
Also go to:http://www.concept2.co.uk/forum/viewtop ... efd3690106

mpukita · Post by **mpukita** » July 13th, 2006, 8:41 am

Thanks for taking the time to write and post this Dr. Ralph, this is great stuff.

ragiarn · Post by **ragiarn** » July 13th, 2006, 5:29 pm

For more information on HRM try the following which I found on The Sports Science web:

From the daily blog Sports Science
http://daily-erg-workout.blogspot.com/2 ... ining.html
How to be fit from Polar
http://www.howtobefit.com/determine-max ... t-rate.htm
from ppol
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0186.htm

tennstrike · Post by **tennstrike** » July 14th, 2006, 9:12 pm

ragiarn wrote:
If your heart is healthy then nothing will happen to your heart when it reaches it's max- it just will not go any faster.

Doc:

Many thanks for the above simple explanation of max heart rate. It is obvious when stated, but I just wondered. We all also appreciate the time you took to respond so fully and the references. I've been out of town for three days and will catch up this weekend on the reading.

Now that I know I shouldn't be worried about the readings, I may take out the heart monitor again and just see what's going on.

Jeff

tennstrike · Post by **tennstrike** » July 15th, 2006, 2:32 pm

ragiarn wrote:
The true sign of fitness improvement is not how fast or how slow your heart rate is but rather how quickly your heart rate and breathing rate recover after a hard effort. As your fitness improves you will find that your heart rate will return to 100 faster and your breathing will recover faster for a given interval intensity.

Doc:

After my workout this afternoon, I took time and read your first link. I had just finished (less than 10 minutes) a 12K piece at 2:05, I wanted to get a handle on my heart rate recovery. So I fished the heart rate monitor out of its original packing and strapped it on and got back on the erg. My rate was still up around 95. So I did a little warmup and then a reasonably hard 500 meters. It was a little under 1:44, and it got my heart rate up to around 158.

When I was done, I stayed on the erg rowing lightly. After a minute, I was just below 123. After a minute and a half, I was down to 110, where it stayed until I stopped which was about 3 minutes after the row. Interesting. I'm reasonably pleased with around 35 beats of recovery in a minute and am wondering how many beats I would recover if I get the rate up to 180 or so. Think I'll try that my next 2K workout for one of the pieces. I really don't like wearing it while I row because it is just too tight around my chest.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond and for the links to view.

Jeff

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » July 15th, 2006, 2:46 pm

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » July 15th, 2006, 2:52 pm

johnlvs2run · Post by **johnlvs2run** » July 15th, 2006, 3:05 pm

ragiarn · Post by **ragiarn** » July 15th, 2006, 4:51 pm

Doc:

After my workout this afternoon, I took time and read your first link. I had just finished (less than 10 minutes) a 12K piece at 2:05, I wanted to get a handle on my heart rate recovery. So I fished the heart rate monitor out of its original packing and strapped it on and got back on the erg. My rate was still up around 95. So I did a little warmup and then a reasonably hard 500 meters. It was a little under 1:44, and it got my heart rate up to around 158.

When I was done, I stayed on the erg rowing lightly. After a minute, I was just below 123. After a minute and a half, I was down to 110, where it stayed until I stopped which was about 3 minutes after the row. Interesting. I'm reasonably pleased with around 35 beats of recovery in a minute and am wondering how many beats I would recover if I get the rate up to 180 or so. Think I'll try that my next 2K workout for one of the pieces. I really don't like wearing it while I row because it is just too tight around my chest.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond and for the links to view.

Jeff

It takes a while to learn how to use the HRM properly but once you do it can be a great training tool. There are a few points I would like to make:
1- you do not have to strangle yourself with the chest strap. Just enough pressure to make good contact.

2-500 meters is too short of a distance to get a good handle on your heart rate. It takes about 2:00 for the heart to catch up with the metabolic demands of a hard pull. There is a good chance that once you finished your 500 meters your heart rate was still rising.

3- The higher the intensity of the interval the longer it will take to get your HR back to recovery.

4- With time and experience you will be able to find the HR at which you entering your lactate threshold. In Gcanyon's original post where he noted his 1 K splits and HR I would estimate that his lactate threshold is around 180-185 and his AT is around 185+. The LT zone is a zone that can be rowed for long periods of time altough not indefinetly. Once you get into your AT zone your exercise time is severely limited to but a few minutes. With training in the AT zone your body becomes more adept at clearing Lactate and you will be able to slowly increase the HR in the LT zone. The LT zone is often also called the OBLA- onset of blood lactate accumulation.

I will use myself as for an example. I am 65. My observed maximum HR at the end of a competition is 167. My maximum HR achieved during hard training session 163.

After a long lay off from training my LT is in the mid 140s(142-146) and my AT is around 149 (147-150). As my training progresses my LT is in the low 150s *(151-154) and my AT is in the mid to high 150s(156-159). How do I know? Well mostly through experience. Through observation I know that when I get to my AT it is not long before I have to stop because of exhaustion. I also know that if I stay in may LT zone I can hold this level of intensity for 20-30 or more minutes. Forget the tables that tell you that a certain % of maximum heart rate equals LT and AT. Both of these levels are individually variable and with proper training you can push both zones upwards so that eventually you may be able to stay in the LT zone at 95% of your max. Untrained sedentary individuals may reach their LT zone at 50% of their max.

5. If you use your HRM during all of your training you eventually will be able to correlate the pace which best corresponds to your LT zone and save the pace which corresponds to your At zone for the last 500 m.

6. Important note: you should not make every workout a LT workout.
see Dr. Seilers article on Intervals.

For info on Lactate Threshld:: http://home.hia.no/~stephens/lacthres.htm
http://daily-erg-workout.blogspot.com/2 ... chive.html

For info on Intervals :http://home.hia.no/~stephens/interval.htm

HardGainer · Post by **HardGainer** » July 15th, 2006, 6:41 pm

Wow! Thanks Ralph and others for the most informative thread I've come across in a long time. I haven't looked at the references yet but look forward to going throught them. Much of what you've told us confirms what I've either suspected or read, but it's great to have so much information in one place.

I've long tired of people bragging about their low RHRs and telling me that mine being around 60bpm shows I haven't gained much fitness over the years of training. I know this is demonstrably rubbish and that my recovery after exercise has improved dramatically. Interestingly my wife (who has next to no interest in fitness matters) teaches general science to 13-15 year-olds and yet one of the things she gets them to do is a HR recovery exercise, the point of which is to demonstrate that the fitter kids recover more quickly than others. The actual RHRs are not considered so significant.

Good too to see the 220-minus-your-age "law" put in its rightful place. I discovered its usefulness half an hour after strapping on my HRM for the first time, when I recorded a 185bpm (25bpm over my then "theoretical" maximum) without even doing a systematic, sustained MHR test.

One question for you: How do I get my 500m time down to 1:28?
In 18 months of admittedly very sporadic training I've only managed to move it from 1:31.7 to 1:29.6

Oh, and I need to do this by 12 August 2006. Tell it to me like it is Doc ! I can take it

John Rippon, NZ
_____________
1.76m 81kg 58yr

ragiarn · Post by **ragiarn** » July 15th, 2006, 7:08 pm

HardGainer wrote:Wow! Thanks Ralph and others for the most informative thread I've come across in a long time. I haven't looked at the references yet but look forward to going throught them. Much of what you've told us confirms what I've either suspected or read, but it's great to have so much information in one place.

I've long tired of people bragging about their low RHRs and telling me that mine being around 60bpm shows I haven't gained much fitness over the years of training. I know this is demonstrably rubbish and that my recovery after exercise has improved dramatically. Interestingly my wife (who has next to no interest in fitness matters) teaches general science to 13-15 year-olds and yet one of the things she gets them to do is a HR recovery exercise, the point of which is to demonstrate that the fitter kids recover more quickly than others. The actual RHRs are not considered so significant.

Good too to see the 220-minus-your-age "law" put in its rightful place. I discovered its usefulness half an hour after strapping on my HRM for the first time, when I recorded a 185bpm (25bpm over my then "theoretical" maximum) without even doing a systematic, sustained MHR test.

One question for you: How do I get my 500m time down to 1:28?
In 18 months of admittedly very sporadic training I've only managed to move it from 1:31.7 to 1:29.6 Oh, and I need to do this by 12 August 2006. Tell it to me like it is Doc ! I can take it

John Rippon, NZ
_____________
1.76m 81kg 58yr

The 220-minus your age law has been taken out its proper context (guidlines for cardiologists testing cardiac patients) and misused by the many in the "fitness industry" and often quoted by some fitness gurus who probaby understand little of exercise physiology. I don't mean to disparage all in the fitness industry but I keep hearing so much misinformation from individuals who put themselves up as experts just because they are good athletes.

As for how to get your 500 mg down another few seconds, I am not sure that I can answer that since I am a relative newbie to rowing (only 4 million meters so far). However you have to realize that 500 m is a higly anaerobic event which requires a high anaerobic capacity. I would suggest that you check out Dr. Seilers article on the different types of intervals (URL is in my previous post),what they are for and how to properly perform them for the maximum benefit. He has a section on anaerobic intervals.

While you are at it chek out his website for the article on Specialized strength training for rowers.http://home.hia.no/~stephens/rowstre.htm
He has an exercise called the power 10s which is a power workout on the ergometer.

The first 2-3 strokes are the most important because that is were a great deal of time is gained or lost. Not unlike the first 10 20 meters of a 100 meter sprint. You need great acceleration and power.

Maintain proper technique since one bad stroke can ruin your time.

500 meters is more of a power event rather than an endurance event so the more muscle and anaerobic capacity the better.

Concept2 Forum

What does this result say about me?

Re: Good/Bad/Indifferent

Re: Good/Bad/Indifferent

Rate Recovery

Re: Rate Recovery

Thanks so much!

Re: Thanks so much!