Concept2 Forum

Finally taking care of myself, I just purchased a heart monitor to link up to the PM5. I am 69 years old with a stent in the LED artery (4 years ago) but appear to be doing well enough to get serious to train.
Looking at the heart rates recommended by Mayo et al., they indicate that my limit to my optimal exercise heart rate is 128.3 bpm. At this level I barely work up a sweat. I picked up the pace and at the 30 minute mark I was at 142 bpm, sweating and working but in no real trouble. At the 128 bpm, I could probably do a marathon but it would take me forever. Any ideas? If pressed I think I could top out over 150 but that is already my theoretical MAXIMUM heart rate.
I have been rowing off and on since college. Is this something I need to be concerned about or when doing ranked pieces, forget about my theoretical and listen to the body?

Many thanks,

JC

The Karvonen HR method is: 1 find your rest rate, 2 find your max rate, 3 paddle at up to 80-85% of range to stay aerobic, where range is the difference between rest and max.

The formula 220-Age gives an average based on a small sample and has a standard deviation wider than the UT2, UT1, AT HR bands, so this method is useless for training, as you have seen. It gives neither the rest rate nor a reliable maximum.

However the C2 erg shows both rating and Watts, making it uniquely simple to train on a C2. When you can, do a 500m as fast as possible, then train at around half the test power. HR can still be used to see how we react, but power is control.

jamesg wrote: ↑

December 28th, 2019, 5:18 pm

When you can, do a 500m as fast as possible, then train at around half the test power.

That is a quite tough target. I would not be able to do that every day.

bepah wrote: ↑

December 28th, 2019, 2:23 pm

Finally taking care of myself, I just purchased a heart monitor to link up to the PM5. I am 69 years old with a stent in the LED artery (4 years ago) but appear to be doing well enough to get serious to train.
Looking at the heart rates recommended by Mayo et al., they indicate that my limit to my optimal exercise heart rate is 128.3 bpm. At this level I barely work up a sweat. I picked up the pace and at the 30 minute mark I was at 142 bpm, sweating and working but in no real trouble. At the 128 bpm, I could probably do a marathon but it would take me forever. Any ideas? If pressed I think I could top out over 150 but that is already my theoretical MAXIMUM heart rate.
I have been rowing off and on since college. Is this something I need to be concerned about or when doing ranked pieces, forget about my theoretical and listen to the body?
Many thanks, JC

Your theoretical MHR based on any formula is pretty much useless as Allan and James have said. (for example I am about the same age as you and true MHR is 172). MHR is not a measure of fitness but an individual predetermined thing. (RHR will drop with fitness though)
With your medical history it would probably be best to do a MHR test with the supervision of an exercise physiologist and then use training bands based on that (<80% of heart rate reserve for cardio). Could even do one with lactates as well. I general I don't get "frightened" by my HR getting >95% of max but have never had a stent which is why specialist advice would be useful.
The other thing you could do is assume that MHR is say 160 or thereabouts and see what that gives you by getting HHR = MHR - RHR then % of that and add back RHR.
There are some sports scientists who think that RPE (ranking of perceived exertion) is an accurate way of setting training as well so "listening to your body" is not a bad way of looking at it either. I would push hard enough to raise a sweat but still able to hold a conversation as a measure of UT1 level and see where my HR was rather than the other way around.
This may help too: http://freespir.s409.sureserver.com/for ... calculator

That is a quite tough target. I would not be able to do that every day.

No need. I do it about once a month to track things. For me it comes to about 250W test and next months training between 120 and 140W (20-22), which keeps me alive. The 500 is handy for 2k pacing too, should one be so inclined.

lindsayh wrote: ↑

December 28th, 2019, 9:19 pm

as Allan and James have said.

Actually, I didn't. But I fully agree to the statement. My max. HR is 24 BPM higher than the 220-age formula says.

With that said, most people will overestimate the effort needed for daily training. They feel that it can't work if they don't train hard. It is very well-known among runners, who often improve a lot when they get some coaching advice and slow down their daily training.

As an example, I have a max. heart rate of 193, and I actually do most of my training around the same heart rate as bepah calculated.

jamesg wrote: ↑

December 29th, 2019, 2:17 am

That is a quite tough target. I would not be able to do that every day.

No need. I do it about once a month to track things. For me it comes to about 250W test and next months training between 120 and 140W (20-22), which keeps me alive. The 500 is handy for 2k pacing too, should one be so inclined.

I am not referring to the 500 meter test. I am referring to your resulting training intensity.

My 500 meter is a little less than 400W. If I was training every day at a little less than 200W, I would wear myself down.

There's no obligation and in any case "around half" does not mean 50.00%. Any other simple guideline will do.

I would talk to your doctor before doing anything particularly rigorous.

~50% of 500M pace is accurate for me, my usual steady state 5k to 30 minute training intensity is around 180 to 200 watts and my 500M is around 400 watts. However, I am younger and also do not have a heart condition that I know of.

That intensity of steady state is probably too intense for a typical coached program, but I really only like rowing at an intense level, if I row at anything easier I get bored, and I do a good amount of hours per week biking on a stationary bike at around 100 watts for lower intensity stuff and as a warmup and cooldown etc. From what I have read on various sites and reddit, however, my steady state is probably too intense and should be more around 2:10 to even 2:20+ instead of 2:00 to 2:05. I tried increasing my mileage to 60KM and reducing my steady state pace to 2:15+ but started getting slower on the short distances and dramatically weaker on the weights, so I switched back to the lesser mileage ~35KM per week with intense workouts I know and enjoy.

One thing that has been observed is heart rate / cardiac creep / drift can occur if you start to overheat, placing a well positioned fan can keep your body cool and your heart rate from creeping up over time.

The well-known formula HRmax = 220-(age) has been reviewed and improved in many scientific studies. You can find a critical summary of these studies in a free-access paper https://www.timtakken.nl/wp-content/upl ... values.pdf .

The major improvent is to distinguish between males and females. For males a more accurate formula is : Hrmax = 220 - 0.88x(age[yrs]).
Another improvement is to include height in the formula, see Table 3 (page 1447) in the paper.

No matter how sophisticated a formula, it is an approximation for the average HRmax for a large group of healthy men. Individual devations always exist, see the Standard Error of the Estimate (SEE) in Table 3.

JC, folks with CAD and stent insertion in the LAD artery are obviously “at risk” and tied by the hip to their cardiologists for the remainder of their days. Based on my CAD history (angina and coronary artery blockage in early 2014) and the volume and intensity of exercise which I reached in 6 months after stenting procedure, i think you can decide to live a little and blip the throttle. I agree that perceived exertion is a better case by case governor on HR than are formulae determined by observation of “healthy” populations. Zone intensity based on percentage test power vs. on percentage HRR+RHR? Learn to use both approaches in concert. Belt and suspenders.

I thank all for the responses and hope this thread continues to survive. With the discussion, it is clear that I have lots more to discover.
MY entire cardiac history also involves a long history of statins due to genetic (plus diet) high cholesterol, high blood pressure, beta blockers, the stent, of course, and a little heavy for my build.
It looks like my doctor and I will have a few more discussions over the next appointments. The cardiologist told me to ignore the studies and go for it, which I am now discovering that the beta blockers are preventing my heart rate to meet the needs of extremely high level of exercise.

Thanks again for the discussion and keep it up! You can never know everything!

See you all at the CRASH-Bs in 2021!

bepah wrote: ↑

January 9th, 2020, 2:01 pm

..... and a little heavy for my build.

Or perhaps just a little short for your weight?