Heart training "dead zone"

[DNA_Rower]

OK, maybe "dead zone" isn't the best phrase, perhaps "ineffective zone" would be better.

I bought a Wahoo TickrX the other day. Today I tried to calibrate my heart training zones in the app (I know nothing about heart zone training so bear with me).

My resting HR is about 60-65. After doing the Wahoo calibration, the app told me that my "Fat Burn" zone is 146-161 and my "Burst Zone" (where I supposedly burn carbohydrate as fuel source increasing body's ability to buffer out lactic acid etc) is >169. Max HR I have hit in first few sessions with monitor is probably ~180.

I was doing an easy 8k today (week 15 BPP) and settled down with a HR of 164 for a while. According to this app I am neither in the Burn Zone, nor the Burst Zone. So am I in an ineffective zone? (I realise I must still be getting some exercise benefit from training away at HR164)

So I then slowed down to HR160 to at least stay in the Burn Zone - it felt very easy. Am I really getting much benefit from rowing in that zone when it feels pretty easy?

I guess maybe I'm asking for some beginner guidance on HR zone training... Should I just be aiming for the Burn zone all the time?

[hjs]

You are simply not very aerbicly fit and your hf readings don,t tell that much yet. You will see a good drop in hf readings, both rest and training ones.

About fat/glucose use during excercise, its much more complicated. Don,t worry about it. Focus on your breathing, that should stay calm, once breathing starts to get laboured, you are certainly not going aerobe anymore.

[DNA_Rower]

You are simply not very aerbicly fit and your hf readings don,t tell that much yet. You will see a good drop in hf readings, both rest and training ones.

About fat/glucose use during excercise, its much more complicated. Don,t worry about it. Focus on your breathing, that should stay calm, once breathing starts to get laboured, you are certainly not going aerobe anymore.

What is it about my HR results that show that I'm not aerobically fit? All of them are too high?

For context I've been training pretty regularly since September last year. Recent 5k best time was 19:03.2 at the end of April but with current temperature in the gym I can't get near that again. At the moment it feels like nothing is improving - I'm just maintaining current fitness (or maybe improving without realising) until the temperature drops again and I can start seeing if I can beat PBs.

[bonefixer]

Don't pay any attention to these fat burn zones and suchlike. Calories are calories, and it really doesn't matter where they're coming from while exercising, it'll all equilibrate later on.

To keep it simple, consider that you have 2 training zones, corresponding to energy production systems - aerobic and anaerobic. The former is where your oxygen delivery is enough to generate ATP to get your muscles contracting. It can be accurately assessed by measuring blood lactate levels. Anaerobic is where you are producing ATP by anaerobic 'oxidation', which generates lactate.

You want to train both systems - aerobic to improve your oxygen delivery systems (cardiac stroke volume, contractility, muscle oxygen extraction, mitochondrial density etc), and anaerobic to improve your lactate tolerance - it is lactic acid that leads to muscle pain and muscles tying up, and is why it's impossible to maintain your 500m pace for 5000m.

As a rough rule, aerobic mechanisms predominate up to 80% of heart rate reserve. In your case, for simplicity of arithmetic you have a resting heart rate of 60, and a heart rate reserve of a further 120 bpm. Your aerobic rate is therefore up to 60+0.8x120=156. You need to be over 50% to get a training effect, so I'd say your training zone for aerobic to be 120-156

Anaerobic is over 156.

These zones don't act like a switch, and you'll still be predominantly aerobic when just above the lactate threshold. If you want to build aerobic capacity (takes years of conditioning) do lots of long rowing with a HR of 120-156. If preparing for a test, do some intervals at high HR to gain lactate tolerance (can probably be developed in 6 weeks)

Hope this helps. Again, the situation is way more complicated than I've presented, and if you want accurate values you'll need full on physiological testing of O2 consumption with heart rate and lactate measurements. But it's probably a workable rule of thumb.

[hjs]

You are simply not very aerbicly fit and your hf readings don,t tell that much yet. You will see a good drop in hf readings, both rest and training ones.

About fat/glucose use during excercise, its much more complicated. Don,t worry about it. Focus on your breathing, that should stay calm, once breathing starts to get laboured, you are certainly not going aerobe anymore.

What is it about my HR results that show that I'm not aerobically fit? All of them are too high?

For context I've been training pretty regularly since September last year. Recent 5k best time was 19:03.2 at the end of April but with current temperature in the gym I can't get near that again. At the moment it feels like nothing is improving - I'm just maintaining current fitness (or maybe improving without realising) until the temperature drops again and I can start seeing if I can beat PBs.

If 180 is your max, 160 is high for just training. But maybe your max is a good bit higher? How did you get that max?

And in general how do your train? Some general info might help. Age, height, weight, rowing results.

[hjs]

You want to train both systems - aerobic to improve your oxygen delivery systems (cardiac stroke volume, contractility, muscle oxygen extraction, mitochondrial density etc), and anaerobic to improve your lactate tolerance - it is lactic acid that leads to muscle pain and muscles tying up, and is why it's impossible to maintain your 500m pace for 5000m.

.

Mwa, aerobic system does not clear lactate, it only produces it. Clearing is combining both systems. The better aerobicly fit one is, the better we can counter lactate build up.

Not lactate but H+ ions cause the pain, both are produced during anaerobic work.

[DNA_Rower]

You are simply not very aerbicly fit and your hf readings don,t tell that much yet. You will see a good drop in hf readings, both rest and training ones.

About fat/glucose use during excercise, its much more complicated. Don,t worry about it. Focus on your breathing, that should stay calm, once breathing starts to get laboured, you are certainly not going aerobe anymore.

What is it about my HR results that show that I'm not aerobically fit? All of them are too high?

For context I've been training pretty regularly since September last year. Recent 5k best time was 19:03.2 at the end of April but with current temperature in the gym I can't get near that again. At the moment it feels like nothing is improving - I'm just maintaining current fitness (or maybe improving without realising) until the temperature drops again and I can start seeing if I can beat PBs.

If 180 is your max, 160 is high for just training. But maybe your max is a good bit higher? How did you get that max?

And in general how do your train? Some general info might help. Age, height, weight, rowing results.

Actually I guess I don't know what my real max is, I just mean that 180 is the highest I have seen in the few times I have used the heart monitor. I presume I can go higher.

My stats: I'm 37 y.o. 184cm tall and about 81 or 82kg. Also a little bit hypertensive.

I guess I haven't trained that much in my life. It's only since September last year that I managed to finally get regular on the erg. I am vaguely going along with the Beginner Pete Plan (week 15 now) but otherwise mostly do 10k and 30min sessions. I am strongly affected by the heat so I set a bunch of PBs in April this year that I can't get close to now. Here is my Concept2 log: https://log.concept2.com/profile/899868/log

My near-term target is to get the 5K below 19min and then to get the 2k below 7min. Both of those will probably have to wait until Autumn due to the temperature.

What do you think? Am I that unfit? I was quite pleased that my 5k and 30min times last season were 70th percentile. I can't see me ever getting much beyond 75th!

[hjs]

Certainly not unfit, pretty solid results, but the fact you don,t know your real max Hf is very relevant, if your real max would be 200, the whole story is different. So you first should know that max roughly at least before you can say much about your numbers.
It takes a very hard medium lenght time trial with a sprint to get your max. You should be well rested if you do one.

[left coaster]

Lots of good feedback from others here!

A small side note from me -- I eventually gave up using the HR monitor on the erg. it seems my max HR on the erg is actually different from what I can achieve running, it's about 15 bpm lower for some reason. I concluded that max HR is somewhat arbitrary and for me at least, related to what I'm doing. Also, I've learned there are genetic differences in how fast our HR accelerates, responds to exercise etc. I'm a slower responded and on the erg this seems to be exacerbated -- the threshold tables don't work well for me.

The HR monitor was a good tool for me initially in terms of identifying training zones etc. and I eventually became comfortable using the general memory of what the zones feel like in terms of perceived effort. Always looking at my HR became a distraction and something that caused me to hold back during max efforts for some reason. As it would go up I would become super focused on the number and it distracted me from the task at hand.

[bonefixer]

Lots of good feedback from others here!

A small side note from me -- I eventually gave up using the HR monitor on the erg. it seems my max HR on the erg is actually different from what I can achieve running, it's about 15 bpm lower for some reason. I concluded that max HR is somewhat arbitrary and for me at least, related to what I'm doing. Also, I've learned there are genetic differences in how fast our HR accelerates, responds to exercise etc. I'm a slower responded and on the erg this seems to be exacerbated -- the threshold tables don't work well for me.

The HR monitor was a good tool for me initially in terms of identifying training zones etc. and I eventually became comfortable using the general memory of what the zones feel like in terms of perceived effort. Always looking at my HR became a distraction and something that caused me to hold back during max efforts for some reason. As it would go up I would become super focused on the number and it distracted me from the task at hand.

It's normal to have a lower 'max' HR on the rower than when running - being vertical apparently. Not usually 15bpm difference though. As for HR acceleration, isn't this, at least in part, due to warm-up? If I'm fully warmed up before a piece my HR goes right up, as compared with building up gradually if I get straight on the machine and go.

[left coaster]

Sure, I don't disagree re the warm-up bit.
That said, my athletigen report indicates that my hr takes longer to come up during warm up and hard efforts. Who know's if their reports are accurate, but it does feel consistent with my lived experience. Middle distances, like 2-5k are rough for me, sprints and longer bits come with considerably lower perceived effort. Sprint come best with a bit of hyperventilation before the start to boost my o2 sat

I'm don't take any of it very seriously though and haven't posted much here lately.

[jamesg]

I guess maybe I'm asking for some beginner guidance on HR zone training... Should I just be aiming for the Burn zone all the time?

Basic fitness training:
Learn to row, then do as much work as you can per shift, but take your time doing it.
As to age and sex, 1.5 to 2.5 W/kg will get you fit.
If you need a rest (now or tomorrow) take it.

The erg reads Watts, so you know the Power level instantly and also what you can hold after 10 minutes warm-up.
At the end you know the amount of Work done, which is average Watts x Time. Heat relates directly to this: Hours x 4 x av Watts = kCal; fudge the 4 if unhappy, or use the C2 add-on (300 kCal/h).

ALWAYS work on technique, the next stroke has to be better so that the boat goes further.
Watt/Rating ratios let us criticize our technique.

The Watt readout makes HR training obsolete, on the erg; HR was used as a proxy of Power. If you do other sports where W can't be measured, then it will help if you set up some cross references between HR and Watts, at steady state. Save for racing, there is unlikely to be any need to go over 220-Age.