Heart Rate, Age And Fitness

[[old] BobD]

<!--QuoteBegin-Porkchop+Jan 4 2006, 01:17 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Porkchop @ Jan 4 2006, 01:17 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-BobD+Jan 4 2006, 10:45 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(BobD @ Jan 4 2006, 10:45 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Porkchop+Jan 4 2006, 09:54 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Porkchop @ Jan 4 2006, 09:54 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-BobD+Jan 4 2006, 03:17 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(BobD @ Jan 4 2006, 03:17 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->May I recommend "Heart Monitor Training for the Compleat Idiot" by John L. Parker, Jr.  ISBN 0-915297-25-6 from Cedarwinds Publishing.  It also talks about using the HR Monitor for other sports besides running.  <br /> </td></tr></table><br />I also have that book. It is also fairly good. I prefer Burke over Parker, but either book would be satisfactory. Burke is a bit more technical than Parker. I think that his MHR testing protocol descriptions are better. If the opportunity to browse both books is available, then you ought to look both over before deciding which you like better.<br /><br />Unfortunately, neither book addresses rowing in any way. They are oriented to the running, cycling, swimming, triathlon, and roller-blading communities. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />But your ticker only knows it's being exercised within a certain range and duration, doesn't matter too much what sport I should think. 150 BPM is 150 BPM no matter how it is achieved if for the same duration. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Yes, but both books set out sport-specific training suggestions that are not particularly easy to adapt to rowing. All of the programs tend to be endurance-oriented. Given that most rowers are focused on the 2K distance as the primary "event," endurance-sport training protocols are of limited utility.<br /><br />Personally, I use heart-rate based interval training, which none of the HR training books address. But I don't row for the sake of rowing. My C2 just happens to be the instrument of choice for the cardio/endurance/energy-systems-development segment of a broader exercise program.<br /><br />Actually, some would argue that 150 BPM on a bicycle is significantly different than 150 BPM on an erg. As I noted above, the heart doesn't have to work as hard to return blood through the system when the body is horizontal (as on an erg) as it does when the body is vertical (as on a bicycle) -- the heart does not have to fight gravity (as much) to get its job done. It can deliver an equal volume of blood with fewer beats, so the maximum heart rate tends to be lower on the erg. <br /><br />This certainly is my experience -- I seldom come close to my cycling MHR of 193 on an erg. I get as high as 182-84 occasionally on the C2. That's roughly a 5% difference, which I think is probably significant. I have read similar observations with regard to swimmers' MHR's (i.e., that an individual's swimming MHR will be lower than his/her running MHR), although I have no personal observations to compare. <br /><br />By the way, I am 54, so I guess that I am a poster-child for the statement that formulae are at best an approximation of MHR. My predicted MHR would be 168 (220-54) to 175 (205-27), but my actual MHR is 16 to 25 BPM higher, depending on the activity. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes but if your heart is beating at 150 BPM and you hold at that frequency, it just gets there earlier or later depending on the activity. You can get a higher HR cycling because you can work harder. The question is if I hold my HR at 150 BPM running am I burning the same number of calories as at 150 BPM on the erg? As an example I can easily reach 145 BPM running in about 3-4 minutes and hold that for an hour. To reach the same HR on the erg takes me around 12-15 minutes... <br />

[[old] Porkchop]

<!--QuoteBegin-BobD+Jan 4 2006, 02:24 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(BobD @ Jan 4 2006, 02:24 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Porkchop+Jan 4 2006, 01:17 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Porkchop @ Jan 4 2006, 01:17 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-BobD+Jan 4 2006, 10:45 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(BobD @ Jan 4 2006, 10:45 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Porkchop+Jan 4 2006, 09:54 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Porkchop @ Jan 4 2006, 09:54 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-BobD+Jan 4 2006, 03:17 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(BobD @ Jan 4 2006, 03:17 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->May I recommend "Heart Monitor Training for the Compleat Idiot" by John L. Parker, Jr.  ISBN 0-915297-25-6 from Cedarwinds Publishing.  It also talks about using the HR Monitor for other sports besides running.  <br /> </td></tr></table><br />I also have that book. It is also fairly good. I prefer Burke over Parker, but either book would be satisfactory. Burke is a bit more technical than Parker. I think that his MHR testing protocol descriptions are better. If the opportunity to browse both books is available, then you ought to look both over before deciding which you like better.<br /><br />Unfortunately, neither book addresses rowing in any way. They are oriented to the running, cycling, swimming, triathlon, and roller-blading communities. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />But your ticker only knows it's being exercised within a certain range and duration, doesn't matter too much what sport I should think. 150 BPM is 150 BPM no matter how it is achieved if for the same duration. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Yes, but both books set out sport-specific training suggestions that are not particularly easy to adapt to rowing. All of the programs tend to be endurance-oriented. Given that most rowers are focused on the 2K distance as the primary "event," endurance-sport training protocols are of limited utility.<br /><br />Personally, I use heart-rate based interval training, which none of the HR training books address. But I don't row for the sake of rowing. My C2 just happens to be the instrument of choice for the cardio/endurance/energy-systems-development segment of a broader exercise program.<br /><br />Actually, some would argue that 150 BPM on a bicycle is significantly different than 150 BPM on an erg. As I noted above, the heart doesn't have to work as hard to return blood through the system when the body is horizontal (as on an erg) as it does when the body is vertical (as on a bicycle) -- the heart does not have to fight gravity (as much) to get its job done. It can deliver an equal volume of blood with fewer beats, so the maximum heart rate tends to be lower on the erg. <br /><br />This certainly is my experience -- I seldom come close to my cycling MHR of 193 on an erg. I get as high as 182-84 occasionally on the C2. That's roughly a 5% difference, which I think is probably significant. I have read similar observations with regard to swimmers' MHR's (i.e., that an individual's swimming MHR will be lower than his/her running MHR), although I have no personal observations to compare. <br /><br />By the way, I am 54, so I guess that I am a poster-child for the statement that formulae are at best an approximation of MHR. My predicted MHR would be 168 (220-54) to 175 (205-27), but my actual MHR is 16 to 25 BPM higher, depending on the activity. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Yes but if your heart is beating at 150 BPM and you hold at that frequency, it just gets there earlier or later depending on the activity. You can get a higher HR cycling because you can work harder. The question is if I hold my HR at 150 BPM running am I burning the same number of calories as at 150 BPM on the erg? As an example I can easily reach 145 BPM running in about 3-4 minutes and hold that for an hour. To reach the same HR on the erg takes me around 12-15 minutes... <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Heart rate is not directly related to calories burned. Heart rate more directly reflects the amount of work the heart has to do to pump oxygenated blood to the muscles that are doing the work that burns the calories and return deoxygenated blood to the lungs for reoxygenation. The blood also carries waste products away from the muscles doing the work.<br /><br />You don't necessarily do more work cycling than erging, but your heart has to work harder to overcome gravity to return blood from the legs. <br /><br />You are probably burning more calories per unit of time at 150 bpm on the erg than you are at 150 bpm running. Without instruments to perform actual measurements, it would be impossible to quantify your individual results, but presumably some part of the 150 running bpm is due to the added resistance of gravity, not the level of demand for oxygen. If the heart is beating (with a constant stroke volume) at the same rate, without as great a need to overcome gravity, then it stands to reason that more oxygen is going to the working muscles and is available for work and the burning of calories in the performance of work.<br /><br />One possible test of this hypothesis would be to perform a rough lactate threshold test in several different activities. I think both Burke and Parker give protocols for this. Essentially, if you work at your maximum aerobic capacity at each of several different activities over an identical period of time (I think that 30 minutes is standard) and record your average heart rate at each activity, you should see variations among the different activities. If as I have read (and suggest here), vertical versus horizontal (or close-to-horizontal) body position makes a difference, the average HR's for running and cycling should be higher than the average HR's for rowing or swimming. Alternatively, you could compare watt output between a C2 and a bicycle equipped to record watt output. Caveat: The C2 watt reading is apparently predicated on assumptions concerning bodyweight.

[[old] BobD]

[Alternatively, you could compare watt output between a C2 and a bicycle equipped to record watt output. Caveat: The C2 watt reading is apparently predicated on assumptions concerning bodyweight. <br />[/quote]<br /><br />Yes one of my suggestions for C2 would be to put more programmable features (similar to a Polar M52) into the PM3 HR function. So that I could enter age, sex, weight, height, fitness level, etc. This to get more accurate data regarding my performance, and a cardio /kcal info summary. Then I could have average and peak HR as well as total calories consumed during the row and the grand total.

[[old] johnnybike]

<!--QuoteBegin-BobD+Jan 3 2006, 11:21 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(BobD @ Jan 3 2006, 11:21 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> On the erg after 20 minutes my heart rate is around 143.  When in running about the same and my max HR is around 170.  Inside of 2 min after exercise (and this is a key sign of fitness) my heart rate drops by 30 BPM.  [right] <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />2 minutes to drop 30bpm seems very high to me Bob.<br />I am pretty certain mine drops by more than 30bpm inside a minute (from around 145-150 bpm range)

[[old] johnnybike]

Further to my last post I found a good article on HR testing on a bike forum. The principles are still very much the same though<br /><br />The article is <a href='http://www.bikeforums.net/archive/index.php/t-90374' target='_blank'> Here </a> but a snippet relevant to this thread is <br /><br /><i>My recovery needs some work, according to Chris. After 1 minute my heartrate dropped from a peak of 167 to 146 (37% drop) and after two minutes it dropped to 133 (59% drop). What this means is it takes me longer to recover from hard efforts. Chris provided me with some workouts to do to help improve this.</i><br /><br />

[[old] Porkchop]

[quote=BobD,Jan 5 2006, 03:07 AM]<br />[Alternatively, you could compare watt output between a C2 and a bicycle equipped to record watt output. Caveat: The C2 watt reading is apparently predicated on assumptions concerning bodyweight. <br />[/quote]<br /><br />Yes one of my suggestions for C2 would be to put more programmable features (similar to a Polar M52) into the PM3 HR function. So that I could enter age, sex, weight, height, fitness level, etc. This to get more accurate data regarding my performance, and a cardio /kcal info summary. Then I could have average and peak HR as well as total calories consumed during the row and the grand total. <br />[/quote]<br />I absolutely agree with you on that. It is frustrating to work with end-of-interval "snapshot" data. Clearly, some of the data are stored temporarily already, because the HRM graphic display shows variations of HR over time. How much more programming would it require to show the data numerically?

[[old] edollar]

I did a 9k row last night, rowing about 5 minute intervals at about 120-125 heart rate and every sixth minute rowing faster to get heart rate up to about 145-148. At the end I rowed fast enough to get heart rate up to 151. I then checked it after I stopped. It had dropped 30 points by 50 seconds and dropped 49 points down to 102 in two minutes. <br /><br />The girl who I bike with at the gym checked her heart rate this morning after working out on the bike and she did drop 32 points from 178 to 146 in two minutes. <br /><br />Would this be a sign that maybe I am more fit than she is? I do feel better that her HR did drop at least 30 though. I was concerned about her.<br /><br />While working on pacing myself by my heart rate, I really let my stroke rate, length and quality SUCK!!. I guess it will take more practice to get all things working correctly at one time.<br /><br />Ellen<br /><br />PS: I ordered the HR books yesterday.

[[old] BobD]

<!--QuoteBegin-edollar+Jan 5 2006, 11:17 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(edollar @ Jan 5 2006, 11:17 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I did a 9k row last night, rowing about 5 minute intervals at about 120-125 heart rate and every sixth minute rowing faster to get heart rate up to about 145-148. At the end I rowed fast enough to get heart rate up to 151. I then checked it after I stopped. It had dropped 30 points by 50 seconds and dropped 49 points down to 102 in two minutes. <br /><br />The girl who I bike with at the gym checked her heart rate this morning after working out on the bike and she did drop 32 points from 178 to 146 in two minutes. <br /><br />Would this be a sign that maybe I am more fit than she is? I do feel better that her HR did drop at least 30 though. I was concerned about her.<br /><br />While working on pacing myself by my heart rate, I really let my stroke rate, length and quality SUCK!!.  I guess it will take more practice to get all things working correctly at one time.<br /><br />Ellen<br /><br /><br />PS: I ordered the HR books yesterday. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I think if you raced against her over distance you would wipe up the floor with her. If she didn't die first... <br />

[[old] edollar]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think if you raced against her over distance you would wipe up the floor with her. If she didn't die first... <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /> I don't think I will tell her that but I do think I am getting some payoff from all my hours of rowing and other exercise (weightlifting, exercise bike, and walking). <br /><br />I will find out in another month how my cholesterol and glucose are compared to a year ago. I was just above the "normal" range for the first time last February. I wanted to get it under control by just changing diet and by exercise. I am hoping for a good improvement in those numbers after losing weight and working out for a year and of course I plan on having 2 million meters rowing completed by then. <br /><br />Ellen<br />

[LindaM]

Sorry I don't have a reference for this chart. It's been tacked to my wall for years:<br /><br />MHR (Max Heart Rate) - HR (Heart Rate after 1 minute of rest) = X<br /><br />If X = 60 or more - SUPER<br /> = 40-59 - Excellent<br /> = 30-39 - Good<br /> = 20-29 - Fair<br /> < 20 - Poor<br /><br />I don't know for sure, but I suspect that if you were able to maintain the higher HR range - 145 - 151 for a much longer time (15 minutes for example) and then waited 60 seconds to measure your HR recovery, you might find it would drop slower than after only 1 minute in the higher range. If your friend was working longer than you at her high range, that might account for her slower recovery.

[[old] Arno]

quote BobD .."If your heart rate is lower at the same load then you are fitter"<br /><br />I don't agree BobD.. There is 27 years difference in age. If two persons are equally fit then the older person will have a lower HR at the same load.<br /><br />

[[old] BobD]

<!--QuoteBegin-Arno+Jan 5 2006, 02:28 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Arno @ Jan 5 2006, 02:28 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->quote BobD .."If your heart rate is lower at the same load then you are fitter"<br /><br />I don't agree BobD.. There is 27 years difference in age. If two persons are equally fit then the older person will have a lower HR at the same load. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />My experience has been that I have to run slower to keep my HR in a lower range to insure my continuing survival. My HfMax is 183 by the way. My race speed is about 160 BPM. I run the 10K in 59 min by the way and I am 66.<br /><br />A young athlete runs at a higher HR and runs faster. If he slows to my speed his HR goes down as he is just loafing along if he is in good shape. I believe that if I try to keep up with a young athlete running at a good speed I will have a very high HR at his speed. But if he is running at my 66 year old cruising speed and has a high HR then he is in pretty bad shape.

[[old] johnnybike]

<!--QuoteBegin-LindaM+Jan 5 2006, 02:14 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(LindaM @ Jan 5 2006, 02:14 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Sorry I don't have a reference for this chart. It's been tacked to my wall for years:<br /><br />MHR (Max Heart Rate) - HR (Heart Rate after 1 minute of rest) = X<br /><br />If X = 60 or more - SUPER<br />      = 40-59 - Excellent<br />      = 30-39 - Good<br />      = 20-29 - Fair<br />      < 20 - Poor<br /><br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Interesting Linda.<br /><br />I have just done a 30@20 PB.<br /><br />AHR was 149 82% and MHR was 159 92%<br />After 1 minute it dropped to 117 so that was 42 which puts me in the excellent catagory. I like that chart <br /><br />Bob, whilst it is probably very normal for you, your MHR is pretty high for your age. Still, who can argue with a 10k time yhou have. Well done<br /><br />John

[[old] BobD]

<!--QuoteBegin-johnnybike+Jan 5 2006, 03:22 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(johnnybike @ Jan 5 2006, 03:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-LindaM+Jan 5 2006, 02:14 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(LindaM @ Jan 5 2006, 02:14 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Sorry I don't have a reference for this chart. It's been tacked to my wall for years:<br /><br />MHR (Max Heart Rate) - HR (Heart Rate after 1 minute of rest) = X<br /><br />If X = 60 or more - SUPER<br />      = 40-59 - Excellent<br />      = 30-39 - Good<br />      = 20-29 - Fair<br />      < 20 - Poor<br /><br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Interesting Linda.<br /><br />I have just done a 30@20 PB.<br /><br />AHR was 149 82% and MHR was 159 92%<br />After 1 minute it dropped to 117 so that was 42 which puts me in the excellent catagory. I like that chart <br /><br />Bob, whilst it is probably very normal for you, your MHR is pretty high for your age. Still, who can argue with a 10k time yhou have. Well done<br /><br />John <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />It's very individual. I only get that high in the last 200 meters <br />

[[old] edollar]

I like Linda's chart. I will keep a copy of that. It did occur to me that if I were at a high HR for a longer period of time, it might take longer for my HR to fall Even though 148-151 isn't my max HR (I have rowed or walked and gotten to over 160) I don't think I could row 15 minutes in that heart range but I'm sure I could walk and get my heart rate to that more quickly and keep it there by walking on an ascent. I will try keeping my heart rate that high for 15 minutes while walking uphill and see what the difference is in the drop. <br /><br />I have enjoyed all the posts and they have raised all sorts of other questions in my head... Maybe the HR books that are due to arrive on Monday will answer some of my curiosities.<br /><br />Ellen