Maximum Heart Rate

[Corwin]

I got a copy of "Just Ride" and read it. I agree with 99% of what Grant says.

One thing I take issue with is maximum heart rate. Not explicitly what's in Just Ride. But more the concept of maximum heart rate as it's currently portrayed in health and medical literature and on the web. I think the purpose of discussing maximum heart rate in Just Ride is to get people to listen to their bodies. This is highly desirable. But the general concept of maximum heart rate is seriously flawed.

In general, I don't think there is any magic number (or formula) for maximum heart rate. The only thing I think you can say is that if Joe is in good health and reasonably fit and Jack has a history of heart and/or circulatory trouble and is not very fit - then Jack should not push himself as hard as Joe. That's not to say that Jack should not get his heart pumping on a regular basis - just that he should probably limit himself to walking (potentially including hills).

I did a thorough search of the web looking for research on maximum heart rate. Also consulted several experts. The only research I could find was anecdotal statistical data reporting heart rates for various groups based on age. But drawing a line through statistical data is just a curve fit. This is without any scientific basis to back it up.

In order to establish a scientific basis for maximum heart rate, I think you would need to apply a stress test (bicycle, treadmill, etc.) to a rather large population. The population would need to be pushed near the point of failure - till an undesirable EKG pattern could be detected. At that point, you would have a good idea of the maximum heart rate for a given individual.

It's very likely that the point of failure/danger would be radically different based on the health and fitness of the individual. For some people - that point could be as low as 140 beats/minute or lower. For others it could be 190 beats/minute or more. Also, based on the book "Born To Run", I don't think there is any basis for saying a limit on heart rate must trend down inversely to age.

Personally, I regularly get my heart rate well beyond the 160 beats/minute or so recommend for a 53 year old male. Since I've been doing this all my adult life (and my workouts seem to be growing in intensity), I'm not worried. I'm comfortable deciding when to back off. In my opinion, you should know your own limits - but should not let your limits be defined by a gross yardstick. And you should carefully establish your own maximum heart rate, and use it as a tool for your own training - but realize that it's a personal measurement/limit.

Corwin

[Patrick in VT]

 On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 12:15:16 AM UTC-4, Corwin wrote:

In my opinion, you should know your own limits - but should not let your limits be defined by a gross yardstick. And you should carefully establish your own maximum heart rate, and use it as a tool for your own training - but realize that it's a personal measurement/limit.

That's spot on - max heart rate is different for everybody as everyone's physiology is different.  Formulas are often in accurate and if somebody really wants to know, they should have some physiological testing done to determine it.  But that test isn't fun, and there's no point in doing it unless one is really serious about training and already has some solid fitness because a true MHR reading takes a true max effort - a lot of people quit soon after they reach their anaerobic threshold.

Even without knowing one's true MHR, however, heart rate is an incredibly useful tool for gauging health and fitness.  Your heart rate can let you know when you need rest, when you're about to get sick, when your fitness is improving, when you are over-doing it, etc.  It's truly amazing bio-feedback and coupled with other metrics, you can set about manipulating and changing your physiology to perform better in a very efficient manner.  but only if you want to, of course. 

in my own experience, even the slimmest structured training plans, based largely on heart rate, can and will lead to a step function improvement in performance for any given mode of exercise.  lighter bikes, lighter wheels, supple tires, etc. simply can not approach the gains to be had from a very modest amount of targeted training. 

[ted]

I believe the physiology research shows folks do have max heart rates,
but trying to predict an individual's max from the published formulas
is not appropriate. The published formulas are based on statistical
fitting of large numbers of people, and the spread in the data is
quite large. Though the formulas are correct on average, the standard
deviation is bigger than the trends in the average.

[dougP]

Since my cardiologist requires an annual trot on the treadmill as part of my care, I've quizzed him about this question especially in relation to cycling.  A stress echo cardiogram is a closely controlled test to allow comparison of a patient's data from test to test, and over the years the maximum heartrate I'm meant to reach has declined, now 154 bpm.  Years ago I asked about using a heart rate monitor and the treadmill rate as my max, thinking this would be a good idea.  He explained that working at the test max for an extended period (more than a few minutes) was a severe test and not to even think about it.  When prressed for "OK, so what should I use for a max?" his response was "listen to your body & pay attention.  It's different for each individual & especially anyone with cardiac problems.  I won't give you a number; just make sure your comfortable.  Your body will give you better feedback than a monitor."  I didn't quite buy into that & went the monitor route anyway.  I've found numbers where I know I'm working but can do so for extended periods, and numbers that are definitely an over-exertion, so I just make sure I'm working hard enough to do some good but keep out of the stress zone.  Your body does tell you stuff but the monitor sometimes lets you know sooner.  You kinda have to experiment on your own to establish your own zones.  Be brutally honest with yourself on how you really feel and don't try to cmpare your numbers to anyone elses. 

 

dougP

[gep7...@gmail.com]

The formulas in JR are accurate for lots and lots and lots of people. Can never be everybody, but (at your own risk, with the usual warnings about doctor's approval and supervision and all)--I think most people will find that it is remarkably close to the number the formula gives. If you're 55 and you can get your heart to 195...that's quite unusual. Still point made and taken---there's a range, of course.

G

On Monday, July 16, 2012 9:15:16 PM UTC-7, Corwin wrote:

[Michael Hechmer]

Well put Doug.  Very good advice.  I no longer have the urge to do hard century rides and the last one I did, two years ago, was a 113 mile ride known as the Double Gap for the two mountain passes it goes over.   The first pass has a very steep section at the front end, a very long gradual climb then an extended crunch of mid teen grade.  I got dropped about a third of the way up the bottom section and didn't see a rider till I was about a third of the way up the final section.  He was on the side of the road bent over and when I asked if he was OK, he told me that he had stopped when his HR monitor told him too.  About a half mile further up the road I came upon another man in the same position with the same story.  I just monitor my own heart and don't let testosterone decide on how hard to go.

Michael

[René Sterental]

FWIW, I remember reading somewhere that Max HR is also sport specific. 

René  

[Patrick in VT]

 
On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 7:37:20 PM UTC-4, dougP wrote:

"Your body will give you better feedback than a monitor."  I didn't quite buy into that & went the monitor route anyway. 

a HRM puts a real number on how hard the body is working - it *is* the body's ultimate feedback metric.  for athletes, accuracy is really important and going by feel just doesn't cut it - for instance, I was surprised to learn that my true max heart rate for running is about 12bpm higher than for cycling - and that's not uncommon.  running requires different muscle and effort than cycling, the body has to work harder, and the heart has to pump more blood to keep things moving for a given effort.  anyway, once I adjusted for the discrepancy in max heart rates between mode or exercise, my running performance improved accordingly. 

going by feel can be quite deceiving, especially when trying to keep things easy, or when trying to sustain intensity at or above anaerobic threshold.  If I don't wear a monitor on a training ride, I inevitably end up riding too hard or not hard enough.  That said, I've been tracking my resting heart rate for the last 9 months and the information I get from simply taking my pulse in the morning is incredibly useful.

For anyone interested in the matter, I highly recommend this book - http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Rate-Training-Roy-Benson/dp/0736086552  - it's a nice intro to exercise physiology and explains how to use heart rate as a means to improving fitness for all levels of athletes.  I actually had my physiological testing done by the co-author, Declan Connolly - it was truly enlightening. 

[Lyle Bogart]

Hey Patrick,

 

Declan did my physiologic testing, too. . . I took an exercise phys class with him before I went to PT school. He is a very knowledgeable guy. I wasn't aware that he'd co-authored that book.

 

Cheers!

 

lyle 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/nmj6yKFTEHEJ.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

--
lyle f bogart dpt

156 bradford rd

wiscasset, me 04578

207.882.6494

206.794.6937

[Patrick in VT]

On Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:13:47 PM UTC-4, LyleBogart{AT}gmail.com wrote:

Declan did my physiologic testing, too. . .

Cool.  I'm considering taking a few classes myself and maybe doing some coaching (cycling).  It's neat stuff and I have a much better understanding of my own physiology, limits, etc. - stuff I wish I would have learned much earlier!