Understanding heart rates

[Solvang Cyclist]

I have a heart rate monitor but I'm lacking in education on how to use it
while training.

First off, I'm certainly no racer. My goals are only to et a good workout
and to enjoy century rides and not suffer so much on the hills. (Just did
the Solvang Century last week end and while I felt fine at the end,
really struggled on the 1100ft climb up Foxen Cyn at about mile 90 -
stopping a couple of times to catch my breath.)

According to the "common" guideline, my max HR should be around 174.
(220-46). However, on rides, I typically exceed that for much of the ride
and will see rates over 180 on hard climbs - I seem to really max out if
I get to about 185bpm pushing up a truly hard hill.

My rest rate has always been low: today after a couple of cups of joe
it's now 47bpm PB 117/73.

So the questions I have are:


1) How do I determine a good reference point for my sustained HR while
riding?

2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)

3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?

BTW: I don't want to start a flame war about the lack of value of HR vs.
VO2 max or power meters. As I noted, I'm a recreational rider and don't
intend to invest in this beyond the Polar watch. I just want to
understand how to use the data better.

Thanks,
David

[Roger Zoul]

Solvang Cyclist wrote:
:: 1) How do I determine a good reference point for my sustained HR
:: while riding?

First determine your max.

::
:: 2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
:: thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)
::

Go has hard as you can and record it (going up a steep hill as fast as you
can - after a good warmup - is one way). The highest number you can see is
your max. Set your polar to record data every one second. If you're can
sustain that for more than a few seconds, it's not your max. Then, work to %
of it to answer your first question.


:: 3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?
::

Don't worry about that. But if you do exceed it, you've found your true
max.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 16:28:19 -0500, Solvang Cyclist
> wrote:

>1) How do I determine a good reference point for my sustained HR while
>riding?

Do a ride of the distance you are aiming for where you feel good and
are achieve your goals at your current level of fitness. Then try to
go faster at that same HR.

>2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
>thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)

There is no rule that works well. One way to determine maximum HR is
with a stress test where you run or ride at increasingly higher
intensity until you are going all out. It's often recommended that
this be done under a doctor's supervision is you haven't had much
background in sports, have a history (yourself or in your family) of
heart disease, or if you are over a certain age, perhaps over 40.

>3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?

You can't exceed your maximum heart rate -- if you exceed some number
you think was your maximum, that number was wrong.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[Antti Salonen]

Solvang Cyclist > wrote:

> According to the "common" guideline, my max HR should be around 174.
> (220-46). However, on rides, I typically exceed that for much of the ride
> and will see rates over 180 on hard climbs - I seem to really max out if
> I get to about 185bpm pushing up a truly hard hill.

Then your maximum heart rate is simply high for your age. The 220-age
formula is only a very rough guideline, and when you know better you
shouldn't pay any attention to it. 185 is probably close to your
maximum heart rate, but few people are able to hit the maximum "out
there". It's a lot easier on a stationary bike in a controlled test.

> 2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
> thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)

A classic way is to use a stationary bike with a power meter. You start by
pedaling with a very low resistance, about 100 W or so, and then raise
the power by 25 watts every two minutes, for example. Eventually you'll
reach the point where you simply can not continue anymore, and your
heart rate should be very close to your maximum.

> 3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?

That is something you by definition can not do.

Antti

[[email protected][_2_]]

http://www.amazon.com/Lance-Armstrong-Performance-Program-Perfect/dp/1579542700/ref=pd_bbs_sr_4/102-8640939-7956134?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174521118&sr=8-4

http://amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/103-7574140-9731018?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=chris+carmichael&Go.x=7&Go.y=5

[[email protected]]

On Mar 21, 1:28 pm, Solvang Cyclist > wrote:

> 3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?
>
You will pass out. Feeling the upcoming doom your body will start
noodling shortly before then, so don't worry about it.

For some reason StarTrac stationary trainers in work gym don't show
heart rates in excess of 195. But, then, their max resistance level
on alpine rides is a poor joke.

[Andy]

Check out this web site by Dr. steven sieler http://home.hia.no/~stephens/index.html
all is revealed!!! He really lays out the basics clearly. What has
worked for me is to build endurance by training at about 85% of
HRMax. If your getting up to 185 observed, then just figure your
HRMax is 185-190 (not bad for your age!) By doing that you in the
zone below LT Lactic THreshold, the point at which you create lactic
acid and muscle burn -- save that realm for short sprints. This
winter I did sets on the spin bike of 8 min at 85% and 4 min at 65%,
repeated 4 times and it really helped a lot. Good luck!


On Mar 21, 4:28 pm, Solvang Cyclist > wrote:
> I have a heart rate monitor but I'm lacking in education on how to use it
> while training.
>
> First off, I'm certainly no racer. My goals are only to et a good workout
> and to enjoy century rides and not suffer so much on the hills. (Just did
> the Solvang Century last week end and while I felt fine at the end,
> really struggled on the 1100ft climb up Foxen Cyn at about mile 90 -
> stopping a couple of times to catch my breath.)
>
> According to the "common" guideline, my max HR should be around 174.
> (220-46). However, on rides, I typically exceed that for much of the ride
> and will see rates over 180 on hard climbs - I seem to really max out if
> I get to about 185bpm pushing up a truly hard hill.
>
> My rest rate has always been low: today after a couple of cups of joe
> it's now 47bpm PB 117/73.
>
> So the questions I have are:
>
> 1) How do I determine a good reference point for my sustained HR while
> riding?
>
> 2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
> thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)
>
> 3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?
>
> BTW: I don't want to start a flame war about the lack of value of HR vs.
> VO2 max or power meters. As I noted, I'm a recreational rider and don't
> intend to invest in this beyond the Polar watch. I just want to
> understand how to use the data better.
>
> Thanks,
> David

[SolvangCyclist]

Thanks everyone for the link and the explanations. I understand much more
now:

HRmax is jsut that: the maximum heart rate (as opposed to some "safe"
limit as I had previously assumed.)

So if I assume my HRmax is about 187 and my rest rate is 47, then my
reserve is 140. If I want to ride at 85% of VO2max, I would add 85% of
the 138 (or 119bpm) to my rest rate to get 166bpm for my training ride.

Now all I need to figure out is the programming of my Polar watch. <grin>

Cheers,
David

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:27:08 -0700, Andy wrote:

> Check out this web site by Dr. steven sieler
> http://home.hia.no/~stephens/index.html all is revealed!!! He really
> lays out the basics clearly. What has worked for me is to build
> endurance by training at about 85% of HRMax. If your getting up to 185
> observed, then just figure your HRMax is 185-190 (not bad for your age!)
> By doing that you in the zone below LT Lactic THreshold, the point at
> which you create lactic acid and muscle burn -- save that realm for
> short sprints. This winter I did sets on the spin bike of 8 min at 85%
> and 4 min at 65%, repeated 4 times and it really helped a lot. Good
> luck!
>
>
> On Mar 21, 4:28 pm, Solvang Cyclist > wrote:
>> I have a heart rate monitor but I'm lacking in education on how to use
>> it while training.
>>
>> First off, I'm certainly no racer. My goals are only to et a good
>> workout and to enjoy century rides and not suffer so much on the hills.
>> (Just did the Solvang Century last week end and while I felt fine at
>> the end, really struggled on the 1100ft climb up Foxen Cyn at about
>> mile 90 - stopping a couple of times to catch my breath.)
>>
>> According to the "common" guideline, my max HR should be around 174.
>> (220-46). However, on rides, I typically exceed that for much of the
>> ride and will see rates over 180 on hard climbs - I seem to really max
>> out if I get to about 185bpm pushing up a truly hard hill.
>>
>> My rest rate has always been low: today after a couple of cups of joe
>> it's now 47bpm PB 117/73.
>>
>> So the questions I have are:
>>
>> 1) How do I determine a good reference point for my sustained HR while
>> riding?
>>
>> 2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
>> thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)
>>
>> 3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?
>>
>> BTW: I don't want to start a flame war about the lack of value of HR
>> vs. VO2 max or power meters. As I noted, I'm a recreational rider and
>> don't intend to invest in this beyond the Polar watch. I just want to
>> understand how to use the data better.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David

[Ed Chait]

"SolvangCyclist" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks everyone for the link and the explanations. I understand much more
> now:
>
> HRmax is jsut that: the maximum heart rate (as opposed to some "safe"
> limit as I had previously assumed.)
>
> So if I assume my HRmax is about 187 and my rest rate is 47, then my
> reserve is 140. If I want to ride at 85% of VO2max, I would add 85% of
> the 138 (or 119bpm) to my rest rate to get 166bpm for my training ride.
>
> Now all I need to figure out is the programming of my Polar watch. <grin>
>
> Cheers,
> David


Also, in practical terms, when you exceed your personal max rate you're
going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy, you're pushing too hard.

I'm a cardiovascular tech and do a lot of stress echocardiography exams.
The target heart rate that we use is 85% of 220 minus age.

If someone is still feeling OK at that target rate, I will let them continue
if they wish to. Others will need to stop at target rate or sometimes prior
to attaining it. It has to do with fitness and conditioning.

Ed Chait, RDCS, RVT

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 23:34:37 -0500, SolvangCyclist >
wrote:
>HRmax is jsut that: the maximum heart rate (as opposed to some "safe"
>limit as I had previously assumed.)
>
>So if I assume my HRmax is about 187 and my rest rate is 47, then my
>reserve is 140. If I want to ride at 85% of VO2max, I would add 85% of
>the 138 (or 119bpm) to my rest rate to get 166bpm for my training ride.
>
>Now all I need to figure out is the programming of my Polar watch. <grin>

I think basing training zones off of maximum heart rate is not as good
as basing training zones off of either:

your functional threshold heart rate -- the heart rate you can sustain
for a maximum effort of 20 to 60 minutes

or

the heart rate you can sustain on a satisfying ride over the distance
that is important to you.

You should base your training around one of these.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:44:32 GMT, "Ed Chait"
> wrote:

> when you exceed your personal max rate you're
> going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy,
> you're pushing too hard.

Exceeding a maximum is a bizarre concept.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[[email protected][_2_]]

establish (record) average pulse, waking, noon, before after
excercise, eating.
if after a beyond max workout or several you're heart rate is slower
than average after waking, moving into the day's routine then the
beyond max workout was beyond max-the workout did more harm than good.

[Ed Chait]

"John Forrest Tomlinson" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:44:32 GMT, "Ed Chait"
> > wrote:
>
>> when you exceed your personal max rate you're
>> going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy,
>> you're pushing too hard.
>
> Exceeding a maximum is a bizarre concept.
>
> --
> JT

Not when you're stress testing a population in which many are cardiac
patients with histories of prior MI's and/or bypass surgery:).

Ed Chait, RDCS, RVT

[Bob in CT[_2_]]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:47:13 -0400, Roger Zoul >
wrote:

> Solvang Cyclist wrote:
> :: 1) How do I determine a good reference point for my sustained HR
> :: while riding?
>
> First determine your max.
>
> ::
> :: 2) How do I determine my max HR? (i.e., is there a better "rule of
> :: thumb" that takes into account my low rest HR as well as my age?)
> ::
>
> Go has hard as you can and record it (going up a steep hill as fast as
> you
> can - after a good warmup - is one way). The highest number you can see
> is
> your max. Set your polar to record data every one second. If you're can
> sustain that for more than a few seconds, it's not your max. Then, work
> to %
> of it to answer your first question.
>
>
> :: 3) What are the consequences of exceeding my max?
> ::
>
> Don't worry about that. But if you do exceed it, you've found your true
> max.
>
>

Also note that your max might change with time. For instance, early in
the season, I'll hit around 183-185. Later in the season, I'll get
nowhere near that, regardless of how hard I try.

--
Bob in CT

[Bob in CT[_2_]]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 06:44:32 -0400, Ed Chait
> wrote:

>
> "SolvangCyclist" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Thanks everyone for the link and the explanations. I understand much
>> more
>> now:
>>
>> HRmax is jsut that: the maximum heart rate (as opposed to some "safe"
>> limit as I had previously assumed.)
>>
>> So if I assume my HRmax is about 187 and my rest rate is 47, then my
>> reserve is 140. If I want to ride at 85% of VO2max, I would add 85% of
>> the 138 (or 119bpm) to my rest rate to get 166bpm for my training ride.
>>
>> Now all I need to figure out is the programming of my Polar watch.
>> <grin>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>
>
> Also, in practical terms, when you exceed your personal max rate you're
> going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy, you're pushing too
> hard.
>
> I'm a cardiovascular tech and do a lot of stress echocardiography exams.
> The target heart rate that we use is 85% of 220 minus age.
>
> If someone is still feeling OK at that target rate, I will let them
> continue
> if they wish to. Others will need to stop at target rate or sometimes
> prior
> to attaining it. It has to do with fitness and conditioning.
>
> Ed Chait, RDCS, RVT
>
>

For me, 85% of 220 - age = 151. On my rides, my average heart rate is
usually above this level. Typical averages are in the 155-160 HR range.
Averages above 160 means wind or something else. Below 155 means that I
must've had multiple flats.

--
Bob in CT

[[email protected]]

On Mar 22, 5:14 am, John Forrest Tomlinson >
wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:44:32 GMT, "Ed Chait"
>
> > wrote:
> > when you exceed your personal max rate you're
> > going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy,
> > you're pushing too hard.
>
> Exceeding a maximum is a bizarre concept.

Hmm... your reaction might be a little over the top...

[[email protected][_2_]]

> Bob in CT-

bob, go for a scan before it's too late!

[Sandy]

Dans le message de ,
John Forrest Tomlinson > a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:37:39 GMT, "Ed Chait"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "John Forrest Tomlinson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:44:32 GMT, "Ed Chait"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> when you exceed your personal max rate you're
>>>> going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy,
>>>> you're pushing too hard.
>>>
>>> Exceeding a maximum is a bizarre concept.
>>
>> Not when you're stress testing a population in which many are cardiac
>> patients with histories of prior MI's and/or bypass surgery:).
>>
>
> I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
> someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.

I think the heart rate maximum that immediately precedes a long period of
zero rate pretty well defines a maximum. Hard to reproduce such a test,
though.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

[[email protected]]

On Mar 22, 3:40 pm, "Sandy" > wrote:
> Dans le message ,
> John Forrest Tomlinson > a réfléchi, et puis a
> déclaré :
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:37:39 GMT, "Ed Chait"
> > > wrote:
>
> >> "John Forrest Tomlinson" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:44:32 GMT, "Ed Chait"
> >>> > wrote:
>
> >>>> when you exceed your personal max rate you're
> >>>> going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy,
> >>>> you're pushing too hard.
>
> >>> Exceeding a maximum is a bizarre concept.
>
> >> Not when you're stress testing a population in which many are cardiac
> >> patients with histories of prior MI's and/or bypass surgery:).
>
> > I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
> > someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
>
> I think the heart rate maximum that immediately precedes a long period of
> zero rate pretty well defines a maximum. Hard to reproduce such a test,
> though.

Not hard, you just need a new subject.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:37:39 GMT, "Ed Chait"
> wrote:

>
>"John Forrest Tomlinson" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:44:32 GMT, "Ed Chait"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> when you exceed your personal max rate you're
>>> going to feel sick. If you get nauseous or dizzy,
>>> you're pushing too hard.
>>
>> Exceeding a maximum is a bizarre concept.
>
>Not when you're stress testing a population in which many are cardiac
>patients with histories of prior MI's and/or bypass surgery:).
>

I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[Robert Lorenzini]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:46:54 -0400, Bob in CT > wrote:
>
> Also note that your max might change with time. For instance, early in
> the season, I'll hit around 183-185. Later in the season, I'll get
> nowhere near that, regardless of how hard I try.

Funny but I know if my HR does not come up I know I have not recovered
enough for a hard workout and all I should do is a easy recovery ride.
Recently I was down for almost three weeks with a bad chest cold and
the first three days back on the bike my HR was 10 beats above normal.
I was doing a long climb at my previous max with my breathing under
control and at my usual target speed. It was one of those WTF moments,
I'm superman. Well after 3 days I was back to 182. One other funny
is I find that my HR will settle, more like snap to a specific rate
like 172 on every hard climb.

Bob

[Robert Lorenzini]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:50:39 -0400, Bob in CT > wrote:
>
> For me, 85% of 220 - age = 151. On my rides, my average heart rate is
> usually above this level. Typical averages are in the 155-160 HR range.
> Averages above 160 means wind or something else. Below 155 means that I
> must've had multiple flats.

For me that formula would equal 133 and my averages are pretty close
to yours. It must only apply to couch potatoes.

Bob

[Too High]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

> I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
> someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.

My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have
never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically feels like
a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range to the
other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
or at least go extremely slow to recover).

[Lou Holtman]

Too High wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
>> I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
>> someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
>
> My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
> to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have
> never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically feels like
> a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range to the
> other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
> for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
> or at least go extremely slow to recover).
>


227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

[Too High]

Lou Holtman wrote:

> 227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.

How do you know?

No, it wasn't a false reading. It is unfortunately real. Before I
had the HRM I counted the HR in such situations: about 37 beats in
10 seconds. Moreover, I reproduced it on a stationary bike which
had a different HRM.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 23, 4:38�pm, Too High > wrote:
> Lou Holtman *wrote:
> > 227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.
>
> How do you know?
>
> No, it wasn't a false reading. It is unfortunately real. *Before I
> had the HRM I counted the HR in such situations: about 37 beats in
> 10 seconds. Moreover, I reproduced it on a stationary bike which
> had a different HRM.

227 could be a good reading... your maximum heart rate is about 220 -
your age if you have an average size heart. If your heart is smaller
your rate tends to be higher, larger and it's lower. No advantage or
problem either way, that's why we use percentages as targets, not
actual rates in beats.

You'll know your max by going hard until you can't breath hard enough
and your legs can't go any more, they go limp and shake a little. But
don't do this if over 40 or so and haven't checked with your doctor.
My max is around 195 and I'm 49, my wifes is about 160 and she's 48.
The average is only the center of the bell curve.

Have fun,
Nick

[Lou Holtman]

Too High wrote:
> Lou Holtman wrote:
>
>> 227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.
>
> How do you know?

Because I get those readings all the time when I'm in the neighborhood
of powerlines and such.

>
> No, it wasn't a false reading. It is unfortunately real. Before I
> had the HRM I counted the HR in such situations: about 37 beats in
> 10 seconds. Moreover, I reproduced it on a stationary bike which
> had a different HRM.

In that case I was mistaken. I find it odd that you never read rates
between 180 and 210. It doesn't sound healthy.
In my 15 years of HRM use the measured values had no discontinuities. My
friend had those funny readings because of some kind of a heart problem.

Lou

--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 20:56:28 +0100, Lou Holtman
> wrote:

>Too High wrote:
>> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
>>> someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
>>
>> My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
>> to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have
>> never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically feels like
>> a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range to the
>> other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
>> for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
>> or at least go extremely slow to recover).

>
>227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.

I was thinking the same thing. Either that, or this guy has a heart
condition that should be checked by a medical doctor.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[Dan Connelly]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 20:56:28 +0100, Lou Holtman
> > wrote:
>
>> Too High wrote:
>>> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
>>>> someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
>>> My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
>>> to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have
>>> never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically feels like
>>> a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range to the
>>> other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
>>> for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
>>> or at least go extremely slow to recover).
>
>> 227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.
>
> I was thinking the same thing. Either that, or this guy has a heart
> condition that should be checked by a medical doctor.
>


I've seen folks get this sort of thing after a night of drinking (alcohol).

Dan

[G.T.]

"Lou Holtman" > wrote in message
...
> Too High wrote:
>> Lou Holtman wrote:
>>
>>> 227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.
>>
>> How do you know?
>
> Because I get those readings all the time when I'm in the neighborhood of
> powerlines and such.
>
>>
>> No, it wasn't a false reading. It is unfortunately real. Before I
>> had the HRM I counted the HR in such situations: about 37 beats in
>> 10 seconds. Moreover, I reproduced it on a stationary bike which
>> had a different HRM.
>
> In that case I was mistaken. I find it odd that you never read rates
> between 180 and 210. It doesn't sound healthy.
> In my 15 years of HRM use the measured values had no discontinuities. My
> friend had those funny readings because of some kind of a heart problem.
>

Benign tachycardia being one. He could see a jump from 180 to 300 with
sudden onset of tachycardia.

Greg

[Bill Sornson]

Dan Connelly wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 20:56:28 +0100, Lou Holtman
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Too High wrote:
>>>> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
>>>>> someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
>>>> My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it
>>>> "jumps" to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM).
>>>> I have never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically
>>>> feels like a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range
>>>> to the
>>>> other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
>>>> for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
>>>> or at least go extremely slow to recover).
>>
>>> 227 is a false reading. Don't pay attention to it.
>>
>> I was thinking the same thing. Either that, or this guy has a heart
>> condition that should be checked by a medical doctor.
>>
>
>
> I've seen folks get this sort of thing after a night of drinking
> (alcohol). \

I think he's Bill Baka.
> Dan

[Michael Press]

In article >,
Too High > wrote:

> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
> > I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
> > someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
>
> My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
> to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have
> never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically feels like
> a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range to the
> other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
> for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
> or at least go extremely slow to recover).

Do you experience these episodes when not exercising
strenuously? Get a diagnosis. Could be non-mortal
condition called Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome,
characterized by paroxysmal atrial tachycardia.
--
Michael Press

[Ralph Barone]

In article >,
Michael Press > wrote:

> In article >,
> Too High > wrote:
>
> > John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know if you're being serious or not. If you are, how can
> > > someone's HR go over their maximum? But definition it can't.
> >
> > My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
> > to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have
> > never measured any HR between 180 and 210, it basically feels like
> > a switch is turned on/off, and the HR jumps from one range to the
> > other. That also means I cannot use that "real" maximum as basis
> > for training (when the HR jumps to the upper range I have to stop
> > or at least go extremely slow to recover).
>
> Do you experience these episodes when not exercising
> strenuously? Get a diagnosis. Could be non-mortal
> condition called Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome,
> characterized by paroxysmal atrial tachycardia.

It could also be interference with nearby heart rate monitors or other
electrical interference. My Timex HRM occasionally goes wonky and
records a brief blip of 240 BPM when I'm outdoors, but it never
misoperates when I'm on the treadmill at home. Perhaps someday I'll buy
a better heart rate monitor...

[Too High]

Michael Press wrote:

> Too High > wrote:

> > My "normal" max.HR is 178, but under certain circumstances it "jumps"
> > to > 220 (e.g., 227 was the highest I've seen on the HRM). I have

> Do you experience these episodes when not exercising
> strenuously? Get a diagnosis. Could be non-mortal

To answer your question: No (luckily).

I tried to get a diagnosis twice, both times the doctors couldn't
find anything.

The first time the (sports) doctor set me on a stationary trainer
and let me pedal for a while. AFAIR they set the resistance to 100W.
At that time I had no idea what that means, and as the guy was
supposed to be a good sports doctor, I assumed he knew what he was
doing... [now that I have a powermeter I know I can generate about
280W for some time during climbing]

The second time (many years later) the hospital didn't have a bike
but only a running station. As I'm not good at running, it was
again impossible to reproduce the problem.

However, by now I'm fairly sure I know how to trigger (and hence
how to avoid) the problem: going for a ride (almost) immediately
after lunch is the "best" way to reproduce the problem, hence I
always wait one hour after lunch before training.

[Phil Holman]

"Robert Lorenzini" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:50:39 -0400, Bob in CT >
> wrote:
>>
>> For me, 85% of 220 - age = 151. On my rides, my average heart rate
>> is
>> usually above this level. Typical averages are in the 155-160 HR
>> range.
>> Averages above 160 means wind or something else. Below 155 means
>> that I
>> must've had multiple flats.
>
> For me that formula would equal 133 and my averages are pretty close
> to yours. It must only apply to couch potatoes.

For me this would be 139. Nowadays if I'm holding 139 I'm kicking out
close to 300 watts. I must get off the couch more often.

Phil H