For those who understand HR Zones
Discussion
I have a question for you.
I'm not riding the bike currently until I can get my elbow sorted (can't straighten my arm making riding very uncomfortable) so I do a spin class once or twice a week.
Using my HRM and Garmin I recorded yesterdays class and found that I averaged 167 over the hour long class. I'm 40 so theoretical MHR of 180.
Ideally I want to use the classes to loose the weight (I've promised myself a road bike when I get down to 13st - currently just over 14st) but from what I can see 167 is well over the fat burning zone and into the anaerobic Zone.
I enjoy the sufferfest of the classes, so don't want to stop going, but how best do I use the class to get rid of the spare tyre?
I'm not riding the bike currently until I can get my elbow sorted (can't straighten my arm making riding very uncomfortable) so I do a spin class once or twice a week.
Using my HRM and Garmin I recorded yesterdays class and found that I averaged 167 over the hour long class. I'm 40 so theoretical MHR of 180.
Ideally I want to use the classes to loose the weight (I've promised myself a road bike when I get down to 13st - currently just over 14st) but from what I can see 167 is well over the fat burning zone and into the anaerobic Zone.
I enjoy the sufferfest of the classes, so don't want to stop going, but how best do I use the class to get rid of the spare tyre?
CoolC said:
Using my HRM and Garmin I recorded yesterdays class and found that I averaged 167 over the hour long class. I'm 40 so theoretical MHR of 180.
If you can average 167 for an hour, you MHR will most likely be higher than 180, the 220-age rule appears to be fast becoming obsolete given my experience of age group athletes! its clear that you already have a good base level of fitness so I dont think that there will be too much of an issue losing the weight if you are also following a sensible diet but there comes a point whereby you can only make small gains (or loss in this case!) for every new thing you try.
Is 13st a realistic target?
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 25th February 12:52
Agree - 220-age is tosh; it's a little unlikely you'd sustain an anaerobic effort for 1hr - in comparison, I'm 38, my max (recorded) hr is 194, threshold works out to be 175(ish)
If you really want to know accurately, do some kind of test to determine, eg:
http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2009/11/quic...
Also remember it takes a few minutes (3-4 in my case) for heart rate to adjust and stabilise to any change in intensity.
As for weight loss, just burn the calories. More intensity = more calories/hr. All this fat burning zone stuff is fine - yes, you burn more fat as a percentage of your total at low intensities, and if you're going properly long then you need to train to run off fat more than glycogen, but if you're doing less than a couple of hours, just go hurt yourself - the lower the intensity the longer you need..
If you really want to know accurately, do some kind of test to determine, eg:
http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2009/11/quic...
Also remember it takes a few minutes (3-4 in my case) for heart rate to adjust and stabilise to any change in intensity.
As for weight loss, just burn the calories. More intensity = more calories/hr. All this fat burning zone stuff is fine - yes, you burn more fat as a percentage of your total at low intensities, and if you're going properly long then you need to train to run off fat more than glycogen, but if you're doing less than a couple of hours, just go hurt yourself - the lower the intensity the longer you need..
Edited by upsidedownmark on Monday 25th February 10:45
Well that's the thing, I don't see myself as particularly fit. I'm certainly a lot fitter than I was a couple of years ago (16 st) but definitely have some way to go still.
It takes a good 15-20 minutes to get my HR below 100 after the class finishes, so recovery is still a long way off.
13st is a realistic target. I'm 6ft with 42 chest and 34-36 waist and a bit of a belly to shift. A couple of years ago when I was 16st and got back on my bike I pretty quickly got down to 14st due to better eating and moving.
I eat reasonably well, mostly fresh food and have tried as best I can to cut out bread and bad carbs. Biscuits are my achilles heel though
I'll stick with the Spin, and my wife is a registered Kettlecise instructor so (once the arm is sorted) will be going to some of her classes too.
It takes a good 15-20 minutes to get my HR below 100 after the class finishes, so recovery is still a long way off.
13st is a realistic target. I'm 6ft with 42 chest and 34-36 waist and a bit of a belly to shift. A couple of years ago when I was 16st and got back on my bike I pretty quickly got down to 14st due to better eating and moving.
I eat reasonably well, mostly fresh food and have tried as best I can to cut out bread and bad carbs. Biscuits are my achilles heel though
I'll stick with the Spin, and my wife is a registered Kettlecise instructor so (once the arm is sorted) will be going to some of her classes too.
CoolC said:
Well that's the thing, I don't see myself as particularly fit. I'm certainly a lot fitter than I was a couple of years ago (16 st) but definitely have some way to go still.
It takes a good 15-20 minutes to get my HR below 100 after the class finishes, so recovery is still a long way off.
13st is a realistic target. I'm 6ft with 42 chest and 34-36 waist and a bit of a belly to shift. A couple of years ago when I was 16st and got back on my bike I pretty quickly got down to 14st due to better eating and moving.
I eat reasonably well, mostly fresh food and have tried as best I can to cut out bread and bad carbs. Biscuits are my achilles heel though
I'll stick with the Spin, and my wife is a registered Kettlecise instructor so (once the arm is sorted) will be going to some of her classes too.
Couple of additional thoughts:It takes a good 15-20 minutes to get my HR below 100 after the class finishes, so recovery is still a long way off.
13st is a realistic target. I'm 6ft with 42 chest and 34-36 waist and a bit of a belly to shift. A couple of years ago when I was 16st and got back on my bike I pretty quickly got down to 14st due to better eating and moving.
I eat reasonably well, mostly fresh food and have tried as best I can to cut out bread and bad carbs. Biscuits are my achilles heel though
I'll stick with the Spin, and my wife is a registered Kettlecise instructor so (once the arm is sorted) will be going to some of her classes too.
- Weight isn't all that - you may reach a point where the body shape is improving, but the weight doesn't drop.
- Watch drinking - as someone who's dropped 30+kg (then put 8 back), a lot of my calories came from drink (and I don't mean alcohol)
upsidedownmark said:
Couple of additional thoughts:
- Weight isn't all that - you may reach a point where the body shape is improving, but the weight doesn't drop.
Fair point. As long as I get rid of the belly and can comfortably fir in the 34 trousers I have I'll be happy. Although loosing the bulk would help in the hills where I suffer.- Weight isn't all that - you may reach a point where the body shape is improving, but the weight doesn't drop.
upsidedownmark said:
- Watch drinking - as someone who's dropped 30+kg (then put 8 back), a lot of my calories came from drink (and I don't mean alcohol)
I hardly drink alcohol at all, just tea coffee and squash (low sugar) only the occasional fizzy pop.Firstly, I'd wonder at what your heart rate monitor is telling you. 167 for an hour could be a lie. What's that feel like effort wise on a 1-10, where 10 is something you can sustain for maybe 20 seconds max.
Second, if that reading is correct it just means you are pushing your lactic acid threshold higher in addition to burning fat. It won't stop you burning fat.
Second, if that reading is correct it just means you are pushing your lactic acid threshold higher in addition to burning fat. It won't stop you burning fat.
My understanding of HR relationship with fat burn is that you need to be in the range of 60-70% HR Max (whatever that is for you). Like others have said the 220 minus age calc is very rough. If you have a HRM then do a thorough warm up, find the steepest hill you know and go as fast as you physically can, will give you a better idea. Otherwise as has been suggested, go on how you feel (the 1-10 scale).
The level that you are working at during your spin class is good for lactate threshold work but your body is looking for easy to access energy sources and so will ignore your fat stores. You need to get your body working at a lower rate for longer periods so your body starts to chip away at your fat reserves first. Combined with a good diet you should start to notice an effect.
You'll probably find that once you've lost the weight you want, spin classes will probably be enough to stop it returning!
The level that you are working at during your spin class is good for lactate threshold work but your body is looking for easy to access energy sources and so will ignore your fat stores. You need to get your body working at a lower rate for longer periods so your body starts to chip away at your fat reserves first. Combined with a good diet you should start to notice an effect.
You'll probably find that once you've lost the weight you want, spin classes will probably be enough to stop it returning!
The fat burning zone is a MYTH. Going easier makes you slimmer faster, c'mon! Frankly I reckon it's one of those comfortable lies we like to believe to make life easier.
Let's say that at a low HR zone you're getting 60% of your energy from fat. Increase the HR by 20bpm and you're only getting 40% from fat. You're out of the fat burning zone - oh no! Thing is, you're using energy at twice the rate, so you're STILL BURNING MORE FAT in a given time. Or, you need to spend twice as much time at lower intensity to burn the same fat. Completely made up numbers, but you get the idea?
Even if you go totally anerobic and use up all the glycogen, that has to be replenished from somewhere, after exercise. The body gets that from where? Stored nutrients (i.e. it will convert whatever it can get it's hands on, including FAT)
Unless you're a serious athlete, don't make it too complicated: just go as hard as you can; and try to avoid all the sugary crap 'sports drinks' the gym probably sells.
Let's say that at a low HR zone you're getting 60% of your energy from fat. Increase the HR by 20bpm and you're only getting 40% from fat. You're out of the fat burning zone - oh no! Thing is, you're using energy at twice the rate, so you're STILL BURNING MORE FAT in a given time. Or, you need to spend twice as much time at lower intensity to burn the same fat. Completely made up numbers, but you get the idea?
Even if you go totally anerobic and use up all the glycogen, that has to be replenished from somewhere, after exercise. The body gets that from where? Stored nutrients (i.e. it will convert whatever it can get it's hands on, including FAT)
Unless you're a serious athlete, don't make it too complicated: just go as hard as you can; and try to avoid all the sugary crap 'sports drinks' the gym probably sells.
- Just as a side note, for endurance (ironman etc) competition, there's merit in training the fat-metabolising system to be more efficient, and to carry you to higher intensities because you simply can't take on calories fast enough. But that's a bit different.
Edited by upsidedownmark on Monday 25th February 17:11
crisisjez said:
I can easily hold 170 for an hour plus. Its a very individual thing this HR thingy
Definitely.I've done a 4hr ride where my average HR was 165bpm. I felt fine. Knackered after riding for 4hrs, but otherwise fine. In theory the whole ride was in threshold.
On the bike my ticker tends to be high but I'm not breathless. I know that if I can whistle I'm am fine, even if the HRM says otherwise. I rarely take it out any more tbh and ride more on feel.
I used it today for the first time in ages and did 90 minutes at 168bpm and again felt comfortable. I was riding at perhaps 70-80% PRE (perceived rate of exertion).
I've also done a proper maxHR test on a static bike and my maximum (186) is not that different to my theoretical 220-age number of 183.
If you want to understand HR Zones & how to train in them read Don Fink's Be Iron Fit: Time-Efficient Training Secrets for Ultimate Fitness.
Average heart rates on a 4 hour ride mean nothing in the context of HR Zone training, it's not about averages it's about riding or running constantly in Zone 2 for whatever time is set, if you climb out of Zone 2, slow down & if required, walk, if you drop too low, speed up. Anyway, read the book, it's not just for triathletes & it's very easy going.
Oh and when you do figure out your absolute max HR, only use 95% of that number for cycling.
Average heart rates on a 4 hour ride mean nothing in the context of HR Zone training, it's not about averages it's about riding or running constantly in Zone 2 for whatever time is set, if you climb out of Zone 2, slow down & if required, walk, if you drop too low, speed up. Anyway, read the book, it's not just for triathletes & it's very easy going.
Oh and when you do figure out your absolute max HR, only use 95% of that number for cycling.
Thanks for the replies chaps.
I think for ease-of-thinking I'll just stick with taking the beasting from the Spin instructor
as posted earlier, doing a higher than whatever % session is still going to get rid of the bulk, just maybe not in the "perfect" way.
And to the poster talking about climbing, the frustrating thing is, I was a right racing snake in my youth, not now though.
I think for ease-of-thinking I'll just stick with taking the beasting from the Spin instructor
as posted earlier, doing a higher than whatever % session is still going to get rid of the bulk, just maybe not in the "perfect" way.And to the poster talking about climbing, the frustrating thing is, I was a right racing snake in my youth, not now though.
crisisjez said:
croftsj said:
Oh and when you do figure out your absolute max HR, only use 95% of that number for cycling.
Once you are round the corner and out of sight of the guy you have just monstered
Or better still, do your testing on the bike 
You will get different numbers - threshold for me is about 6-7bpm higher for run than bike. That said, the problem with HR is if you're getting picky it's also susceptible external influences like heat and stress; my HR on a wintery UK training day is very different to my HR on a 30degree race day, which is why power meters are such a big deal.
But hey, you can take it all too far - Asked a guy I know who qualified for / raced at the IM world champs for some HR based training advice, he looked a bit sheepish and said he didn't even use a HR monitor, just went with what felt OK..
You will get different numbers - threshold for me is about 6-7bpm higher for run than bike. That said, the problem with HR is if you're getting picky it's also susceptible external influences like heat and stress; my HR on a wintery UK training day is very different to my HR on a 30degree race day, which is why power meters are such a big deal.
But hey, you can take it all too far - Asked a guy I know who qualified for / raced at the IM world champs for some HR based training advice, he looked a bit sheepish and said he didn't even use a HR monitor, just went with what felt OK..
Edited by upsidedownmark on Tuesday 26th February 01:11
So, this evening I had my mid-week spin session, and as you can see from the trace below I think my monitor might be misreading.
That's an average of 170 over the hour and peaking at 186.
I'll replace the battery in the chest strap thingy and see what Sunday's trace looks like in comparison.
That's an average of 170 over the hour and peaking at 186.
I'll replace the battery in the chest strap thingy and see what Sunday's trace looks like in comparison.
CoolC said:
So, this evening I had my mid-week spin session, and as you can see from the trace below I think my monitor might be misreading.
That's an average of 170 over the hour and peaking at 186.
I'll replace the battery in the chest strap thingy and see what Sunday's trace looks like in comparison.
Its either that or you're Lance ArmstrongThat's an average of 170 over the hour and peaking at 186.
I'll replace the battery in the chest strap thingy and see what Sunday's trace looks like in comparison.
If you unfitter you will tend to have a higher HR for given period of excersive, as your hart muscle isn't that stong so it has to beat more times to push the blood around your body, as you get fitter, you cardio fittness will mean your hart is more effective at doing it's job, pumping blood so it doesn't need to pump so many times.
when I started cycling 6 years ago, i would regularly ride up hills with a hr of around 188-190 bpm, now I max out at around 178. I know I'm older , but my resting hr has gone from around 65bpm to 42bpm. Over the course of a 25mile TT I average around 178bpm for the 50-60 mins they last. I doubt your HR moniter is misreading. The only way to check is to physically check your pulse whilst looking at the hr moniter.
when I started cycling 6 years ago, i would regularly ride up hills with a hr of around 188-190 bpm, now I max out at around 178. I know I'm older , but my resting hr has gone from around 65bpm to 42bpm. Over the course of a 25mile TT I average around 178bpm for the 50-60 mins they last. I doubt your HR moniter is misreading. The only way to check is to physically check your pulse whilst looking at the hr moniter.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff