Perceived Exertion vs. HRM: Surprise!

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

For those who haven't seen my other thread on a training plan, I'm back on the bike after 13 years off. I've got 230 whopping miles under my belt so far. Today I busted out my wife's heart rate monitor, just to see what my pulse looks like during my usual work.

Uh, very, very high. I'm 37, so let's call it approx 185 max rate. I've been riding a 12.3 mile loop, generally pretty hard. Turns out that my heartrate, when at that pace, is at least 165, and more like 175 most of the time. A longish slow grade brought out 182 bpm, and I had room to put in an additional burst for the last bit of the hill. When I slowed it down to bring my HR down to 150 or so, I found that to be near effortless riding, and stretched my ride out to 30 miles. Even 160, 165bpm would allow an easy conversation.

So, let me see if I've got this straight. 75%-85% is the normal training zone? 140-155 or so bpm? Heck, I think I can get that high just thinking about hills! I was at 100 just carrying my bike down our stairs and saddling up. I know my HR is very sensitive and spikes up easily, but I wouldn't think that would translate to such a high HR when genuinely working.

I wonder what's more important -- sticking to HR ranges and all the science/research behind it, or feeling like I'm 'working'.

Also, after the rude and final hill right before my driveway that completely disallows a cooldown (grrrrrr), my HR went to 178. One minute later, it was a little under 140. Isn't the rate at which your HR drops a decent indicator of cardio fitness?

You will very likely find that your max HR is some way above the theoretical and your conclusions are then a bit wobbly. The old 220 minus your age is a very questionable formula and you should do an actual max HR test. Have a look at one of the training sites for the details. You can use a long constant climb or, much better, is an ergo (then you can have someone with you to monitor & just in case you blow up). Quick HR recovery MAY suggest good cardio fitness but the real test is how well you can sustain a higher intensity and that's the key to building a training plan around HR zones. For example, I have a good lactate threshold, high sustainable HR and good HR recovery but get shelled on climbs because of insufficient aerobic capacity to pull about 10 too many kilos up the hill. So, the answer is interval training in the 85% - 90% zone to train my respiratory functions to serve me better. And doing without icecream and biscuits ! Alternatively, if your problem is legs crying enough, then you need to establish your lactate threshold HR and build a plan around that to make them hang in longer. Your 'feel like I'm working' idea has one big flaw - it doesn't allow you to objectively evaluate your body condition. The overtrained but didn't know you were doing it thing is the classic example. If you use the same piece of road periodically as a test datum, then HR is a useful measure of what state your body is in - it can however be a little misleading and that's why the pros interpret HR mappings in conjunction with power meters like an SRM. It's a really complex subject but one worth exploring.

I like that scientific answer. Interesting. I'd have to say what holds me back, at this very early stage, is my leg endurance. A quick burst up a short hill is one thing (high HR ensured), but a longer grade really takes the juice out of my legs. My HR is high, but my breathing won't necessarily be that heavy, and my legs just run out of 'it.'

All this argues for a coach, despite my early stage and relatively recreational interests.

Originally posted by old&slow For example, I have a good lactate threshold, high sustainable HR and good HR recovery but get shelled on climbs because of insufficient aerobic capacity to pull about 10 too many kilos up the hill. So, the answer is interval training in the 85% - 90% zone to train my respiratory functions to serve me better. And doing without icecream and biscuits ! Alternatively, if your problem is legs crying enough, then you need to establish your lactate threshold HR and build a plan around that to make them hang in longer.

Old&slow
Liked your response to Aztec, so I would be interested in your comments and any advice on my performance please:

Age 38, HRmax 194, min 39. TT rate: 172 (89%) for a '10', 169 (87%) for a '25'. Like you I get shelled on climbs no matter how hard I practice, but I'm finding I'm quite good at the short stuff (track & sprints).

So... for a '25' do I train to increase lactate threshhold, or VO2max? I feel that my limiting factor is the pain in my legs (ie not my lung capacity), so this would indicate lactate, but the hill thing suggests otherwise?

Shibumi... I say be happy and stick to the track, then! You're already good at the best stuff ;-)

Guys, I don't pretend to be any sort of expert here - if I was I'd be winning instead of leaving bits of coughed up lung spread all over the countryside. I will say though, Shibumi, that to time trial well it's a proven formula - maximize your lactate threshold, have a VO2 max that's capable of feeding bulk oxygen to blood which is getting pumped around by a high sustained HR to muscles which are strong and working in an efficient pedalling action and look out Lance ! Simple, eh ? If you're going into lactate overload I'd think you'd know it. If you struggle on climbs but your legs aren't fried and you can still breathe, then sorry, but there's only 2 choices - you ain't trying hard enough or the legs just aren't strong enough. If it's the latter then you need interval training targeted at the development of leg strength. Usually (in a roadie context and I know nothing about track training other than it's a different world) this takes the form of short duration intervals climbing in relatively big gears with short spinning recoveries between repetitions. To really mess up the discussion here, maybe your apparent track sprint talent is a sign of being at the fast twitch end of the muscle fibre range and you just weren't build for endurance strength.
How about some help from a real expert out there ?

Originally posted by Aztec
For those who haven't seen my other thread on a training plan, I'm back on the bike after 13 years off. I've got 230 whopping miles under my belt so far. Today I busted out my wife's heart rate monitor, just to see what my pulse looks like during my usual work.

Uh, very, very high. I'm 37, so let's call it approx 185 max rate. I've been riding a 12.3 mile loop, generally pretty hard. Turns out that my heartrate, when at that pace, is at least 165, and more like 175 most of the time. A longish slow grade brought out 182 bpm, and I had room to put in an additional burst for the last bit of the hill. When I slowed it down to bring my HR down to 150 or so, I found that to be near effortless riding, and stretched my ride out to 30 miles. Even 160, 165bpm would allow an easy conversation.

So, let me see if I've got this straight. 75%-85% is the normal training zone? 140-155 or so bpm? Heck, I think I can get that high just thinking about hills! I was at 100 just carrying my bike down our stairs and saddling up. I know my HR is very sensitive and spikes up easily, but I wouldn't think that would translate to such a high HR when genuinely working.

I wonder what's more important -- sticking to HR ranges and all the science/research behind it, or feeling like I'm 'working'.

Also, after the rude and final hill right before my driveway that completely disallows a cooldown (grrrrrr), my HR went to 178. One minute later, it was a little under 140. Isn't the rate at which your HR drops a decent indicator of cardio fitness?

There is nothing in this post that sugests your heart rate is abnormal; perhaps you should go out with another rider and compare heart rate response to the same training session. Your heart rate goes up and down relative to your work rate; at rest it will be low and at 100% of VO2 max your heart rate will be 100% MHR.

You should determine your MHR with a test and not the equation as its so far out. You ask if 75%-85% is the normal training zone; however that depends upon what you are training for and as you have found your HR will be much higher unless you limit your effort.

In terms of sticking to heart rate or feeling like you are working; unless you feel slightly out of breath you will get no health or performance benefit. Riding so that you feel like you are working will help you improve for a while, but then you will plateau. Use a HRM to provide variety into your training; using it to push you and hold you back while you target specific mechanisms. One of the most beneficial training intensities for the TT and RR rider is that at lactate threhold, similar to the pace you can maintain for 30 minutes.

There is a saying that 'easy training should feel too easy, and hard training feel too hard'.

Recovery rate can be an indication of fitness (i.e. as you get fitter your HR will drop more within one minute than when less fit), but this depends upon the different types of training you do prior to measuring the response and your level of fatigue (both chronic and acute). There are better measures of fitness.