Recently i've aquired a couple of books on cycling training that place a heavy emphasis on heart rate monitors. Now we all know that HRMs are a good idea but.....
to use a HRM you have to know what zones to train in and so far all the books and articles i've seen have fallen down by using HR zones predicted based on age etc.
nice theory but as i've found out the formulas can be a bit inaccurate.
for example i'm 23 and should have a max HR of 197 (age predicted) however i've hit 202 on several occasions and got to 204 the other day without dying.
the books also tell you to do recovery rides at 50-60% of MHR, again this sounds really good but if i even look at my bike then my heart rate jumps up to about 65%, start pedalling and i'm at 75%.
So i guess the moral of the story is to get your MHR and HR zones tested properly before trying to train "like lance"
to use a HRM you have to know what zones to train in and so far all the books and articles i've seen have fallen down by using HR zones predicted based on age etc.
nice theory but as i've found out the formulas can be a bit inaccurate.
for example i'm 23 and should have a max HR of 197 (age predicted) however i've hit 202 on several occasions and got to 204 the other day without dying.
the books also tell you to do recovery rides at 50-60% of MHR, again this sounds really good but if i even look at my bike then my heart rate jumps up to about 65%, start pedalling and i'm at 75%.
So i guess the moral of the story is to get your MHR and HR zones tested properly before trying to train "like lance"