Heart Rates..Running Vs. Riding

"John" ha scritto nel messaggio

Quoted message said:

can anyone tell me what these two hr ranges are telling me?

if i'm not wrong usually LT in running is about 10 pulse higher than in
biking.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)

thanks, i'm learning how to use the trainer and this is all new info to me.

I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
that is how I trained this last year.

Mark

"John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

thanks, i'm learning how to use the trainer and this is all new info to me.

(M Kochanski) said:

I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
that is how I trained this last year.

I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
10bpm higher than on the bike...

Mark "one more bit of anecdotal evidence to the contrary" Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Hi, I think you should test it for yourself. The hr zones are different for
all people and for each sport. I suggest this test to determine your LT - AT
(anaerobic threshold) value:

Run for 8-10 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
finishing.
Cycle for 30-40 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
finishing.

These are your approximate AT values. You can plan your training based on
these values. Basically, if you are have a cycling background the heart
rates should be the same, if not the cycling heart rate will be about 10
pulse lower. But the tests are easy enough to do yourself.

HTH.

--
Remove the obvious part to reply
Burak
"jjx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"John" ha scritto nel messaggio

Quoted message said:

can anyone tell me what these two hr ranges are telling me?

if i'm not wrong usually LT in running is about 10 pulse higher than in
biking.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)

Mark Hickey said:

(M Kochanski) said:

I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
that is how I trained this last year.

I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
10bpm higher than on the bike...

How are you measuring the exertion rate?

Steve = : ^ )

The % of LT for each Zone is the same for running and cycling but the actual
LT HR is going to be different by 5-10 bpm depending in relative fitness in
each sport. A strong cyclist with little running experience my have a
running LT very close to their cycling LT, but in the opposite case the
difference would be larger.

"Mark Hickey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

(M Kochanski) said:

I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
that is how I trained this last year.

I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
10bpm higher than on the bike...

Mark "one more bit of anecdotal evidence to the contrary" Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

As I try to adjust my hr should I do so with higher cadence or a harder gear
(lower or higher gear?)

Steve B. said:

Mark Hickey said:

(M Kochanski) said:

I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
that is how I trained this last year.

I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
10bpm higher than on the bike...

How are you measuring the exertion rate?

It's the HR I hit right before I want to blow lunch... ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Depends on the desired improvement. Pushing bigger gears is helpful to
improve hill climbing power. If you can hold your own on a hill, but need
to improve flat speed, push the cadence.

"John" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As I try to adjust my hr should I do so with higher cadence or a harder

gear

Quoted message said:

(lower or higher gear?)

"Burak Ilter" ha scritto nel messaggio :

Quoted message said:

Hi, I think you should test it for yourself. The hr zones are different
for
all people and for each sport. I suggest this test to determine your LT -
AT
(anaerobic threshold) value:

Run for 8-10 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
finishing.

You are right , but I think that if you have got a heart rates monitor (like
polar or timex) the better choice to determine your LT is Conconi test (you
can do it by yourself)

Quoted message said:

Cycle for 30-40 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate
upon finishing.
These are your approximate AT values. You can plan your training based on
these values.

That's fine. Conconi test is too difficult to do by bike. I know there is a
formula to find your LT from your MHR, but i don't remember it.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)

Quoted message said:

"Burak Ilter" ha scritto nel messaggio :

That's fine. Conconi test is too difficult to do by bike. I know there is

a

Quoted message said:

formula to find your LT from your MHR, but i don't remember it.

The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that you
MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent) while your LT
will increase as your fitness increases. However, on average, LT is
approximately 85% of MHR.

AJ

In article <[email hidden]>,

A. J.' ajinsig99@hotmail_ns.com said:

The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that you
MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent)

You know, people say this all the time, and I guess it really depends on
how you define it. If you define MHR to be "the maximum heart rate you
could ever possibly achieve," then, sure, there's some theoretical
number--which you don't know--that you can't change by training.

OTOH, if you define MHR as "the maximum HR you can achieve right now,"
that's certainly going to depend on training since someone completely
out of shape isn't going to be able to run (or whatever) long and hard
enough to get close to the theoretical MHR.

--Harold Buck

"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

A. J. said:

The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that
you MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent) while your
LT will increase as your fitness increases. However, on average, LT is
approximately 85% of MHR.
AJ

I know that when you work on aerobic power your LT increases so you can run
or bike faster, but your LT HR remain about the same.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)

"jjx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
|
| "Burak Ilter" ha scritto nel messaggio :
|
| > Hi, I think you should test it for yourself. The hr zones are different
| > for
| > all people and for each sport. I suggest this test to determine your
LT -
| > AT
| > (anaerobic threshold) value:
| >
| > Run for 8-10 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
| > finishing.
|
| You are right , but I think that if you have got a heart rates monitor
(like
| polar or timex) the better choice to determine your LT is Conconi test
(you
| can do it by yourself)
|
| > Cycle for 30-40 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate
| > upon finishing.
| > These are your approximate AT values. You can plan your training based
on
| > these values.
|
| That's fine. Conconi test is too difficult to do by bike. I know there is
a
| formula to find your LT from your MHR, but i don't remember it.
|
| carlo
| Ferrara (Italy)
|

Last April I had myself tested at a local college:
http://personal1.stthomas.edu/dgcarey/
One of the things I learned during the post-test briefing, is that a very
high percentage(95+) of athletes tested find their LT @ approx 85% of HRmax.
On the bike my HRmax was 183 bpm, and my LT occurred at 156 bpm (85.2 %
HRmax).
The difficulty is getting an accurate HRmax, as the motivation required is
considerable.

ED3

Harold Buck <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

A. J.' ajinsig99@hotmail_ns.com said:

The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that you
MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent)

You know, people say this all the time, and I guess it really depends on
how you define it. If you define MHR to be "the maximum heart rate you
could ever possibly achieve," then, sure, there's some theoretical
number--which you don't know--that you can't change by training.

OTOH, if you define MHR as "the maximum HR you can achieve right now,"
that's certainly going to depend on training since someone completely
out of shape isn't going to be able to run (or whatever) long and hard
enough to get close to the theoretical MHR.

--Harold Buck

HB,

It may also be based upon experience. My level of fitness varies
widely over a two or three year period.

When my level of fitness is particulalrly low, it requires less
perceived exertion for me to peg a high heart rate.

I have always measured my fitness progress by the change (trend) in my
*resting* heart rate or also how quickly my heart returns to my
aerobic range after having held it in anaerobic range for awhile.

My experience leads me to agree that MAX tends to be independent, but
floats around a bit based upon age, your ancestors, and pastry.

rsquared