Doctor Morbius said:There's always Sinus Bradycardia!
Stupid me! Thank you.
Doctor Morbius said:There's always Sinus Bradycardia!
Doctor Morbius said:I would imagine that after a hard ride your pulse is more likely to stay high as your metabolism has been jacked up a notch - thermogenic effects and all that rot.
I'm just starting my 3rd year of cycing and my resting pulse hasn't really dropped much after the initial 6 months so I'm in the same boat. Kind of discouraging isn't it? From what some of the other posters have told me, it just takes years. 52 sounds pretty good to me. I'm stuck around 58 BPM!
I'd sure like to get a power meter but am not willing to plunk down the long green. They cost more than any of my bikes! They'll drop further in price in a few years though. Until then I can make due with an HRM.Carrera said:My readings vary a lot. I'll sit by a clock and time the beats for 15 seconds and then multiply by 4. Sometimes I get almost one beat per second. Also, I can actually take a pulse by watching the throb on my wrist as it's very visible.
52 was the best I ever got but normal is just under 60 or maybe 58.
I'm getting hung up on it to the point I'm forcing my pulse up on steep uphill intervals to try and improve my reading.
Of course, there are other factors such as heart size and lung capacity. But I may buy myself either cardio unit or a power meter, one of the two. I want to get that pulse down lower to be honest.
OK, found several sites pushing HRM training that talk about a reduction in RHR as a measure of aerobic fitness. But, believe this only applies to individuals who are new to aerobic exercise, or losing weight. After several years of aerobic exercise, I don't believe RHR is a reliable indicator of progress.mitosis said:Just type resting heart rate into a search engine. Every site will note the correlation between resting pulse and aerobic fitness.
dhk said:OK, found several sites pushing HRM training that talk about a reduction in RHR as a measure of aerobic fitness. But, believe this only applies to individuals who are new to aerobic exercise, or losing weight. After several years of aerobic exercise, I don't believe RHR is a reliable indicator of progress.
Here's one by a cardiologist from Runner's World that may be of interest: http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/news/article.asp?UAN=1539
Or better yet, lactate threshold & tolerance. Here's an article that discusses adapations to VO2 Max and how quickly they plateau whereas LT will improve for several years. It's a quick 1 pager.mitosis said:Good article. There are many like it floating around the ether.
You are right about RHR not continuing to decrease. There are other measures of improvement you can then turn to such as increase in VO2 max.
Or do a periodic TT effort or similar test on the same bike on the same trainer as that will rule out wind, traffic and other non-controllable outdoor factors. Anything to keep all the extraneous variables held constant works well.If you train over the same course regularly you will see a measurable improvement in performance if you keep all other variables (wind, tyre pressures, time of day, clothing, bike weight, wheels etc) as controlled as possible.
Doctor Morbius said:I'd sure like to get a power meter but am not willing to plunk down the long green. They cost more than any of my bikes! They'll drop further in price in a few years though. Until then I can make due with an HRM.
I'm supprised you don't already have an HRM. We can get those items pretty cheap here in the States. It's much better to take your RHR with an HRM than by counting. I'll start my HRM and let it run for a couple of minutes before stopping it. Then I'll use the average as my RHR. There are just too many fluxuations for a 15 second count to be accurate. Oddly enough, I tend to get my lowest readings at night rather than in the mornings upon waking as most suggest.
Much of the time I prefer to use Ambient HR as my gauge as I tend to get restless trying to lie still long enough to take a RHR measurement. It's much easier for me to take an Ambient measurement while putzing around on the computer and watching the TV which is right next to the monitor.
Yes, I'd like to get my resting HR lower as well. Other than a medical condition, such as the one I referenced above, a lower RHR indicates greater stroke volume. Translation - improved fitness and greater cardio efficiency.
Sure, no prob. Plateau is my middle name.dhk said:Doc: Thanks for the link. Does a great job of explaining the how and why of plateau's, particularly for us masters-age guys.
Hey, just read the related page: http://home.hia.no/~stephens/traprin.htm
Excellent stuff on the basic psychology and concepts of individual training.
David_Zen said:My resting heart rate is neither less nor more than 45 so I can't participate in the poll.
I've been riding off and on for about 2 years now. I started a triathlon training program about 4 1/2 months ago and I've been riding at least 3 times per week and averaging about 375 miles per month. I don't know what my resting HR was before I started training but I recently bought a Polar HR monitor and it measure my resting HR at 45 bpm. What I would like to know is... How much longer do I have to train before I see my resting HR begin to decrease?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.