Should I bike be "feel" or by Heart Rate?

[JamesAA]

I often want to push myself harder but I look at my HR monitor and see it creeping at around 160 bpm, and I back off. This is supposedly an "anaerobic" zone for for someone my age (40 years old). But on shorter rides I feel like pedaling at a rate in which my HR is around 155 bpm is too slow and that I have more in me. It's like I'm holding back just cause of what my HR monitor says.

Should I pick a target HR and bike accordingly, or should I just bike at a pace simply by "feel"?

 

[JibberJim]

Absolutely by feel. capping yourself to some arbitrary HR is madness here.

 

[JamesAA]

Originally Posted by JibberJim
Absolutely by feel. capping yourself to some arbitrary HR is madness here.

Cool! I was hoping for that. Seems only logical too.

 

[Felt_Rider]

Agree with Jim

The most liberating moment for me was years ago when there were some really good cyclists and coaches participating on this forum talking amongst themselves about using power rather than HR. It was at that point that I realized that I was doing exactly what you are now doing (limiting training via a HRM) and threw the HRM in the closet.

I started training with RPE (perceived effort) based on the chart by Coggan for a couple of years before buying my first (used) power meter.
http://freewebs.com/velodynamics2/traininglevels.pdf

 

[JamesAA]

So in general, when I'm doing rides, should I try to finish with my best personal times, i.e. push it every time? Or should I be coasting at a pace that's moderate?

In other words say I bike X miles in 1 hour, but I could really trim it to 50 minutes if I worked harder. Which is preferable?

Thanks in advance

 

[Felt_Rider]

I am probably not the appropriate person to give advice on cycling training, but I will throw in a very vague "it depends" on your constraints in life and goals for improved cycling performance (recreational and/or race).

Even without a power meter as a guide to training these physiological adaption occur so it is still very worthy to understand them. See Table 2 at the following link, but in general the whole page is great to put much of this together and start formulating a training structure. Then you can choose how you personally want to structure your training week, intensity levels combined with duration for each session and how all of that fits together with your life constraints and other goals.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/power-training-levels

Quote: In other words say I bike X miles in 1 hour, but I could really trim it to 50 minutes if I worked harder. Which is preferable?

For me personally looking at your example of miles trained at either 1 hour or 50 minutes I would rather have a perspective of what intensity could I tolerate for 1 hour and be able to train the next day. Training on perceived effort may take some trial and error to figure out, but that is okay. I have trained many years based on trial and error with attempt to find that fine line between training just enough to stimulate and not so much that I annihilate.

"Stimulate, not Annihilate" was a slogan used by Lee Haney. Love that phrase. Finding that fine line is not easy.

Having a power meter and application like WKO has helped me take some of the guess work out of finding that fine line, but there are times when I under train and times when I overreach.. It's not perfect because I am not perfect (I don't function like a math equation or like a machine), but it works well - IMO.

 

[JamesAA]

Thanks for your input Felt. Sage advice. I know nothing about power meters. But it sounds cool!

How does one go about tailoring his/her ride based on the readings of the power meter?

I'd like to learn more about it and start training with one!

But even if I get one and on a given day my power is lower for a given HR (maybe I'm a bit more fatigued that day, for example), it will be really hard for me to maintain my "normal" power (in this specific example) because that would mean working at a higher HR. Maybe I am reading way too much into HR???? I guess there are some days working at 155bpm feels "easier" than other days. Sometimes 165 feels like torture, other days..not so bad.

Do you experience that too?

 

[Felt_Rider]

Originally Posted by JamesAA


How does one go about tailoring his/her ride based on the readings of the power meter?

I'd like to learn more about it and start training with one!

_______________

Maybe I am reading way too much into HR???? I guess there are some days working at 155bpm feels "easier" than other days. Sometimes 165 feels like torture, other days..not so bad.

Do you experience that too?

Just start camping out as a lurker on forums where there are discussions of training with power and dig in on reading various books and articles is about the best I can suggest. When it comes to training you will get various thoughts and I am not a good person to share my ideas since I am a recreational level cyclist with a broad range of fitness goals. I do prefer to train in more of the Lydiard style where aerobic training with a submaximal effort is the focus and then sharpening up with higher intensity as an event draws near. Some prefer to train higher intensity all the time.
_________________________

According to some of the coaches and gurus that is the issue with training with HR because of the variability. I stopped looking at my HR years ago after I noticed that all I was doing with HR was using as an excuse to limit training load and intensity. I think it was Ric Stern that made a comment years ago in similar type of discussion to someone that really made an impact on me to the point I threw my HR strap in the closet and just went with the investment into using power metrics. His reply was something like, "I've never had a client kill over from a heart attack because they pushed their heart rate a little higher." Taking his comment not so literally he makes a good point (we do need to be aware of physical issues if they exist) that many use the whole HR as an excuse not to push higher intensity levels.

That's not to say that everyone uses HR to limit performance and training, but if you find yourself doing it often than it may be a good thing to stop using it. I think now that I have trained with power long enough to feel what the different intensity levels feel like I would not use a HR strap in the wrong way, but then again if I had to give up my power meters than I would prefer to train on perceived effort rather than HR.

Just my opinion and preference though

 

[jpwkeeper]

It is important here to differentiate between higher-end cyclists and those who are just starting out, and perhaps people who are coming in from other fitness activities.

For those who are just staring out, an HRM can be an extremely useful tool. When I started cycling, I was doing 5 miles and was wiped out at the end. Did this for 4-5 rides.

Then my wife bought me a HRM for my birthday.

This is not an exaggeration: The next day I did 10 miles instead of 5 (2 loops instead of 1).

Why the change? Because when the HRM started beeping at me, I would back off. Not a whole lot; just enough to not die.

So when my pride would say "You can do this boy", my HRM would say "Oh no you can't". I called it my EgoShutTheHellUpInator.

(LOVEMUFFIN was not impressed)

After a few years I was able to switch to RPE (lost the strap to my HRM). But early on it was really helpful.