Your heartrate in rest
- Thread starter Routier
- Start date
Routier said:Hello, I just measured my heartrate in rest...
It's 35 beats per minute... Isn't this paticulary LOW...
I also measure my condition with the Polar OwnIndex system and that's 72...
Is this good
Yes that is extremely low. Miguel Indurain had a resting heartrate of 29 beats per minute, and he won the Tour de France.
35 BPM is pretty durned low. But don't use HR alone as a yardstick of fitness. Genetics play a big part, too. My 73 y.o. mother has a resting rate of 53, and the last time she exercised was 45 years ago, when she was chasing toddler blazingpedals around the house.Routier said:
What is this "Polar OwnIndex?"
my average resting is 52. i read that a very good indicator of fitness is one minute max to rest heart rate. this basically means that after a MHR test, stop all activity completely and measure your HR exactly 60 seconds later. if the difference between your max HR and one minute later HR is greater than 50, then you are in very good health. obviously, this wont predict a racing season, but it will say that you are very efficient at restocking ATP stores and utilizing oxygen. remember, the higher the difference, the more fit you are.
vio765 said:
the rate of decline would be also be dependent on your HRmax when using an absolute measure such as "50 b/min". In other words if your HRmax is 200 b/min, dropping 50 b/min (to 150 b/min) is a smaller % of 200 than dropping 50 b/min if your HRmax is 170 b/min (which would therefore take longer to achieve).
Having said the above, neither HRmax, resting HR, or the time it takes for your HR to drop from max to some number is anyway a measure of fitness. There are for e.g., riders in the TdF with 'high' resting HR and low resting HR.
Fitness is best measured with either a proper physiological variable (i.e., VO2max, LT, etc) or actual performance.
Going back to the OP question, a resting HR of 35 b/min, means that your resting HR is 35 b/min, which is considerably lower than the average ~ 72 b/min. It doesn't mean anything else, and nothing else should be inferred from this value.
ric
Most people would agree with ric that max HR is not a measure of fitness but both resting heart rate and heart rate drop immediately after exercise are useful as a measure of increased fitness of an individual. As your cardiovascular fitness increases, resting heart rate will decrease and heart rate recovery will be more drammatic.
The improvements are substantial as you go from unfit to fit.
The improvements are substantial as you go from unfit to fit.
mitosis said:
however, because HR is affected by so many other things you can't really use it as a measure of fitness (either resting or % decrease). While it is true that resting HR decreases with increasing fitness, as does the decrease from one (upper) limit to a (lower) limit, you can't really use it in the way described. For e.g., if you have caffeine prior to exercise when you wouldn't normally this may increase both the peak HR you achieve and slow the return to a lower HR, however, actual performance maybe unaffected or even improved, so you would conclude the opposite of what has happened. similarly, if you ride races on consecutive days your peak HR will decrease, as will your average and it's likely that the return to some lower limit will also be slowed. again actual may well be completely unaffected.
if you want to measure your actual fitness/performance, there are far better ways to do this e.g., lab testing, power output, or field testing such as climb a long steep hill and record time taken.
ric
I just measured mine at 38 bpm. It's 11 pm, I've had about 500 mg caffeine today, and I've been sitting here reading cycling forums for the last hour. I'm working on mentally sedating myself to catch up with you. A few more readings should do it. Go heart go!Routier said:Hello, I just measured my heartrate in rest...
It's 35 beats per minute... Isn't this paticulary LOW...
I also measure my condition with the Polar OwnIndex system and that's 72...
Is this good
You can't go past the lab for objective measurement.
But the lab is not always with you and if you have a new athlete in your team it is something they can check themselves, any time they like, and have a measure of their improvement. Feedack.
The conditions under which measurements are taken have to be comparable for them to be of use. I would imagine most people would realise that and not compare meaurements taken under different circumstances - like after different levels and times of exertion, or after drugs that alter heart rate.
As most people, I would hope, would not take lab measurements without controlling variables. Good scientific method.
But the lab is not always with you and if you have a new athlete in your team it is something they can check themselves, any time they like, and have a measure of their improvement. Feedack.
The conditions under which measurements are taken have to be comparable for them to be of use. I would imagine most people would realise that and not compare meaurements taken under different circumstances - like after different levels and times of exertion, or after drugs that alter heart rate.
As most people, I would hope, would not take lab measurements without controlling variables. Good scientific method.
mitosis said:
this is in part the main concern i have. most people don't realise this, or understand all the implications and variables that affect HR. such that people wil place too much belief in what the HR data may mean and might not understand it properly. additionally, as i pointed out previously, the drop in HR from a peak value to a lower value after some sort of sub maximal or maximal effort can be slowed, but you can be fitter nonetheless.
ric
Well if it isn't that, then what is it?Roadie_scum said:
Every gym i have been too and every physical education teacher have told me that thats your MHR.
Personally I believe them, but would be interested to know otherwise so I can time waste a PE lesson by correcting them
jrewil said:Well if it isn't that, then what is it?
Every gym i have been too and every physical education teacher have told me that thats your MHR.
Personally I believe them, but would be interested to know otherwise so I can time waste a PE lesson by correcting them
then every gym and PE teacher who has taught you is simply incorrect. With the equation 220-age there is a standard deviation of (iirc) +-15 b/min, which makes it completely useless for ascertaining individuals HRmax, but okay for ascertaining a groups HRmax.
The only was you can actually ascertain HRmax, is to do some sort of either field or lab test where you gradually increase your effort and reach a plateau in HRmax, whilst trying to increase the workload. Often such testing is done in a lab concurrently with ascertaining VO2 max or MAP
ric
jrewil said:Well if it isn't that, then what is it?
Every gym i have been too and every physical education teacher have told me that thats your MHR.
Personally I believe them, but would be interested to know otherwise so I can time waste a PE lesson by correcting them
Your maximum heart rate is the highest your heart rate can go. I doubt very much your PE teacher will believe you when you tell them they are wrong since that misleading formula is repeated over and over again. However, the only real way to know your MHR is to perform a maximum heart rate test. Their is too much individual variation in MHR to accurately predict with a formula like that.
Let's not ignore cause & effect if we are to analyze performance factors.
If one's resting HR was in the 70s and then one rides for x at x and it is now 35, this does indeed represent something.
If it is much higher than this the astute coach would perhaps tailor the day to suit.
If one's resting HR was in the 70s and then one rides for x at x and it is now 35, this does indeed represent something.
If it is much higher than this the astute coach would perhaps tailor the day to suit.
Hypnospin said:
yes, it represents something, but what?
what happens if you are actually overtrained and your resting HR decreases, as can happen
I never really considered this. you know, one week i had piled on a couple 100mi. rides in addition to commuting and training and group rides and stopped at a light, rested my elbows on the bars and watched in amazement as the Polar showed a decrease into the 30 bpm's as i waited for the light. maybe i was overtrained, but within a couple weeks i was feeling like flying, maybe peaking.
I do not consider resting rate as the ultimate indicator of anything neccesarily, just always looking for cause and effect.
I do not consider resting rate as the ultimate indicator of anything neccesarily, just always looking for cause and effect.
ric_stern/RST said:
