Well put Doug. Very good advice. I no longer have the urge to do hard century rides and the last one I did, two years ago, was a 113 mile ride known as the Double Gap for the two mountain passes it goes over. The first pass has a very steep section at the front end, a very long gradual climb then an extended crunch of mid teen grade. I got dropped about a third of the way up the bottom section and didn't see a rider till I was about a third of the way up the final section. He was on the side of the road bent over and when I asked if he was OK, he told me that he had stopped when his HR monitor told him too. About a half mile further up the road I came upon another man in the same position with the same story. I just monitor my own heart and don't let testosterone decide on how hard to go.
Michael On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 7:37:20 PM UTC-4, dougP wrote: > > Since my cardiologist requires an annual trot on the treadmill as part of > my care, I've quizzed him about this question especially in relation to > cycling. A stress echo cardiogram is a closely controlled test to allow > comparison of a patient's data from test to test, and over the years the > maximum heartrate I'm meant to reach has declined, now 154 bpm. Years ago > I asked about using a heart rate monitor and the treadmill rate as my max, > thinking this would be a good idea. He explained that working at the test > max for an extended period (more than a few minutes) was a severe test and > not to even think about it. When prressed for "OK, so what should I use > for a max?" his response was "listen to your body & pay attention. It's > different for each individual & especially anyone with cardiac problems. I > won't give you a number; just make sure your comfortable. Your body will > give you better feedback than a monitor." I didn't quite buy into that & > went the monitor route anyway. I've found numbers where I know I'm working > but can do so for extended periods, and numbers that are definitely > an over-exertion, so I just make sure I'm working hard enough to do some > good but keep out of the stress zone. Your body does tell you stuff but > the monitor sometimes lets you know sooner. You kinda have to experiment > on your own to establish your own zones. Be brutally honest with yourself > on how you really feel and don't try to cmpare your numbers to anyone > elses. > > dougP > > > On Monday, July 16, 2012 9:15:16 PM UTC-7, Corwin wrote: > >> I got a copy of "Just Ride" and read it. I agree with 99% of what Grant >> says. >> >> One thing I take issue with is maximum heart rate. Not explicitly what's >> in Just Ride. But more the concept of maximum heart rate as it's currently >> portrayed in health and medical literature and on the web. I think the >> purpose of discussing maximum heart rate in Just Ride is to get people to >> listen to their bodies. This is highly desirable. But the general concept >> of maximum heart rate is seriously flawed. >> >> In general, I don't think there is any magic number (or formula) for >> maximum heart rate. The only thing I think you can say is that if Joe is in >> good health and reasonably fit and Jack has a history of heart and/or >> circulatory trouble and is not very fit - then Jack should not push himself >> as hard as Joe. That's not to say that Jack should not get his heart >> pumping on a regular basis - just that he should probably limit himself to >> walking (potentially including hills). >> >> I did a thorough search of the web looking for research on maximum heart >> rate. Also consulted several experts. The only research I could find was >> anecdotal statistical data reporting heart rates for various groups based >> on age. But drawing a line through statistical data is just a curve fit. >> This is without any scientific basis to back it up. >> >> In order to establish a scientific basis for maximum heart rate, I think >> you would need to apply a stress test (bicycle, treadmill, etc.) to a >> rather large population. The population would need to be pushed near the >> point of failure - till an undesirable EKG pattern could be detected. At >> that point, you would have a good idea of the maximum heart rate for a >> given individual. >> >> It's very likely that the point of failure/danger would be radically >> different based on the health and fitness of the individual. For some >> people - that point could be as low as 140 beats/minute or lower. For >> others it could be 190 beats/minute or more. Also, based on the book "Born >> To Run", I don't think there is any basis for saying a limit on heart rate >> must trend down inversely to age. >> >> Personally, I regularly get my heart rate well beyond the 160 >> beats/minute or so recommend for a 53 year old male. Since I've been doing >> this all my adult life (and my workouts seem to be growing in intensity), >> I'm not worried. I'm comfortable deciding when to back off. In my opinion, >> you should know your own limits - but should not let your limits be defined >> by a gross yardstick. And you should carefully establish your own maximum >> heart rate, and use it as a tool for your own training - but realize that >> it's a personal measurement/limit. >> >> Corwin >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/Ri_Vvmjlt5sJ. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
