UKH

....and you are using heart rate monitor info instead.......

Putting aside the clear caveats about HR data on any given day and assuming all things to be equal, if a V02 max test is carried out 12 months apart does a higher average heart rate indicate increased fitness or reduced fitness?

In reply to Removed User:

Perhaps I need to clarify? Just not sure I can. I'm following the Time Crunched Cyclist workout. This requires what is called a CTS test (I've called it a V02 max test in my op) which is essentially 2 x 8 minute sections at max output split by a 10 minute recovery. You then record the results and on a HR monitor you are looking for average HR amd Max HR.

If your average and Max Hr is higher 12 months later is this indicative of improved fitness or worsening fitness?

In reply to Removed User:
It isn't possible to tell. If you were producing the same power for a lower HR you will have got fitte. But dehydration, ambient temperature, how rested you are, how much coffee you've drunk and how hard you were trying all will have a bearing on how fast your heart beats. YIou may feel like you were tryung as hard both times, ad you may have been but the power you were putting out may be completely different on each occasion. Without knowing what power you were outputting it is impossible to tell. A better indicator though still not all that reliable is to see whether your resting HR has decreased, but even with that there are quite a few variables which means you can't really draw firm conclusions.

Have you got a turbo which will allow you to work out psuedo power using speed? Did you do your two tests on a turbo with everything set up the same? Did you ride further for the same effort?

And I guess the TCC plan just wants you to set your HR zones using the 2 x 8 test, can't see how tracking improvements in fitness is possible by doing this test without speed, distance or power and the other variables controlled.

In reply to Removed User: i'm glad he typed all that, but I'd second it. I would emphasise tho' that with training an increase in max HR is commom as a lot of people assume it's pretty fixed.

In reply to Removed User:

It depends. Naturally.

strava segment on a climb tells you more than a vo2 or ramp test

In reply to Escher:

Thanks for all the replies. I realize all of the caveats and "it depends" scenarios. I guess what I'm asking is this:

Would a fitter person knock out a higher or lower peak heart rate than a less fit person. I would expect a fitter person would be able to knock out a higher peak heart rate but then I would also expect them to have a lower resting heart rate which is why I'm not so sure.

In reply to Removed User:

For all intents and purposes when you are fitter your max HR will be lower. Its commonly thought it would be higher I.e. a fitter heart will be able to beat faster but blood volume, increased capillaries, and more heart muscle means the heart can beat more slowly and move a lot more blood. E.g. in the winter I can reach 185 to 190 but when fully fit in summer I find it very hard to get past 175 whilst being considerably faster and developing a great deal more power. And that happens when making a maximum effort. Another symptom of this seems to be that I can maintain a very hard effort for much longer as although I cannot get my HR above 175 I can sustain it there for much longer than when I'm able to reach 190, when I do I pop pretty soon.

In reply to Removed User:

My missus signed up for a turbo training program called 'Trainer Road' not sure exactly how it works but the first sessions involve using speed, heart rate and cadence to calculate a sort of proxy power figure which is what you then train to.

It draws graphs for you too. I like graphs.

In reply to Removed User:
Is it possible to determine the distance you achieved in each workout?

Assuming you were on the same route, and using the same gear, you'll have a pretty accurate correlation between power and the distance achieved in each 8-minute segment.

For my rowing and running (I don't cycle often) I find it useful to record distance, Av HR and Peak HR for every workout (plus a subjective comment on how the workout felt). I get a pretty good picture of fitness over time from this, being able to compare any given session directly with last season's results etc. Improvements can manifest either by an improvement in distance or power for the same HR, or a decrease in HR for the same power or distance. Certainly on the rower, power and distance are two sides of the same equation and are inextricably linked. For the bike there are more variables, but as Escher points out these can be reduced by using a turbo for example.

If you can broadly match last year's variables (e.g. route travelled, gear used, tyre inflation pressure, wind speed, it goes on) and quantify both sessions' absolute values (distance, height gained), you can get a fairly accurate comparison of fitness between the two. Power is only one way of interpreting the effort - distance achieved over the same course is directly correlated to power, variables notwithstanding.

Max effort testing is very reliable, but frankly you have to ensure sufficient data points if you want to be accurate. Athletes have good and bad days as you know: this can massively skew the picture if you only have limited data. IMO, trying to build up a picture of general fitness progress over a year using only two data points is (with respect) a bit daft, and potentially demoralising.

I personally don't like max effort testing, as it tends to screw me up for a few days and I've seen it adversely affect my fitness as a result, so I refer to my in-session data over time, which is a bit more gentle.

In reply to DaveHK:

I use Trainerroad. If you don't have a power meter then it uses what it calls "Virtual Power", basically they have taken all the turbo trainers and checked what power is produced when pedalling at each setting. You then select make and model and what setting you are using and it uses that to determine what power you are producing. It's worth making sure that you set things up *exactly* the same each time including tyre pressure.

The figures are meant to be reasonably accurate but so long as they are consistent for your setup then it's fine.

Note to self - you've got a 90 minute appointment with Trainerroad this evening!

In reply to Escher:

Thanks all.

This is all done on a turbo trainer and tbh I don't try to measure fitness or improved fitness using HR I was just curious about whether a fitter person might have a higher, or lower, max heart rate on any given day.

What The TCC program does is use the HR data to give you a HR range to train in.

In reply to Removed User:
How much are those hub power meters where you can switch the wheel between bikes?
(reply to whole thread not just you siouux)


ooh can you tell us more about your coach alison (cost, who it is? etc)

In reply to jfw:

A PowerTap G3 hub is around £540 and can be built into a decent wheel for approx £630-730 (plus shipping) depending on rim and spoke choice. And just to 'fess up I run a wheel building and coaching business in the North West!

In reply to Removed User:

Have a read of Joe Friel's blog, he's got a lot to say on HR, Power and the like.

You have to be quite careful when doing the assessment tests that everything (and I mean pretty well everything) is the same: time of day; amount of rest before the test; what you ate for at least the day beforehand; how you slept; temperature; humidity, etc.

A couple of weeks ago my HR went up significantly when doing the same (virtual) power output on the turbo. I was starting with a cold/cough but hadn't shown any other symptoms at that time. Before starting with TrainerRoad I'd do HR based turbo work and it feels really imprecise in comparison with power based sessions: HR lag means you can't really do short hard sprints and get meaningful data back for example.