# 90 % Heart rate for 30 mins



## chipmonster (12 Jul 2010)

Hi All

I am 36 yrs old and have been cycling on and off for two years. However, I have got a new toy which is a heart rate monitor. Anyway, I try to go out on my bike for about 45 mins, 15 mins warm up and they really going for it for the last half an hour (3 times a week).

Anyway, because there are alot of hills around where I live, my heart is really pumping. I average about 90 % and my max was 96 %. I really enjoy it but am I okay to continue and this pace or should i slow down?

Thanks


----------



## JamesMorgan (12 Jul 2010)

It shoudn't cause a problem, although if you exercise every day at this intensity your body may get a little run-down and would benefit from a rest day or two (3 times a week should be fine). Not sure how you are assessing max heart rate - don't use any age based formulae as these typically have large variances. As you get fitter, you may it more difficult to reach this level of exertion. Key thing is that you continue to enjoy it and don't get too obsessed with chasing high heart rates.


----------



## chipmonster (12 Jul 2010)

JamesMorgan said:


> It shoudn't cause a problem, although if you exercise every day at this intensity your body may get a little run-down and would benefit from a rest day or two (3 times a week should be fine). Not sure how you are assessing max heart rate - don't use any age based formulae as these typically have large variances. As you get fitter, you may it more difficult to reach this level of exertion. Key thing is that you continue to enjoy it and don't get too obsessed with chasing high heart rates.




formula is 220 - age

not sure if correct?


----------



## zacklaws (12 Jul 2010)

chipmonster said:


> formula is 220 - age
> 
> not sure if correct?



Thats not regarded as a very accurate method. For example, I am 55, which should give me a MHR of 165, but in reality, my LTHR is 158 and my max 187.

The best way to determine it is to do a ramp test of some description.


----------



## montage (12 Jul 2010)

chipmonster said:


> formula is 220 - age
> 
> not sure if correct?




myth


----------



## JamesMorgan (12 Jul 2010)

chipmonster said:


> formula is 220 - age
> 
> not sure if correct?




Well, it depends what you mean by correct. For the population as the whole, this _*may*_ be the mean max heart rate at a given age. However, the variance is such that 95% of people will fall +/- 25 beats from this. So at age 40 you would expect your max heart rate to be between 155-205. This is not very useful at an individual level. As other posts have indicated your need to do some type of ramp test to work out your own max heart rate.

Out of interest, my own max heart rate has not dropped over the past 10 years. So even if you do measure yourr max heart once you can't assume that it will drop by around 1 beat/year - you just need to keep measuring it.


----------



## youngoldbloke (12 Jul 2010)

An example - I am 62, so my 220 - age max = 158. Yesterday on a club run my max recorded was 169, and I was by no means uncomfortable. I have no idea what my actual MHR is, but I suspect it is in the region of 190.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Jul 2010)

JamesMorgan said:


> Well, it depends what you mean by correct. For the population as the whole, this _*may*_ be the mean max heart rate at a given age. However, the variance is such that 95% of people will fall +/- 25 beats from this. So at age 40 you would expect your max heart rate to be between 155-205. This is not very useful at an individual level. As other posts have indicated your need to do some type of ramp test to work out your own max heart rate.
> 
> *Out of interest, my own max heart rate has not dropped over the past 10 years. * So even if you do measure yourr max heart once you can't assume that it will drop by around 1 beat/year - you just need to keep measuring it.



Unusual. Once you've _accurately_ determined your MHR and then do another one a few years later the correlation of one year older to 1 less bpm for MHR is my experience. Testing MHR is a very tough exercise and needs good preparation. You don't just go out on the bike and think oh I'll measure my MHR today, give it some welly on a hill, look at at your HR and say that's my maximum unless you're not bothered about getting an accurate reading.


----------



## lukesdad (15 Jul 2010)

Im in a similar position to JM my MHR has been 187 for as long as Ive been testing. When out riding it Peaks at 180 although did go to 183 once. This has remained constant over the same period.Never realised it was so unusual,wonder why....


----------



## lukesdad (15 Jul 2010)

At what age does it start to drop ?


----------



## JamesMorgan (15 Jul 2010)

Bill Gates said:


> Unusual. Once you've _accurately_ determined your MHR and then do another one a few years later the correlation of one year older to 1 less bpm for MHR is my experience. Testing MHR is a very tough exercise and needs good preparation. You don't just go out on the bike and think oh I'll measure my MHR today, give it some welly on a hill, look at at your HR and say that's my maximum unless you're not bothered about getting an accurate reading.




I agree it is tough measuring it which is why I don't like to do it often. I was a bit suprised when it didn't appear to fall over a 10 year period. However, from the small amount of research I did it appears that for reasonably fit individuals they may not see much of a fall between the ages of 30-50. The figures on average MHR are derived from the population as a whole (both active and sedentary individuals).


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Jul 2010)

Maximum Heart Rate declines with age. Simple as.


----------



## Hont (15 Jul 2010)

To the OP. The above posts will tell you that 220-age is unlikely to be accurate for you. I would also say that if you were at 90-96% your breathing would have been extremely uncomfortable - to the extent that it would be difficult to maintain if an alternative was possible (i.e. slowing down a bit) and 30 minutes at that level would be close to hell.


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jul 2010)

220 minus my age = 170.

I can keep 165 - 168 for half an hour with little problem.

Its in the 300 to 325 Watts output region. That's standing up with the gym bike on level 21 out of 25.


I don't like doing the full Maximal Heart Rate ramp test.

I know that if I can keep 300 to 325 Watts for half an hour, I can climb up Horseshoe Pass.


----------



## a_n_t (17 Jul 2010)

Hont said:


> if you were at 90-96% your breathing would have been extremely uncomfortable and 30 minutes at that level would be close to hell.



eh? I aim for 90% on 25's so thats an hour of "hell" 10's are more like 93% so 23 minutes of "hell".


----------



## jimboalee (17 Jul 2010)

a_n_t said:


> eh? I aim for 90% on 25's so thats an hour of "hell" 10's are more like 93% so 23 minutes of "hell".




eh? What you aim for on a 25 ( or any other TT for that matter ) is to be at certain points on the course within certain times so you know you will be on the podium.

Your heartrate will be what it will be. It doesn't matter a jot.


----------



## hambones (17 Jul 2010)

If you feel you like the idea of a formula then use the one I was told, namely 210 minus half your age. It seems more accurate and works quite well for everyone who has posted above...


----------



## Garz (17 Jul 2010)

Agree on the bog standard formula being way off.

For healthy people who cycle a lot you would have to bump up the MHR by around 10-15 so if the calculation was like jims being 170 his realistic max would be more like 185.


----------



## lukesdad (17 Jul 2010)

Works for me. Same age as Jimbo MHR 187


----------



## Threelionsbrian (17 Jul 2010)

a_n_t said:


> eh? I aim for 90% on 25's so thats an hour of "hell" 10's are more like 93% so 23 minutes of "hell".



That would make 188 about right and 177 would be about 94% on a 10


----------



## a_n_t (18 Jul 2010)

jimboalee said:


> eh? What you aim for on a 25 ( or any other TT for that matter ) is to be at certain points on the course within certain times so you know you will be on the podium.
> 
> Your heartrate will be what it will be. It doesn't matter a jot.




podium on an open 25? well i can dream.

my point was that its not hard to average over 90% MHR for an hour for me,


----------



## Hont (19 Jul 2010)

a_n_t said:


> my point was that its not hard to average over 90% MHR for an hour for me,


The OP mentioned 96% and that he was _enjoying_ it. No-one really "enjoys" a time-trial (masochists aside), until you cross the line, realise you've done a good time and then get selective memory about how you actually felt on the bike ;-). I agree that it is not hard to get your HR up and keep it there, but it's not "fun". Grimly satifying but not fun.


----------



## jimboalee (20 Jul 2010)

If I used the "220 minus age = MHR" equation, 90% of that is 153 BPM.

I'd be up around here for probably half of a 10 hour 200km Audax BR.

But as I've implied many times, I only use a HRM in the gym, and at 260 Watts ( 20 mph on my Dawes Giro 500 with full mudguards ), I'm at 150 - 155 BPM.


----------



## jimboalee (22 Jul 2010)

*Distribution of Power Output During Cycling*


letriathlon.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/cycling-pace-review.pdf

Read through this and pay attention to where they talk about Max Heart Rate.


----------



## a_n_t (11 Sep 2010)

http://connect.garmin.com/activity/48182083

Last 10 of the season. 92% average MHR for just under 23 mins. Most enjoyable!


----------



## Garz (11 Sep 2010)

Well done ant!


----------



## a_n_t (11 Sep 2010)

Garz said:


> Well done ant!




cheers! I can head into the winter slog quite happy with this season.


----------



## KRUSSELL (14 Sep 2010)

The problem is the heart monitor




if you were ok before you bought it throw it in the bin.
What did we do before ?


----------



## PK99 (14 Sep 2010)

jimboalee said:


> 220 minus my age = 170.
> 
> I can keep 165 - 168 for half an hour with little problem.
> 
> ...





my max by the formula is 165.


a few weeks ago i averaged 159 on a 3 hour ride feeling very comfortable and only stopped at that point to enjoy the view.




220 - age is useless as a training tool


----------

