# Understanding my heart rate data



## david k (6 May 2013)

Completed a 40 mile ride today and beat my PB for 10 miles by 5 seconds,, hurray! 31.20minutes BTW

This is my data on my HRM, can anyone help me understand it please


RESTING(70 - 124)​*1h:01m:43s*​1.​WARM UP(125 - 134)​*21m:32s*​​2.​FAT BURNING(135 - 145)​*36m:03s*​3.​AEROBIC(146 - 156)​*54m:12s*​4.​ANAEROBIC (157 - 167)​*26m:58s*​5.​MAXIMUM 168-179 -*1m06s*


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (6 May 2013)

Where is the original data? On a Garmin?


----------



## david k (6 May 2013)

yeh a garmin, got this off endomondo, dont know why it spread out so much?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (6 May 2013)

It doesn't really tell anyone anything of use** TBH. It's numbers with no base or previous effort to base them on.

The one thing that does stand out is "fat burning" which is a load of crap. It was calculated somewhere that you burn more by riding at intensity and increasing your BMR temporarily after, than you would anally staying below 146bpm.

**HR is often a pointless comparison. Especially to other people.


----------



## Rob3rt (6 May 2013)

I think your MHR value is set incorrectly (too low is my guess). Apparently you spent just under a 3rd of the ride in an anaerobic state (without questioning the Endomondo zone definitions)?

Or has the formatting in your post caused me some confusion? Very possible.


----------



## david k (6 May 2013)

no the data is accurate to what endomondo says

garmin connect just says

*Heart Rate*
Avg HR: 78 % of Max
Max HR: 94 % of Max


----------



## david k (6 May 2013)

*Heart Rate*
*Avg HR: 2.2 z*
*Max HR: 5.0 z*

*Heart Rate*
Avg HR: 144 bpm
Max HR: 
174 bpm

which also means nothing to me??????


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (6 May 2013)

david k said:


> *Heart Rate*
> Avg HR: 144 bpm
> Max HR:174 bpm
> 
> which also means nothing to me??????


It means you averaged 144bpm and hit 174bpm max. The zone stuff is probably based on default values set in your connect profile. They are pretty much useless if you unless know your actual resting HR or maxHR.


----------



## Rob3rt (6 May 2013)

Average HR is a meaningless figure tbh. Max HR, rather useless too (unless you set out to determine it). Back to your previous post, clarify the format so is it more readable. That information tell you more, although only if you have input MHR correctly, and someone will be able to assist in understanding it.


----------



## david k (6 May 2013)

my HR does fluctute a lot but i used my closest average figure and did a basic formula i found on the internet to set my MHR - not very scientific i know and a good chance its out. TBH i just use the data for a bit of interest and its not the be all and end all.

I do notice that if i go above 150BPM i tire, so i try to stay just below that and i seem to stay fresh for longer


----------



## Crackle (6 May 2013)

WHat's the highest max HR you have ever seen? Just take that for now and pop into one of the many zone calculators on't web.


----------



## Ningishzidda (6 May 2013)

You rode faster than before and you're still alive


----------



## Ningishzidda (6 May 2013)

When you get to a certain point in your exertion, you should feel a sharp burning sensation in your quads.
Did you feel this? No? Ride harder.


----------



## Garz (6 May 2013)

Ningishzidda said:


> When you get to a certain point in your exertion, you should feel a sharp burning sensation in your quads.
> Did you feel this? No? Ride harder.


 
Burning in your quads will flag fatigue in the muscle or high lactic acid buildup - your cv system may not be flaking at this point. It could work the other way but I agree in a generic sense riding harder will improve your cycling fitness.


----------



## Ningishzidda (7 May 2013)

If you’re thinking of doing HR max work, go to your Doctor’s and arrange a full ECG test. The practice nurse will do it. It only takes quarter of an hour.
I get mine in March or April just as I’m coming to train peak for the season.


----------



## Rob3rt (7 May 2013)

There goes another HR training thread!


----------



## david k (8 May 2013)

had an ecg ages ago, it said i had some slight valve issue or something that most people have, it had a name but cannot remember, but that was in response to an overactive thyroid that is now sorted, what would i be looking for in an ecg?


----------



## Garz (9 May 2013)

david k said:


> had an ecg ages ago, it said i had some slight valve issue or something...what would i be looking for in an ecg?


 
Err to see if it had deteriorated since or for any other defects.. unless you meant your HRM and not the ECG?


----------



## david k (11 May 2013)

no meant ecg, not sure what i would do with the info, anyone advise please?


----------



## Crackle (11 May 2013)

The answer is not much unless you know the zones are accurate or you actually intend to train with them.

In general terms, if you're using HR as an indicator, then for a given ride you can see how much time you spend in a particular zone/zones. As you ride more then the time in a higher zone, for the same effort, should come down. Or you could aim to spend more time in a higher zone or more time in a lower zone when doing a recovery ride. You're looking at building a set of data results over time for a given ride and from that you can evaluate your fitness at a given time. That is in very rough terms as there are lots of variables but if you're using HR as an indicator rather than a training tool it works that way.

Just as important is resting HR, and recovery HR. HR will also confirm if you're fatigued or ill. A low HR when you would not expect it, might be fatigue or a high HR might be illness. It could be neither, you need to relate it to how you feel but again, as an indicator, it's confirmation of what you already suspect.

Training in zones is a different matter and a pretty huge area to understand and I suspect you don't need more than the basics but if you want a start to HR usefulness then start with that.

I fully expect to be shot down in flames now, as is the nature of these threads.


----------



## david k (11 May 2013)

cheers crackle, that makes sense

for now, i think just using it as a rough guide to how much effort at any given time, it at least shows me if im at a high HR and i now know that this will tire me quickly so helps me keep a steady effort


----------



## Crackle (11 May 2013)

david k said:


> cheers crackle, that makes sense
> 
> for now, i think just using it as a rough guide to how much effort at any given time, it at least shows me if im at a high HR and i now know that this will tire me quickly so helps me keep a steady effort


 
In fact if you do that you are using your HR to train in zones, very roughly but you are. If you want to ride further then you already know to stay below a certain HR. If you want to reverse that, you could ride above 150 each time for a longer period until you increase the length of time it takes you to fatigue. Alternate that with some slower rides and you are doing some basic zone training in a structured way. You could do the same thing on perceived effort and after a while of doing it, it will become dialled in, like cadence. The more you want to get out of it the more you start to refine your training in zones. Once you've got a volume of data it'll start to make more sense as you equate it to speed and feel etc...


----------



## david k (11 May 2013)

that is good insight into what im doing, maybe without knowing it. i plan to use my HRM more often and to try to analyise the data when i have an idea of whats happening more accurately

thanks for your help


----------



## lukesdad (11 May 2013)

If you want to use HR as a fitness or training aid you need to devise a regular ramp test.


----------



## Andrew_P (11 May 2013)

david k said:


> yeh a garmin, got this off endomondo, dont know why it spread out so much?


I find one of the best things about Garmin Connect is the HR graph,


Crackle said:


> Just as important is resting HR, and recovery HR. HR will also confirm if you're fatigued or ill. A low HR when you would not expect it, might be fatigue or a high HR might be illness. It could be neither, you need to relate it to how you feel but again, as an indicator, it's confirmation of what you already suspect.
> 
> Training in zones is a different matter and a pretty huge area to understand and I suspect you don't need more than the basics but if you want a start to HR usefulness then start with that.
> 
> I fully expect to be shot down in flames now, as is the nature of these threads.


Bizarrely I had a bad chest infection and the effect on my HR was that I couldn't get it as high as normal nor could I rev it in the same way it was just flattening out. It took two new straps and a an upgrade to an 800 fro me to finally suspect it was my body telling me something. The upgrade was something I wanted it gave me the excuse that my 705 could be at fault which was handy. A week off the bike and antibiotics and it went back to normal.

Back to the original post, David K how long have you been using a HR monitor? Do you have any historical data to compare it too?

Not sure if you are looking at using it to train?


----------



## Rob3rt (12 May 2013)

LOCO said:


> I find one of the best things about Garmin Connect is the HR graph


 
Rather contradictory, I find one of the most lacking area's of Garmin Connect to be anything related to heart rate!

I notice the OP still didn't bother to clarify the original information, guess he doesn't care for a bit of advice regarding the distribution of accumulative time spent in each zone (i.e. possibly one of the most useful things to be able to interpret).


----------



## david k (12 May 2013)

Cheers loco,

ive been using it off and on for a year, some of the training with HRM it seems needs a greater understanding of my own HR and more data. Whilst useful im not that deep into it, more a breif understanding is all i really need. For now ill look to use my HRM more and look closer at the results to see what i can learn and to see if it can be used to help me.

Robert - not sure what you dont understand, although not in neat lines all the information is there - what are you struggling with?


----------



## Rob3rt (12 May 2013)

david k said:


> Cheers loco,
> 
> ive been using it off and on for a year, some of the training with HRM it seems needs a greater understanding of my own HR and more data. Whilst useful im not that deep into it, more a breif understanding is all i really need. For now ill look to use my HRM more and look closer at the results to see what i can learn and to see if it can be used to help me.
> 
> Robert - not sure what you dont understand, although not in neat lines all the information is there - what are you struggling with?


 
I just wanted you to clarify/tidy up the format, to make it easy for those looking at it, that is all. It Call me awkward if you like, but basically, I wanted to see if you would bother to put it in an orderly format as a courtesy, if you bother to put a little time in to present the data nicely, I for one feel much more inclined to take a bit of time to try to help (we get loads of HR training and similar threads and most of them are junkers, so before spending time on it, I try to make a distinction between which ones are worth it and which ones the OP will actually take on board peoples advice). That's all really. Ironically, I probably spent more time trying to get you to do this than would have taken to answer your question, more fool me!

Also, I don't really understand what you don't understand as you have essentially said, here is a load of numbers, tell me about them. The information you posted is self explanatory, it tells you how long you spent in each zone that is all! Now if you care to contextualise the data or elaborate on what you don't understand about it, then the analysis can become much more nuanced for very little effort.


----------



## david k (12 May 2013)

in terms of the data presented - i guess the question was do these times in these zones seem normal? if they do then they are more likely to be accurate and more of use, this was about my best ride in terms of ability 40miles at around 16mph average. this is my max ish workout, are the zone what would be expected?


----------



## Rob3rt (12 May 2013)

Well, that really depends on what you aimed to achieve in the given ride?


----------



## david k (12 May 2013)

i aimed to achieve a good distance - 40 miles is a good distance for me and a good average 16mph is good for me. I had little left in the tank so wondered if given that anything could be made of the said data


----------



## Andrew_P (12 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Rather contradictory, I find one of the most lacking area's of Garmin Connect to be anything related to heart rate!


 I find it useful for tracking the peaks and troughs, a part of my commute ride where I regularly get to roughly 85% of max I can then coast or gentle pedal down the other side for two minutes which gives me a rough guide to my HR recovery. By hovering over I can get the 1 minute and two minute HRR.

90% of my miles comes from doing my commute so I am not really in training for anything but I almost always am trying at 70-80% of my perceived best effort. The only interval training I do that gets me anywhere close to 100% perceived and or HR max is trying (and failing) to chase down someone who has nearly had me off my bike!

Hence why I find the graph interesting more than useful I suppose as my HR tracks with elevation, when I look back at early rides my HR didn't really fluctuate anywhere as near as much as it does now, in fact some of my early rides the HR looks more like it would while running/jogging a steady state.


----------



## Garz (12 May 2013)

david k said:


> i aimed to achieve a good distance - 40 miles is a good distance for me and a good average 16mph is good for me. I had little left in the tank so wondered if given that anything could be made of the said data


 
If your aiming to achieve distance then your HRM is not needed...

If you mean you want to analyse this information and apply fitness as 40 miles is your target distance then by only doing 40 mile rides your not going to see much improvement as you will plateau.


----------



## david k (13 May 2013)

Garz said:


> If your aiming to achieve distance then your HRM is not needed...
> 
> If you mean you want to analyse this information and apply fitness as 40 miles is your target distance then by only doing 40 mile rides your not going to see much improvement as you will plateau.


 

would you expect to see a change in the 'zones' if i did the same distance in the same time but got fitter?


----------



## Rob3rt (13 May 2013)

The zones given, are labelled in an exceptionally poor way. Warm up? Fat burning? Aerobic? Anaerobic? Stupid!

You ought to look to a better source to define the zones in terms of Active Recovery, Endurance, Tempo, Threshold, VO2 Max, Anaerobic, Neuromuscular or a close approximation of such a structure. These are just words, substitute them for the words linked to your previous zones, it is more descriptive and will be in line with the terms used in relation to performance cycling.

At present, the zones either tell you whether you are aerobic or anaerobic, next to useless, the pain in your legs will tell you as much. It is almost impossible to describe a good distribution given your ambiguous aim of "acheive a good distance" based on such zones.

Looking at a better defined zone range, if you wanted to be going all day, you would want to spend as much time as possible in Z2 Endurance. On your labels, this probably equates to Fat Burning? Considering your distribution, you didn't spend a large proportion of your ride in this zone, you spent more in the "anaerobic" zone for one, so the conclusion is that you probably didn't cycle anywhere near as far as you are capable of.

Considering a slightly different scenario, if you wanted to cover the 40 mile as fast as possible, again your distribution could be improved, you would probably be looking at a high Z3/Tempo effort here, maybe with some ventures into Threshold territory.

A lot of the time spend in your lowest intensity zone suggests you ease off a lot when things get easy then struggle when things get tough (hence lots of time anaerobic), you should try to move the anaerobic and doing nothing %age into the tempo region. This will make for a more steady state effort. The easy bits will be harder, but sustainable, the hard bits will be easier (you will go a bit slower on these bits, but you will get it all and more back at other points), less time in the red = less damage done. Generally, you will go faster over a set distance if you maintain a steady, hard but maintainable effort rather than yo-yo'ing between blowing your arse out and then coasting or soft pedalling.

Real life and terrain dictates that the ideal scenario can will not be achieved, but you could get a lot closer to it than at present.


----------



## Rob3rt (13 May 2013)

david k said:


> would you expect to see a change in the 'zones' if i did the same distance in the same time but got fitter?


 
If you became fitter, you would capable of producing the same power, for a lower perceived exertion and your BPM per Watt would be lower, so if you were to maintain the same speed, for the same duration i.e. same power (assuming conditions are identical), you would do so with a lower HR, thus the zone distribution would be shifted (to the left if you plotted it using good practice, i.e. origin bottom left, assuming no negative numbers).


----------



## Rob3rt (13 May 2013)

Garz said:


> If your aiming to achieve distance then your HRM is not needed...
> 
> If you mean you want to analyse this information and apply fitness as 40 miles is your target distance then by only doing 40 mile rides your not going to see much improvement as you will plateau.


 
A HR monitor is never needed, however, it can be useful with regards covering a new, increased distance.

I don't really understand what you mean in the second part.


----------



## david k (13 May 2013)

Thanks Robert, its a lot to take on board

it didnt seem like i was yo yo-ing but ill consider a more consistent effort on similar rides in the future


----------



## Rob3rt (13 May 2013)

IMO, it would probably be quite beneficial for someone to write a sticky on basic HR training, equipment, basic features, testing protocol's, setting up your zones and understanding them, basics of training to HR, recommended reading, FAQ's etc.

Problem being, it takes time and effort, requires a little bit of knowledge, is open to criticism and it is probably going to be a fairly thankless task so there is not much motivation for anyone to bother.


----------



## david k (13 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> IMO, it would probably be quite beneficial for someone to write a sticky on basic HR training, equipment, basic features, testing protocol's, setting up your zones and understanding them, basics of training to HR, recommended reading, FAQ's etc.
> 
> Problem being, it takes time and effort, requires a little bit of knowledge, is open to criticism and it is probably going to be a fairly thankless task so there is not much motivation for anyone to bother.


ha ha, very true

for me knowing if the stats back up how i felt is enough, i thought id worked harder than these stats suggest!


----------



## Rob3rt (13 May 2013)

david k said:


> ha ha, very true
> 
> for me knowing if the stats back up how i felt is enough,* i thought id worked harder than these stats suggest!*


 
That is related to the point I was making re. the distribution being rather polarized (a disproportionate amount of time spent either at very low or very high intensity zones). All that time accumulated in the anaerobic zone will have done damage, so even when working below that intensity, you may have had an elevated rate of perceived exertion.


----------



## Garz (13 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> I don't really understand what you mean in the second part.


 
Pretty simple really. If all you want to do is get better at riding 40 miles then he can continue working on that. Myself for example, when I got into road cycling moved up another mileage milestone i.e. could complete 40 miles then moved onto 50, then 75 then 100... 

If all you want to do is improve on your fitness then there are many ways to achieve this.


----------



## Garz (13 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> That is related to the point I was making re. the distribution being rather polari*z*ed (a disproportionate amount of time spent either at very low or very high intensity zones). All that time accumulated in the anaerobic zone will have done damage, so even when working below that intensity, you may have had an elevated rate of perceived exertion.


 
Rob3rt, I don't really understand the Americanized spelling but each to their own.


----------



## lukesdad (14 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> A HR monitor is never needed, however, it can be useful with regards covering a new, increased distance.
> 
> I don't really understand what you mean in the second part.


 
The trouble with this statement is, you need a starting point. If you are not using heart rate as a starting point what are you using ?


----------



## Rob3rt (14 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> The trouble with this statement is, you need a starting point. If you are not using heart rate as a starting point what are you using ?


 
What?


----------



## 400bhp (14 May 2013)

Does annoy me that Garmin connect doesn't break down time into HR zones. You can download the garmin software and use that but it's a bit clunky. Might have to upgrade to Strava Premium.

For me, I find heart rate reading and data very useful as when on a ride I can quickly tell how hard I am working (and whether that corresponds to how I feel).

I can usually guess my heart rate within a few bpm's too.


----------



## Rob3rt (14 May 2013)

400bhp said:


> Does annoy me that Garmin connect doesn't break down time into HR zones. You can download the garmin software and use that but it's a bit clunky. Might have to upgrade to Strava Premium.
> 
> For me, I find heart rate reading and data very useful as when on a ride I can quickly tell how hard I am working (and whether that corresponds to how I feel).
> 
> I can usually guess my heart rate within a few bpm's too.


 
Golden Cheetah will give that information  It is free. Maybe some free websites will also give it, endomondo, ridewithgps etc?


----------



## 400bhp (14 May 2013)

Thanks-just downloaded but can't seem to get the HR zones showing data?


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> What?


Exactly  that was the question.


----------



## Garz (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Golden Cheetah will give that information  It is free. Maybe some free websites will also give it, endomondo, ridewithgps etc?


 
There is also Sportypal.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> Exactly  that was the question.


 
If you want an answer, you are going to have to ask the question in a way that makes sense or at least appears to loosely correlate to what I said


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> If you want an answer, you are going to have to ask the question in a way that makes sense or at least appears to loosely correlate to what I said


 Well it occured to me if you want to understand HR data an HRM is an essential.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

You know full well that I meant training by HR is a non-essential step and you can train without such data, regardless of the pursuit. But by having it at your disposal you may benefit. You also may not, for various reasons, some as fickle as your personality. For example I train using power data, it suits my personality and my choosen disciplines (time trialling and hill climbs, which also coincidently suit my personality), I have gained massively from using a power meter, others would hate it to the point it become counter productive. Same goes for HR.

However, since we are playing a game of pedantry, your comment is equally incorrect, it is perfectly plausible to understand HR data without having a HR monitor. You could for example, read a book. I did that, long before buying anything, I just wish others might do the same sometimes, given the number of times the same basic questions come up on this forum!


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

400bhp said:


> Thanks-just downloaded but can't seem to get the HR zones showing data?


 
Have you set your zones up in the Tools - Options - Athlete tab?

IMO GC is the best free tool for data analysis. Garmin Connect is a complete waste of time.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> You know full well that I meant training by HR is a non-essential step and you can train without such data, regardless of the pursuit. But by having it at your disposal you may benefit. You also may not, for various reasons, some as fickle as your personality.
> 
> However, since we are playing a game of pedantry, your comment is equally incorrect, it is perfectly plausible to understand HR data without having a HR monitor. You could for example, read a book. I did that, long before buying anything, I just wish others might do the same sometimes, given the number of times the same basic questions come up on this forum!


 Of course you can train without such information but without it how do you know when to train and how hard ?

We'll get there in the end I suppose, but I warn you my interest may well have waned by that time.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

VamP said:


> Have you set your zones up in the Tools - Options - Athlete tab?
> 
> IMO GC is the best free tool for data analysis. Garmin Connect is a complete waste of time.


 
Was just going to say this, also, depending on the version you are using, I am guessing Nige got the last release version, not the current release candidate (unless they have released officially now), the charts are placed in different locations within the UI.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> Of course you can train without such information but without it how do you know when to train and how hard ?
> 
> We'll get there in the end I suppose, but I warn you my interest may well have waned by that time.


 
Short of buying a power meter (or doing all of your training in a lab), you will never KNOW. You will have to go on perceived exertion (feel) if you choose not to invest in a HR monitor and learn how to use it, preferably by reading one or more of the many books regarding the use of such devices.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

what happened there then


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Short of buying a power meter (or doing all of your training in a lab), you will never KNOW. You will have to go on perceived exertion (feel) if you choose not to invest in a HR monitor and learn how to use it, preferably by reading one or more of the many books regarding the use of such devices.


 How the feck is a power meter going to help you decide how to train on a given day ?


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Was just going to say this, also, depending on the version you are using, I am guessing Nige got the last release version, not the current release candidate (unless they have released officially now), the charts are placed in different locations within the UI.


 
I am sticking with 2.1 - bug free, and I prefer the interface.


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> How the feck is a power meter going to help you decide how to train on a given day ?


 
You can track your training load (short and long term) and adjust your workouts to help you achieve the training effect you seek. The amount of insight you gain with a power meter is staggering, it's a totally different ballgame to anything else. HR monitoring is like guesswork by comparison.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> How the feck is a power meter going to help you decide how to train on a given day ?


 
Have a read around, training peaks is a reasonably good source since the authors of some of the best texts on the matter have included excerpts. The information you can derive from a single time varying data field is immense! Or if you are really interested, join the Wattage group.

A few topics you may want to have a gander at include, chronic training load, acute training load, training stress balance, performance management chart, intensity factor, training stress score, periodisation.........


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

VamP said:


> You can track your training load (short and long term) and adjust your workouts to help you achieve the training effect you seek. The amount of insight you gain with a power meter is staggering, it's a totally different ballgame to anything else. HR monitoring is like guesswork by comparison.


 You ve missed the point, can a power meter indicate a cold comming on or other such ailments at the start of any given day ?


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> You ve missed the point, can a power meter indicate a cold comming on or other such ailments at the start of any given day ?


 
Not exactly no, although it does afford an objective measurement of intensity, which can be compared to things such as HR data or RPE which are subject to influences such as a cold. So in combination, you have a higher chance of picking up on such things than you otherwise would, i.e. if you are only going 60-70% FTP and your HR is at 85% MHR and you feel like you are working really hard, you now KNOW that you are not working as hard as you feel and your body is reacting to the demand in a none typical way (high HR). Something is not right, you should stop.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Not exactly no, although it does afford an objective measurement of intensity, which can be compared to things such as HR data or RPE which are subject to influences such as a cold. So in combination, you have a higher chance of picking up on such things than you otherwise would, i.e. if you are only going 60-70% FTP and your HR is at 85% MHR and you feel like you are working really hard, you now KNOW that you are not working as hard as you feel and your body is reacting to the demand in a none typical way (high HR). Something is not right, you should stop.


 So you would use your power meter at 6am every morning to determine this ?


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> You ve missed the point, can a power meter indicate a cold comming on or other such ailments at the start of any given day ?


 
Any number of things can give an elevated HR reading. Do you abandon rides because of what your resting HR is? I never do. If I feel rough during the ride, I will adjust intensity.

In fact, I haven't even used my HR strap in couple of months now. I feel it is redundant.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

To save this going round and round and you getting bored, as you suggested would happen, can you just state the point you want to make, then I will comment on it. You know me well enough LD to know that I a happy to discuss, but it is frustrating when you do this elusive/cryptic thing.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

VamP said:


> Any number of things can give an elevated HR reading. Do you abandon rides because of what your resting HR is? I never do. If I feel rough during the ride, I will adjust intensity.
> 
> In fact, I haven't even used my HR strap in couple of months now. I feel it is redundant.


 WHR and RHR are completely different things but Im not going there for the minute.


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> WHR and RHR are completely different things but Im not going there for the minute.


 
You do seem determined to make a a point, but I really have no idea what it might be.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> To save this going round and round and you getting bored, as you suggested would happen, can you just state the point you want to make, then I will comment on it. You know me well enough LD to know that I a happy to discuss, but it is frustrating when you do this elusive/cryptic thing.


 The point Rob is these guys don t want to know about power meters, they quite correctly dont want to fork out for them. They want to know how they can use a relatively cheap HRM and get the best out of it. Now the majority of what they can get out of one is beyond them, with me so far ? Therefore dropping to the lowest common denominator, the only use I can see for one, for them, is for general well being and a ball park fitness test. Hence an HRM is actualy more use to them off the bike than on.

Its not cryptic its giving people chance to think for themselves, (ploughing a lonely furrow I know but someone has to )


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

VamP said:


> You do seem determined to make a a point, but I really have no idea what it might be.


 For someone who likes his technical data 'feeling rough' is a little unscientific would you not say


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

I think your plight failed, not because those responding don't have the capacity to think it out for themselves, but because you pushed the conversation in a direction that frankly was not conducive to this thread whilst somehow convinced you are bringing it back on topic. So far, up until your arrival, the thread was based on helping the OP to understand his data, collected from his HRM. No-one recommended that the OP or the general CC populous buy a power meter.

It seems almost as if you read something that wasn't there!


----------



## 400bhp (15 May 2013)

VamP said:


> Have you set your zones up in the Tools - Options - Athlete tab?
> 
> IMO GC is the best free tool for data analysis. Garmin Connect is a complete waste of time.


 
Can't remember now(was late last night and i'm now at work) but I recall going into the rider options tab and setting my RHR and max HR, but then it wouldn't allow me to set zones (there were already zones set up on a separate tab so I just assumed that it would use these default ones?)


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> For someone who likes his technical data 'feeling rough' is a little unscientific would you not say


 
It's good enough for me


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> I think your plight failed, not because those responding don't have the capacity to think it out for themselves, but because you pushed the conversation in a direction that frankly was not conducive to this thread whilst somehow convinced you are bringing it back on topic. So far, up until your arrival, the thread was based on helping the OP to understand his data, collected from his HRM. No-one recommended that the OP or the general CC populous buy a power meter.
> 
> It seems almost as if you read something that wasn't there!


I just knew where it would end up so I took a shortcut 

..and you brought power meters into the convo, Ive only concerned myself with HR and HRMs


----------



## Crackle (15 May 2013)

Interestingly, when I got an HR monitor and learnt how to use it, I discovered it confirmed what my perceived scale of effort already told me. As I said upstream, it confirms what you already know but it's nice to have that confirmation, otherwise you're often left wondering and you may end up trying harder when you shouldn't (guilty once) or not trying hard enough (guilty now).


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> I just knew where it would end up so I took a shortcut
> 
> ..and you brought power meters into the convo, Ive only concerned myself with HR and HRMs


 
I mentioned the use in passing, as a parallel, to illustrate the point that the fact that some may benefit from collecting and analysing data, either in real time, or post-ride whilst some may not and that the difference between benefiting or not can be down to something as variable as personality. Some people like numbers, structure etc, others do not like it, it is overwhelming, an extravagance etc.

The point at which the in's and out's of the usefulness of power meters emerged when you backed the conversation into a corner wanting to know how you would KNOW something, to which I responded, either by training in a lab, or by field measurement using a power meter.

That is all.

To be honest, the point you claim to have been making (which seems to have evolved constantly without ever establishing itself) bears no resemblance to your 1st post in the thread. If these two things are directly linked, I am at a loss to your thought process.


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

Crackle said:


> Interestingly, when I got an HR monitor and learnt how to use it, I discovered it confirmed what my perceived scale of effort already told me. As I said upstream, it confirms what you already know but it's nice to have that confirmation, otherwise you're often left wondering and you may end up trying harder when you shouldn't (guilty once) or not trying hard enough (guilty now).


 
Yep Perceived Effort is good. Once you have calibrated your Perception. That's the tricky part.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob could you please send me an alert everytime you edit a post Ta


----------



## Rob3rt (15 May 2013)

A post will generally not be edited post reply, if so, I would refer you to the above. All edits are made before any reply is made.


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

I havn t claimed anything Im just asking questions and living in hope one day someone might answer one without the fear of making themselves look a tw*t


----------



## lukesdad (15 May 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> A post will generally not be edited post reply, if so, I would refer you to the above. All edits are made before any reply is made.


 Whatever


----------



## VamP (15 May 2013)

lukesdad said:


> I havn t claimed anything Im just asking questions and living in hope one day someone might answer one without the fear of making themselves look a tw*t


 
I can't tell if you are genuinely after answers, and just incapable of formulating the question, or if you're in a mischievous frame of mind


----------



## HLaB (15 May 2013)

400bhp said:


> Does annoy me that Garmin connect doesn't break down time into HR zones. You can download the garmin software and use that but it's a bit clunky. Might have to upgrade to Strava Premium.
> 
> For me, I find heart rate reading and data very useful as when on a ride I can quickly tell how hard I am working (and whether that corresponds to how I feel).
> 
> I can usually guess my heart rate within a few bpm's too.


 Do you ever upload to RWGPS it breaks the info down into time spent in each zone.


----------



## 400bhp (15 May 2013)

HLaB said:


> Do you ever upload to RWGPS it breaks the info down into time spent in each zone.


 
No

I do have an account over there, but got annoyed with it after I created a route to download to my Garmin and it mistook it as an actual ride.


----------



## Garz (15 May 2013)

Thread derailment.


----------

