Hills - Should you back off as you get older ?
- Thread starter kingrollo
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I had one, put me 9 years younger.
ok, i take your point its probably not well written, so what actually are you saying, that going up a hill until you can no longer function on the bike and you have to get off and you collapse in a heap on the floor and your heart is going like a big base drum is good or bad ?
because as i understand it thats what he is asking, and to me thats not sensible nor is it training,
i'm not looking to prove a point here just giving my opinion on what can and cannot in terms of extreme exercise can potentially be dangerous depending on age and problems that you cant possibly know you may have with the heart or other vessells in the head which can lead to strokes etc, as you get older you are taking risks that have no benefit to training or health or other wise, in other words its a pointless thing to do just train differantly to over come that hill on another day or change the gearing
OP
OP
kingrollo
Guru
A while back yes. From memory that gave readings more in line with my age/weight/height - but like a say it was around 10 years ago. What is spirometrey measuring ?
Oldfentiger
Veteran
- Location
- Pendle, Lancs
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
And the rest of the year, you worked in the fields digging drains, life was harder back then, had to get up two hours before you went to bed, 27 children living in a matchbox, etc etc...
OP
OP
kingrollo
Guru
Thanks reacher.
What would you suggest as training for that hill though. I live in quite a hilly area - so go up a fair few hills -Im never great at it - but though most hills are a struggle there is never any danger of me not getting over them. Would climbing more but less steep hills prepare for that one ? - I don't know the answer - but I suspect not. Its as almost as though the shock to the system is part of the problem.
Anyway I got over the 2nd of those 2 hills in the link tonight - it wasn't pleasant or easy. That would suggest a combination of the unknown, the narrow road, and fear of motor coming the other way played a part.....? sound feasible..?
Oldfentiger
Veteran
- Location
- Pendle, Lancs
S-Express
Guest
Spirometry measures lung capacity and function and is usually performed when conditions like asthma or others are suspected. However, if you didn't have asthma then, you probably don't have it now. I would suggest that what you are actually experiencing when going up that climb is simply a lack of cardiovascular fitness and nothing more.
S-Express
Guest
As I said before, it's only bad if you have a heart or pulmonary condition for which high levels of cv stress would be dangerous. If you don't, then you are simply riding a bike harder than your body can cope with, but what you aren't doing is risking your life by doing it.
The only other thing I would add is that your thoughts on 'training' in your post #87 seem very confused, to the point where I can only assume you have very limited knowledge/understanding of the topic. No offence.
Last edited:
No offence taken, however the way I ride seems to say the opposite so far, I dont think I will taking your advice on it anytime soon, No offence
S-Express
Guest
You obviously have concerns about your own health - you should get them checked out.
I have to say I disagree with the second part of that - people frequently do push themselves beyond what is safe and do actually die as a result of it (and the way the body expresses its knowledge of its limits and its refusal to go beyond them is, often, by stopping permanently).
But though I love my gadgets as much as the next bloke (and I can't resist looking down workmen's holes... fnarr), I do agree with the first part. I wear a Fitbit Surge whenever I'm out on my bike, but it's largely to keep a record for later perusal - keeping a record and looking back on my progress gives me a big psychological boost.
But when I'm out, all I look at is the screen that shows my time, distance and average speed - I almost never check my heart rate. The thing is, what would it mean? If I'd seen the maximum 171bpm that occurred on yesterday's ride (when the 220-age guideline would suggest 162bpm as my max), would I have paused to let it settle or just continue? I felt fine at the time.
With hindsight, I'm pleased that my max HR is actually significantly better than 220-age (I've had 180+ on numerous occasions), but it's the kind of thing that could get people panicking.
I had a heart attack 10 years ago (the anniversary of which I celebrated by doing the Liverpool-Chester-Liverpool 100-mile ride in July), which led to a quadruple bypass, and it happened when I was lying in bed watching the telly. What would an HR monitor have told me at the time? I'm sure it would have shown a low HR and given no indication of any problem whatsoever.
Gadgets are fun, but when deciding whether to power up hills (and I use the word "power" reservedly in my case), I go on how I feel.
Alan
No ones invincible unfortunately, not even people who train very hard, perhaps you would care to share your thoughts on how the op should be training then, rather than trying to just be top dog on every subject
