Fiona N
Veteran
lukesdad said:Right this is dragging on. The test Ive described is my general fitness test 12 times a year. (the last one done on Sunday Morning by the way.) It is the most accurate way I have found If you know different tell me and I will try it.
Yes - you've described a general fitness test - what's that got to do with what the original thread was about - i.e. resting heart rate? A resting heart rate on waking is something to be monitored on a regular - preferably daily - basis not a once a month fitness test. The rationale for daily monitoring is to develop an understanding of your specific trends - e.g. some women find rhr varies slightly during the month, others don't. But you can't get anything about this from a once a month measurement not matter how 'scientific'.
BTW if you're going to go to all this rigmarole, why not do a full ramp test and have done with it? That's generally reckoned to give the best overall assessment of developing/evolving fitness. When I used to train seriously, a ramp test to failure on calibrated equipment was an extremely good way to measure the benefits of different types of training - it was easy to see improvement in specific areas (e.g. efficiency at low HR%, variation in anaerobic threshold a la Conconi etc.) given that at the time we didn't have access to power meters on bikes on the road so lab testing was gold standard.