Conference noted::bicycle

    
    Well, first of all I guess I should start by saying that I agree
    with opinion 1. The n% you spoke of is from 65% to about 80%. These
    are however ballpark figures. There has been alot of research to
    back up the theories that you can get maximum aerobic benefits at
    the lower end of this percentage. Supposedly the body burns fat
    (and glycogen for that matter) much more effeciently at the low
    end of that zone.
    
    As far as the questions about pulse rate changes, I'm not real sure
    but I have to guess that your friend may have been hitting his
    anaerobic zone and thus causing the changes.  The heart's got alot
    of work to do when its "ramping up" but once its got enough blood
    going around it can kinda take it easy.... That last sentance is
    just my own simple way of looking at it and I'm not so sure that
    its accurate.
    
    Any other ideas???
    
    Stew
    

    As far as the maximum rates not being accurate if you're in shape:

    If you're in shape, your heart rate is lower for an equivalent 
    amount of work.  When an in-shape person gets up to the max rate
    he or she is doing lots more than an out-of-shape person.
    As a result, the maximum rate is still valid, regardless of 
    conditioning.  At least that's what I've been told!
    
    The fact kind of depressed me, because it illustrates better
    than most things that humans get "over-the-hill" physically
    as they get older, no matter what they do.  Of course, I take
    solace that I'm in better shape than I was when I was 21, so
    that even if I can't sustain a maximum heart rate that's as
    high as it was then, I can do more with less.
    
    MATT

    
    I asked the question about max heart rate at the DRC's "Can science
    improve your running" seminar last week, given by Dr. Lee Cunningham
    of Fitchburg St and some hospital down there.  The answer I got
    was that max heart rate is an upper limit that does decrease with
    age.   Now 220-age may be off by a couple of %, but it does not
    really change.  What changes as you get in shape is your stroke
    volume.  This is the amount of blood that your heart can pump per
    beat.  This combined with your body's efficent use of oxygen cause
    the heart rate to drop.  I feel that mine is higher than normal,
    (I once clocked a 220+ after a tough run) but like Stew says, the %'s
    that really count.
    
    The rollers are as good an aerobic exercise as riding.  I've heard,
    but not read of recently, that the body is actually more inefficent
    when hot.  Your circulation changes, and blood goes to the skin
    or something like that.  If it gets real hot enzymes and other
    elctrochemical things start screwing up.  
    
    I don't understand your friend's condition.  I would doubt it. 
    Once you get your pulse up, the only way to *dramitically* drop
    it is decreased exercise.  Even if he was past his AT, he should
    keep it pumping.  I'd ask somebody who *really* knows.  Wouldn't
    want it to drop to ZERO...
    
    Any of the new cyclometer w/ pulse have chest straps?  I'm not into
    earclips.
    
    JD Doyle
    

    Another potential explanation for why your friend's heart rate drops
    off after he reaches a certain level of effort is that, for athletes
    in condition, there is a switching function which comes into play
    in the capillaries.  During normal sedentary or low exertion conditions
    many (most for an athlete in top condition) capillaries are closed,
    to keep the blood flow down to only what is required.  As the work
    load goes up, you reach a point where the extra capillaries begin
    to open up and allow blood to pass through.  These capillaries grow
    in response to the demands placed by training and constitute one
    of the elements of "being in shape".  The process of getting them
    to open up and start allowing blood to pass through them is one
    of effects of warming up before exercise and is one of the reasons
    a warm up is so important.  Starting from rest and going to maximum
    exertion immediately, it takes about 5 minutes for these capillaries
    to open.  You cannot sustain full output until this happens.
    
    Jim
    
    PS - When I first started racing, I read a book entitled "A Textbook
    of Work Physiology" by Per Olaf-Aastrand.  I recommend it highly
    to anyone who is seriously involved in endurance sports.

    re .1
    I agree with opinion #1, that the max and target rates are just
    guidelines.  You don't really know what yours are until you've been
    tested, more than once too!  This means I really don't agree with
    opinion #2.  Anyone seriously interested in training should try
    to determine their own rates thru testing.
    
    I agree with opinion #3, due to the many variables of physical and
    environmental states, day to day monitoring is difficult.  I train
    most of time by heartrate, but I don't let it be an absolute dictator.
    I use HR training mostly to keep me from training TOO hard, but
    sometimes, if I'm feeling really good, I'll let it fly even if I
    shouldn't according to my HR or my schedule.
    
    re Question #1:  If this really happened, either the person has
    a serious problem or has made a physiological breakthru that no
    one else in the world has made.  As Stew said in .1, at the beginning
    of a workout, the heart has a lot 'more' to do, and that's why your
    HR increases rapidly.  Once your heart reaches a level of output
    equal to the stress you're putting on it, your HR levels off.  It
    doesn't fall, unless you reduce the stress.  But your HR won't stay
    leveled off indefinitely.  If you ran on an indoor track so there
    was no wind or hills to vary the stress, you'd find that after a
    while your HR would increase even if you held a steady pace.  This
    is do to fatigue and the accumulation of lactic acid in your muscles.
    The length of time to pass before this happened depends on your
    conditioning and the level of stress you're trying to maintain.
    Now if you start a run at 5:00 pace for awhile and then slow do
    to 7:00 or 8:00 pace, you'd see a dramatic drop in HR.  Is this
    what your friend is doing?  When you cross your anaerobic threshold,
    your HR will continue to increase, but much more slowly, until you
    reach your max, if you can continue that long.
    
    re Question #2:  
    The rollers are probably better for pure aerobic conditioning than
    riding the roads, since you can control your HR better on the rollers
    (no wind or hills to increase the stress beyond the aerobic range)
    However, if your not using a fan to keep you cool, your driving
    your HR too high.  If you're either too hot or too cold, your body
    uses energy to regulate temp, and that elevates your HR.  JD's right,
    you get the best aerobic benefits from riding at the lower to middle
    rates of your aerobic range because its less stressful and therefore
    doesn't use the other energy systems used to fuel anaerobic work.
    (Better for weight control too, as you use more fat than glycogen)
    Aerobic conditioning is more than your heart's stroke volume.  Its
    also how well your body uses the oxygen your heart delivers.  You
    improve this by training the muscles involved, which increase the
    number of capillaries to deliver the blood, as well as making changes
    to the muscle cells themselves to process oxygen better.  So you
    must work both the heart and the muscles too.  Otherwise, you could
    just simulate (in your mind) the activity, or otherwise raise your
    HR, and become more fit.  This works to some degree, but not enough
    to really benefit an athlete.
    
    JD, the Rhode Gear cycle comp has a heartrate chest strap option,
    as does the new, expensive Cateye (I forget the model).  There's
    also an option for the Cateye Solar, made by Biotechnology.  I use
    the same monitor that Dr. Cunningham uses, and I think its great,
    tho I would like one that plugged into my cycle comp to simplify
    things.  I wish I'd known you were there...I would have introduced
    myself, since I haven't met you, or anyone else in this conference.
    
    Kevin
    
    

    
    I was tested once during a physiology study at BU.
    
    At age 28, my maximum heart rate was 192.  Exactly 220-age.
    
    My anaerobic threshold (maximum sustained exercise level) was 185.
    This is about 96% of maximum heart rate.  
    
    (It was also a lot of fun.  Wires all over my chest, breathing hoses,
    a tube sticking out of the artery in my arm so they could draw blood
    every 2 minutes.)    
    
    The most valuable thing I learned was to "feel" my maximum training
    pace, so I could duplicate it without the heart monitor.  It is just
    what many people have talked about.   Quality training is done at
    that level where, if you raised your effort at all, you would fall
    apart.
    
    The doctors in charge of the study said that you should not always
    train that hard, but to really improve some of your training must
    be at that level.
    
    Chuck

    I don't know what the max means since I have consistently gotten
    a 196 pulse after climbing Pack Monadnock -- theoretical max is
    180 (soon to be 179, sigh).  One explanation that I've heard for
    the 196 is "You were about to have a heart attack, don't do it
    again."
    
    It's all very interesting, and I'm sure there are exceptions.
    
    (I will "do Pack" again, a few times, this year.)
    
    ed

    
    RE .7
    
    "Max" here is strictly a ballpark figure. It doesn't necessarily
    mean that you were about to have a heart attack, but that you shouldn't
    keep it that high for too long. I read of a good way to come alot
    closer to you max in "Runner" magazine. I can't remeber it right
    now..... I'll see if I can find the old issue....
    
    Stew
    

    I have read with great interest the last 8 notes on measuring pulse
    rates etc. However I feel that we are losing site of the fact that
    to get the best use out of the heart then it requires hard work.
    From what I am reading although I may be wrong is that we are all
    looking at work loads and goodness knows what else. I feel there
    are a number of points to take note.
    
    1. I have suffered with the problem of the heart beat shooting up
    as soon as I start physical effort. This I expect due to the sudden
    call for oxygen in the muscules around the body. This can be overcome,
    in all the years I have been racing (18) I have found that a good
    warm up is what is called for. Starting with a steady ride I build
    up steed uptil racing speed is achieved over a short time, this
    is followed by a short rest. This rest usually takes the place of
    getting changed from training ket to racing kit. From experience
    I have worked my time out such that by the time I have changed it
    is time to get to the start line.  Then once I start racing I
    don't experience any problems with the heart beat shooting up and
    the weak feeling which comes with it.
                                         
    2. As for age causing a problem I disagree to a point. There I
    feel are two ways of looking at it, when one is 18 one can run 100
    yards without any problem, however can you do the same at 36 answer probably
    not. However the 18 year old and the 36 could probably run three
    miles at the same speed. What this is telling me is that that what
    is being lost is the ability to take the change in pace, but in
    return one is getting strengh and exdurance. If one excepts this
    and works on this aspect of things then I feel age is no problem.
    I could quote a number of cases but one may just be enough Raymound
    Poulidor who at 40 was 3rd in the Tour de France.
    
    3. As a footnote I was always told that the best way to enjoy cycling
    and racing was to get out and ride your bike every day. Use science
    as an aid but not to the extent that we become paranoid about every
    ache and pain we get.
    
                                                         
    TC

    
    	The subject of pulse rate did not occur to me in the bicycling
    	context until I ran the "Ride-Log" demo program mentioned in another
    	note.  It has provisions for entering and tracking pulse data.
    
    	Doing a "DIR/TITLE=PULSE" yielded this note (only), but as you
    	can see, it hasn't been active for over six years. Perhaps it
    	is time to renew some dialogue in this string.
    
    	I would be interested in hearing from NOTERS that monitor their
    	pulse, what equipment they use to do the monitoring and what their
    	experiences and conclusions have been around the data gathered.  
                                    
    	Thanks, George
    

    I may be wrong, but my reason for not using an h/r monitor
    when I ride is because I can't compete effectively (on the
    road) without alternating between being well above my
    target range or at the very low end.  I am seldom in it.
    
    My pace is often dictated more by the aggressive cyclists
    in the group than my heart rate.  If I don't "knock-myself-out"
    for a short burst, the train can leave the station without
    me--no matter what my heart says...  
    
    
    my $.02
    
    r�

I agree with -.1 in that if you're riding in a fast group or road racing, 
looking at your HR isn't going to help you keep from getting dropped.

BUT..in a TT, they are very valuable for keeping you at the right level of 
effort. Ditto for indoor workouts on the rollers or windtrainer or solo rides 
outside.

On a semi-related topic, the latest VeloNews has some of the phyiological data
from tests done on Miguel Indurain. The ones that absolutely stagger me:
 
	1. his resting HR is 28 bpm
	2. one min after he finished the Luxembourg TT in last year's TdF, his
	   HR had dropped from around 190 to 60 bpm.

-tom

    I once drug my heart rate monitor with me on a ride.  Going up a fairly
    steep hill my rate went so high I just about had a heart attack
    thinking about it so now I leave the monitor at home.  ;)
    

    Heart rate monitors are very useful in racing and training.  They 
    tell you what your heart rate is, and then you can assess whether 
    it is good or bad based on your physical conditioning.  The max-min
    range is only presented as a guideline.  Your body can tolerate 
    heart rates that are outside that range (and your body will tell you
    when it doesn't like what you are doing!) Your personal max heart rate
    can be determined by careful data collection from using your monitor
    often.  This may be far above the recommended rate, or it may be
    within the range.  The range was established for average people, and 
    if you are in any sort of shape, your heart rate can be higher 
    (this is assuming that you don't have any sort of heart disease or
    unusual heart beats,etc [see your doctor if you're not sure])
    The 85% range just gives you the "most efficient" rate for cardio-
    vascular conditioning.

    .14 is, of course, correct; but personally I tend to do what the
    previous noters say.
    
    I use the HRM for winter (gym and turbo-trainer) work (just to make sure 
    that I am always in the band I should be that day) and for early
    season `on my own' rides (fixed wheel normally).  Then the HRM goes into
    the cupboard and stays there.
    
    If I did Tris and/or TT I'd use the HRM during them.
    If I roadraced I'd use the HRM for training - but these days I don't race
    and when I did the HRM would just be extra weight to haul up the hills,
    I don't need one to tell me that my heart is trying to jump out through
    my ears.
    
    Using an HRM does make you think more about what your body is doing and
    when you don't use it you have a much better feel to how your body is
    reacting.
    
    Finally as someone said in this conference about 18 months ago, if you
    use an HRM during a road-race, make sure that you turn the alarms off,
    it's the last thing you want your competitors to hear during a
    strenuous break !
                                     

    
    Rod expressed it succinctly.  HRM's are the way to go when the event 
    calls for maximized application of [sustainable] effort over time 
    (TT's, for example).
    
    Clearly your energy expenditure in a RR is more up-and-down and
    "maximized application of effort" doesn't apply.  (But note Rod's
    good point about HRM's for *training* for race conditioning - not
    for race tactics, but for physical conditioning.)
    
    Now, RAAM is a time trial of sorts. :-)  Many RAAM riders use the HRM
    in lieu of speedometer, etc., to pace themselves.  Recently (May 10th) 
    RAAM veteran John Stoneman set a record cycling the Blue Ridge Parkway
    (469 miles).  His bike did not even have a computer on it. Instead, he 
    paced himself with his HRM.
    
    - jodi (alias the visiting jle)

     I still subscribe to the exploding heart method :-)
    
     Chip

>>    "maximized application of effort" doesn't apply.  (But note Rod's
>>    good point about HRM's for *training* for race conditioning - not
>>    for race tactics, but for physical conditioning.)
    
    HRMs do have their place in RRs, especially those that have long climbs
    on them. I said somewhere else when talking about climbing (CYCLE_RACING
    I think), that when you're climbing, it's important not to push
    yourself too hard, since blowing with 1000ft of climbing left is a
    surefire way of making sure that you never see the bunch again. If you
    use your HRM to keep to your own pace, you will be in much better
    shape to catch the leading riders over the other side.
    
    Graham.

    Does anyone know where to buy some ECG Gel for the monitor? Mine
    seems to lose contact any the pulse rate goes whacko. In the HR1000
    book, it says to use the ECG gel. I am have checked with most of the 
    pharmacies in the Fitchburg/Gardner Ma. area with no luck in finding
    any.
    
    Thanks.
    
    Dave