Thanks for sharing.Was thinking about getting one.
HR is max
I recently acquired a Garmin Instinct watch, love it, a good investment. Once thing I've been seeing is that my mt, bike rides, which is all I'm doing in the colder temperatures in the NE US, is seeing me max out my HR a few times during the ride. I am riding on generally flat Long Island, on single track, usually in a park that isn't completely flat but has a lot of short hills that the trails go up and over. My HR goes up to 160.
I did a HR Max test about 30 years ago when I was a Cat4 road racer, developed that my theoretical max at age 34 was 192. If you use the rule of 1 beat less per year, that puts my theoretical max now at around 162. I find it remarkable that I can get my heart to that. Also tells me what I've also known, that mt. biking is a very anaerobic sport, with a lot of shorter extreme efforts required. Unlike road biking where it's easier to control your effort levels, big hills the exception !.
I did a HR Max test about 30 years ago when I was a Cat4 road racer, developed that my theoretical max at age 34 was 192. If you use the rule of 1 beat less per year, that puts my theoretical max now at around 162. I find it remarkable that I can get my heart to that. Also tells me what I've also known, that mt. biking is a very anaerobic sport, with a lot of shorter extreme efforts required. Unlike road biking where it's easier to control your effort levels, big hills the exception !.
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
The theoretical hr formula sometimes works out about right but more often probably not. I'm 60 and max around 175bpm, sometimes 180 depending on the day.
Also the garmin watches are good (I use one) but heart rate data from them is generally not so accurate on bouncy trails. For better accuracy get a chest strap and pair it to your watch.
Have fun!
Also the garmin watches are good (I use one) but heart rate data from them is generally not so accurate on bouncy trails. For better accuracy get a chest strap and pair it to your watch.
Have fun!
I'm a Clinical Exercise Physiologist with over 20 years of experience in conducting maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). The only way to know what your maximum HR is now is to have another stress test. The one beat per year reduction in max HR is (at best) a rule of thumb, and probably pretty useless in your case given your physical activity history.I recently acquired a Garmin Instinct watch, love it, a good investment. Once thing I've been seeing is that my mt, bike rides, which is all I'm doing in the colder temperatures in the NE US, is seeing me max out my HR a few times during the ride. I am riding on generally flat Long Island, on single track, usually in a park that isn't completely flat but has a lot of short hills that the trails go up and over. My HR goes up to 160.
I did a HR Max test about 30 years ago when I was a Cat4 road racer, developed that my theoretical max at age 34 was 192. If you use the rule of 1 beat less per year, that puts my theoretical max now at around 162. I find it remarkable that I can get my heart to that. Also tells me what I've also known, that mt. biking is a very anaerobic sport, with a lot of shorter extreme efforts required. Unlike road biking where it's easier to control your effort levels, big hills the exception !.
I agree 100%. The HR monitors worn on the wrist (e.g., Apple, FitBit, Garmin, etc.) use an optical sensor to detect blood flow under the skin. They work well at HRs most people are likely to see during the course of a normal day. I don't have to tell you that mountain bikers aren't like most people and our days aren't necessarily normal. The optical sensor's accuracy falls off at higher HRs. About 4 or 5 years ago, they could be off by as much as 30% compared to an ECG. They have improved a lot since then, and we're in the middle of a study to determine how accurate they are now.Also the garmin watches are good (I use one) but heart rate data from them is generally not so accurate on bouncy trails. For better accuracy get a chest strap and pair it to your watch.
By comparison, the chest strap type monitors are essentially a single lead ECG detecting the electrical activity associated with cardiac activity. They are +/- 1% of the accuracy of a 12 lead ECG.
When I generated my theoretical max 30 years ago, I did a semi-stress like test on a bike on a trainer, I think this was a method developed by Sally Edwards who wrote a very good book (Heart Rate Monitor Book of 1992) about exercise and heart rate. It involved 3 sessions of 15 minutes all out holding whatever HR you could maintain for the 15 minutes, then a 10 minute spin, followed by 2 more 15 minute sessions with a 10 minute break between. You then averaged the 3 sessions to get a max.
I used an actual HR strap and reader (Polar in my case). Note that this was before power meters had become available for the average cyclist, and HR was the only method to determine effort on training rides. Also important to note that everybody's max. HR is different and if rider X has a max of 190 and rider Y has 175, that doesn't mean Rider X is fitter or stronger then Rider Y, it only means rider X needs to use a different HR for training purposes.
I'm aware that wrist-based HR's can be somewhat inaccurate, but I have been getting the same readings over 4 rides at the same trail system, so suspect the readings are accurate.
My point was I had never used an HR while mt. biking and was surprised that it seems to indicate how HARD mt. biking can be.
I used an actual HR strap and reader (Polar in my case). Note that this was before power meters had become available for the average cyclist, and HR was the only method to determine effort on training rides. Also important to note that everybody's max. HR is different and if rider X has a max of 190 and rider Y has 175, that doesn't mean Rider X is fitter or stronger then Rider Y, it only means rider X needs to use a different HR for training purposes.
I'm aware that wrist-based HR's can be somewhat inaccurate, but I have been getting the same readings over 4 rides at the same trail system, so suspect the readings are accurate.
My point was I had never used an HR while mt. biking and was surprised that it seems to indicate how HARD mt. biking can be.
Yes, but close enough is good enough if you wan't a close number. Just do a max effort test on the bike and if done well enough it's likely to get you to what you can produce on the bike as a max. There are a lot of variables that can change the number you can produce like rest and conditioning, but it will be close enough. I'm 45 and saw 201 earlier this year. I saw 199 just yesterday on what I thought was an easy ride, but I've been off the bike for a long time.The only way to know what your maximum HR is now is to have another stress test.
Getting your heart rate up to max is no joke. I usually can't do it unless I am in a fast paced group ride where we are essentially racing at max effort for a couple laps. And this is after warming up for 15-20 minutes. And use a chest strap for accuracy. What might even be more important than max hr is your lactate threshold heart rate which is the most accurate way of setting your training zones.
As others have said the formula is just a rough approximation based on a typical bell curve. I am 48 and have seen as high as 186 in the last year, which is what I use as my max. I typically average about 150-152 over a course of a ride, but some days if tired, my HR runs about 10 beats lower.
due to medical history, I had some testing done after my Garmin chest strap HRM showed me blowing well past my theoretical max HR.
I'm just at the high end of the bell curve, so the formula means a whole lot of **** for me. thankfully no medical issues popped up through the testing I did.
I'm just at the high end of the bell curve, so the formula means a whole lot of **** for me. thankfully no medical issues popped up through the testing I did.
My Garmin was doing that to me for a while, then it abruptly recalculated my percentages and max, and the splits made a lot more sense after that. I didn't do anything specific to cause the recalc. But I think you can also manually adjust your HR percentages in the app.I recently acquired a Garmin Instinct watch, love it, a good investment. Once thing I've been seeing is that my mt, bike rides, which is all I'm doing in the colder temperatures in the NE US, is seeing me max out my HR a few times during the ride. I am riding on generally flat Long Island, on single track, usually in a park that isn't completely flat but has a lot of short hills that the trails go up and over. My HR goes up to 160.
I did a HR Max test about 30 years ago when I was a Cat4 road racer, developed that my theoretical max at age 34 was 192. If you use the rule of 1 beat less per year, that puts my theoretical max now at around 162. I find it remarkable that I can get my heart to that. Also tells me what I've also known, that mt. biking is a very anaerobic sport, with a lot of shorter extreme efforts required. Unlike road biking where it's easier to control your effort levels, big hills the exception !.
This stuff always gets bounced around on every one of these HR threads. How is it that so many people have been convinced that formulas will give them their max heart rate? That's about as logical as assuming there is some formula out there that will accurately illustrate a man's penis length.
You get what fate gave you. You haven't done anything better or worse than the next guy to get you what you got. It's up to you to capitalize on your full potential, and if you let somebody else tell you how much you can push it based on some numbers, you might be missing out on a whole world of possibility.
Rev that thing up and see what it will do. The most you see it going through is very, very close to the best you can expect from it, assuming you gave it the right stimulus. Well, performance enhancing drugs can show you different results, and some situations, environments, moods, and a person's general sense of desire can be more or less arousing which will give you different outcomes. Still, giving whatever you were blessed with all you've got, or letting a special someone, or maybe even a group of people pull it out of you, will often be the best method of seeing how big it can be.
You get what fate gave you. You haven't done anything better or worse than the next guy to get you what you got. It's up to you to capitalize on your full potential, and if you let somebody else tell you how much you can push it based on some numbers, you might be missing out on a whole world of possibility.
Rev that thing up and see what it will do. The most you see it going through is very, very close to the best you can expect from it, assuming you gave it the right stimulus. Well, performance enhancing drugs can show you different results, and some situations, environments, moods, and a person's general sense of desire can be more or less arousing which will give you different outcomes. Still, giving whatever you were blessed with all you've got, or letting a special someone, or maybe even a group of people pull it out of you, will often be the best method of seeing how big it can be.
True to a point, but also max heart rate has nothing to do with potential power. Just a guideline to let yourself know when you're about ready to blow up.You get what fate gave you.
Yep. Sort of like a tach on a motor. A Corvette vs a Honda Civic, or a huge logging truck... They all do different things with their motors, but if somebody told the owner of each of those vehicles there was a formula that predicted the limit of their motors, and they never got out and pushed them to see what they could really do but instead operated the engines inside the formula prediction, well, that would be sad.Just a guideline to let yourself know when you're about ready to blow up.
Ugh. Conventional wisdom.
Garmin will use the default formula, but if your HR exceeds the calculated max, it will automatically adjust the max to the max rate recorded and use its default zones off that max.My Garmin was doing that to me for a while, then it abruptly recalculated my percentages and max, and the splits made a lot more sense after that. I didn't do anything specific to cause the recalc. But I think you can also manually adjust your HR percentages in the app.
I ride like I got an old GM 6.2 V8 diesel from the 80's but rev like a Civic, what does that tell you?Yep. Sort of like a tach on a motor. A Corvette vs a Honda Civic, or a huge logging truck... They all do different things with their motors, but if somebody told the owner of each of those vehicles there was a formula that predicted the limit of their motors, and they never got out and pushed them to see what they could really do but instead operated the engines inside the formula prediction, well, that would be sad.
Ugh. Conventional wisdom.
I find HR useful for two things:
1) On climbs it tells me to back off before I run out of lungs and blow up.
2) It gives me an idea of if I am fitter or less fit than normal. If over a period of time I am doing the same climb faster at the same HR, I am getting fitter. You really have to look over time though, one day is just one day and results can vary a lot on a daily basis.
Theoretical hr Max is just what it says, theoretical.
I've always had a high max HR. I'll be 41 in a few weeks and my current max HR using a Garmin chest strap to record is 205.
I've always had a high max HR. I'll be 41 in a few weeks and my current max HR using a Garmin chest strap to record is 205.
Assuming you have enough math to know what average means, the equations to map age to max heart rate are actually just age to AVERAGE max heart rate for that age.
the equations let you see population trends and it makes no sense that you’d try to determine your personal max from them. Makes as much sense as determining your annual income from your country’s average.
unfortunately there are a bajillion websites that will pretend to do exactly that. Max hr calculators, etc, so it’s easy to get the wrong idea.
you can’t even use the equations as a safe lower bound guess when starting a routine because you might be in the 50% that has a lower than average max.
I think best approach is to set zones using breathing rate.
the equations let you see population trends and it makes no sense that you’d try to determine your personal max from them. Makes as much sense as determining your annual income from your country’s average.
unfortunately there are a bajillion websites that will pretend to do exactly that. Max hr calculators, etc, so it’s easy to get the wrong idea.
you can’t even use the equations as a safe lower bound guess when starting a routine because you might be in the 50% that has a lower than average max.
I think best approach is to set zones using breathing rate.
Theoretical hr Max is just what it says, theoretical.
I've always had a high max HR. I'll be 41 in a few weeks and my current max HR using a Garmin chest strap to record is 205.
Not saying this is the case with your 205 number but "max" heart rate isn't necessarily the highest number you record. I was advised to throw away any anomalies.
I think best approach is to set zones using breathing rate.
Whatever works is good but I think power is the gold standard for zones.
I can hit 205 consistently at max effort, not just a one time anomaly.Not saying this is the case with your 205 number but "max" heart rate isn't necessarily the highest number you record. I was advised to throw away any anomalies.
Whatever works is good but I think power is the gold standard for zones.
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Top Contributors this Month
View All
ilmfat
764 Replies
DIRTJUNKIE
443 Replies
Sparticus
416 Replies
Recommended Communities
