Heart Rates..Running Vs. Riding - Triathlon Week

11-09-2004, 02:05 PM

Howdy All,
I recently bought a CTS timetrial DVD to use at home. I did the field test
and came up with a hr of 150 for one effort and then 154 for the second 8
minute "max" effort. i just did a 9 mile run sunday in prep for the St. Jude
half marathon and had an avg. hr of 162. i'm still learning about hr's. can
anyone tell me what these two hr ranges are telling me? am i not riding hard
enough? what gear should i be doing the CTS field test in? thanks for any
info. i luv the long race reports..thanks!

11-13-2004, 04:23 PM

"John" ha scritto nel messaggio
> can anyone tell me what these two hr ranges are telling me?

if i'm not wrong usually LT in running is about 10 pulse higher than in
biking.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)

11-16-2004, 07:59 AM

thanks, i'm learning how to use the trainer and this is all new info to me.

11-16-2004, 02:31 PM

I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
that is how I trained this last year.

Mark

"John" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message news:<yBomd.475$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].atl.earthlin k.net>...
> thanks, i'm learning how to use the trainer and this is all new info to me.

11-16-2004, 09:05 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (M Kochanski) wrote:

>I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
>running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
>somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
>that is how I trained this last year.

I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
10bpm higher than on the bike...

Mark "one more bit of anecdotal evidence to the contrary" Hickey
Habanero Cycles
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Home of the $695 ti frame

11-17-2004, 12:27 AM

Hi, I think you should test it for yourself. The hr zones are different for
all people and for each sport. I suggest this test to determine your LT - AT
(anaerobic threshold) value:

Run for 8-10 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
finishing.
Cycle for 30-40 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
finishing.

These are your approximate AT values. You can plan your training based on
these values. Basically, if you are have a cycling background the heart
rates should be the same, if not the cycling heart rate will be about 10
pulse lower. But the tests are easy enough to do yourself.

HTH.

--
Remove the obvious part to reply
Burak
"jjx" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:yHwld.31704$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>
> "John" ha scritto nel messaggio
> > can anyone tell me what these two hr ranges are telling me?
>
> if i'm not wrong usually LT in running is about 10 pulse higher than in
> biking.
>
> carlo
> Ferrara (Italy)
>
>

11-17-2004, 07:00 AM

Mark Hickey said:

> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (M Kochanski) wrote:
>
>> I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
>> running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
>> somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
>> that is how I trained this last year.
>
> I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
> 10bpm higher than on the bike...

How are you measuring the exertion rate?

Steve = : ^ )

11-17-2004, 08:18 AM

The % of LT for each Zone is the same for running and cycling but the actual
LT HR is going to be different by 5-10 bpm depending in relative fitness in
each sport. A strong cyclist with little running experience my have a
running LT very close to their cycling LT, but in the opposite case the
difference would be larger.

"Mark Hickey" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (M Kochanski) wrote:
>
> >I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
> >running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
> >somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
> >that is how I trained this last year.
>
> I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
> 10bpm higher than on the bike...
>
> Mark "one more bit of anecdotal evidence to the contrary" Hickey
> Habanero Cycles
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> Home of the $695 ti frame

11-17-2004, 12:30 PM

As I try to adjust my hr should I do so with higher cadence or a harder gear
(lower or higher gear?)

11-17-2004, 07:14 PM

"Steve B." <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].au> wrote:

>Mark Hickey said:
>
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (M Kochanski) wrote:
>>
>>> I asked my cycling coach, John Howard, about this. He said the
>>> running and cycling heart rate zones are the same. I had read
>>> somewhere that cycling was 10 beats lower, but I believe John, and
>>> that is how I trained this last year.
>>
>> I dunno - my running heart rate at a given exertion rate is about
>> 10bpm higher than on the bike...
>
>How are you measuring the exertion rate?

It's the HR I hit right before I want to blow lunch... ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Home of the $695 ti frame

11-17-2004, 08:59 PM

Depends on the desired improvement. Pushing bigger gears is helpful to
improve hill climbing power. If you can hold your own on a hill, but need
to improve flat speed, push the cadence.

"John" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:0FNmd.3170$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].atl.earthl ink.net...
> As I try to adjust my hr should I do so with higher cadence or a harder
gear
> (lower or higher gear?)
>
>

11-18-2004, 04:06 AM

"Burak Ilter" ha scritto nel messaggio :

> Hi, I think you should test it for yourself. The hr zones are different
> for
> all people and for each sport. I suggest this test to determine your LT -
> AT
> (anaerobic threshold) value:
>
> Run for 8-10 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate upon
> finishing.

You are right , but I think that if you have got a heart rates monitor (like
polar or timex) the better choice to determine your LT is Conconi test (you
can do it by yourself)

> Cycle for 30-40 K at constant speed and take your immediate heart rate
> upon finishing.
> These are your approximate AT values. You can plan your training based on
> these values.

That's fine. Conconi test is too difficult to do by bike. I know there is a
formula to find your LT from your MHR, but i don't remember it.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)

11-18-2004, 08:30 AM

>
> "Burak Ilter" ha scritto nel messaggio :
>
> That's fine. Conconi test is too difficult to do by bike. I know there is
a
> formula to find your LT from your MHR, but i don't remember it.
>

The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that you
MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent) while your LT
will increase as your fitness increases. However, on average, LT is
approximately 85% of MHR.

AJ

11-18-2004, 11:32 AM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
"A. J." <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that you
> MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent)

You know, people say this all the time, and I guess it really depends on
how you define it. If you define MHR to be "the maximum heart rate you
could ever possibly achieve," then, sure, there's some theoretical
number--which you don't know--that you can't change by training.

OTOH, if you define MHR as "the maximum HR you can achieve right now,"
that's certainly going to depend on training since someone completely
out of shape isn't going to be able to run (or whatever) long and hard
enough to get close to the theoretical MHR.

--Harold Buck

"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

11-18-2004, 11:56 AM

"A. J." wrote:

> The problem with using you MHR to determine LT for workout zone is that
> you MHR is independent of fitness (genetics and age dependent) while your
> LT will increase as your fitness increases. However, on average, LT is
> approximately 85% of MHR.
> AJ

I know that when you work on aerobic power your LT increases so you can run
or bike faster, but your LT HR remain about the same.

carlo
Ferrara (Italy)