Re: Training zones, Heart-rate, Advice, and Humbug

On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:55:17 -0400, jtaylor wrote:


"diablo" <diablo@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:AWcGf.189$iD.72@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"oarsman" <oarsman101@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1139351499.211476.56090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<snip>

I disagree with the notion that lactate is more reliable a measure - it
is just as, if not more so, vulnerable to confounding variables as
heart
rate.

HR varies a lot on very short timescale. try holding your breath. Lactate
might not be terribly useful as an absolute metric across different people
or even the same person under greatly varying circumstances (large time
differences, healthy/well, pre/post season) but it's usually more useful
than heart rates.

<snip>

The trouble with heart-rate seems to be two-fold. The first issue is
that the prediction of maximum HR is inaccurate - the varied formulas
suggested give a clue to the range of individual variation from any such
arithmetical determination. The second is that inexperienced people
will seize upon one of these (such as the obviously wrong 0.8 x
(22-age)) and having understood this crumb will proclaim it as the one
and only truth. Bombast is no substitute for wisdom.

A greater concern I'd have is the relationship between delta HR/delta PE
(perceived effort). I'm not entirely sure that this relationship is linear
or comparable between people. Particularly not between the extremes you
find within a squad of mature, trained, successful athletes. try
comparing the usefulness of calculations like critical velocity for a
miler vrs said accuracy/usefulness for a mature sprinter.

Here's a thought experiment:

Given a group of swimmers, some sprinters some distance athletes, compare
the span (max heart rate)-(heart rate post 1000m @ CV). I'll guarantee
that the span for the milers is smaller than it is for the sprinters. Even
very fit sprinters. And the sprinters CV will be slower than you'd think
it should be. If I'm even close to being right it wouldn't make a lot of
sense to tell a group to swim at MaxHR-15. Perhaps (MaxHR-CVHR)*0.8 or
something. Even that would only be useful if there's a dependable
relationship between W (work, let alone PE) and HR.

There aren't many who will stake much on HR being an accurate or precise
tool in real world situations.

--Mike
.

Relevant Pages