I’m reading Total Heart Rate Training by Joe Friel. I did the LT threshold 30 minute test and came up with a heart rate of 172. When I look at the chart of heart rate zones it tells me that Z1 is anything below 146. My question is doesn’t that seem a bit high? Z2 is 146-156?
Seems a bit high to me. What’s the arithmetic you did, and how did the book define the zones?
(Different methodologies have different zone definitions and you’ll probably also have different zones for bike vs. run)
Personally, not a fan of using formulas for determination. However, those numbers seem relatively appropriate.
It was running. The book describes them as z1 active refinery z2 aerobic threshold z3 tempo z4 sub LT z5 LT.
I find Friel’s HR zones fairly accurate for both running and cycling. When appropriate, do the LT test again and confirm your data. Btw, age, weight, experience running, weekly mileage?
It’s been a while since I’ve looked at friels heart rate but I use coggan zones and z2 would be 118-143 if LT is at 172
http://freewebs.com/...2/traininglevels.pdf
.
When I tested myself I actually ended up at 172 myself, and used those same zones, ( though it was 146-153, not up to 156 ) and on the bike it was 139-156.
I tend to do my Z1 recovery runs at about 138-140ish, and try to do my Z2 work right around 150, though it usually averages 151-152 ish.
Link to friel’s blog with the calculation chart: http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2009/11/quick-guide-to-setting-zones.html
Very similar to mine which is 2 beats higher. Z1 is up to 148 for running and 142 for cycling. I’m sure it’s in his book, but worth noting it will be different for cycling. In most cases, your bike LT threshold will be lower than your running. And bike on trainer is usually lower than bike on the road. Everyone is different and assomeone else said, re-test over time.
Personally, not a fan of using formulas for determination. However, those numbers seem relatively appropriate.
Agree. If you look at a chart or charts of power, heart rate and stroke volume you will see that stroke volume is not constant.
Hearts behave very individually. It’s entirely possible for a 350 watt FTP individual to have a threshold heart rate of 160bpm but that same individual may have a higher heart rate at 200 watts than a 300 watt FTP individual who also has a threshold heart rate of 160bpm, because their stroke volume graph is different.
If you think about it, as heart rate is variable, one day your heart rate may be higher at a given wattage than another, that does not mean that you are pumping more blood for the same power, it may be that your heart is pumping the same amount of blood but the rate is higher because the stroke volume has decreased.
You can’t assume a heart is an electrical mechanical pump which has a constant stroke volume through from 40bpm to 200bpm. The stroke volume graph levels off and decreases close to maximum. Some people’s heart’s stroke volume increases more with the rate than others. One man’s heart’s stroke volume may level off or start to fall at lower rates compared to their maximum.
A question. How variable is an individual’s stroke rate day to day? Does the stroke rate / stroke volume ratio vary with fatigue and if so how much?
In my opinion we pay too much attention to heart rate because we can easily monitor it so we completely ignore stroke rate which is half the equation because we can’t easily measure it.
A HRM and a formula are cheaper and more accessible than professional help (whether a coach to help determine zones via RPE, or measuring SV). It’s a good tool for people getting into endurance sports and then after a time of following a plan they will learn the limitations of this particular measurement. You can say the same of limitations of power. If you could measure SV easily, would people then criticise that as you’d really want to measure cardiac output, would that then be criticised because you’d really want to measure leg blood flow, ad nauseam?
Heart rate zones are individual and “seems high” is based on what reference? JF has a pretty well used system of defining those zones along with testing methodology. If your LTHR test was valid and data correctly gathered, then I would not suspect the accuracy of the zone. It is individual to you.
A HRM and a formula are cheaper and more accessible than professional help (whether a coach to help determine zones via RPE, or measuring SV). It’s a good tool for people getting into endurance sports and then after a time of following a plan they will learn the limitations of this particular measurement. You can say the same of limitations of power. If you could measure SV easily, would people then criticise that as you’d really want to measure cardiac output, would that then be criticised because you’d really want to measure leg blood flow, ad nauseam?
I’m merely pointing out that setting zones using heart rate can be misleading because X% of threshold heart rate can be far easier for one man than another.
People should concentrate on RPE, along with pace / power, how their legs feel, how their breathing feels. We have an amazing on board monitoring and feedback system, which has been developed over millions of years evolution, it’s better to learn how to use that.
We can feel our breathing, this is because it’s important to feel how we are breathing. We can feel our muscles, that is because it’s important to feel our muscles. We can feel how hot we are because it’s important. We can’t feel how fast our heart is beating - it isnt part of the feedback system because we don’t need to know how fast it’s beating because it isn’t important.
I agree with your points. Tools are tools and useful for learning but most important is how we feel. Feelings themselves can be biased/corrupted so useful to have tools as a check and balance
Agreed, I find heart rate a useful tool but not for pacing or for training to. I find the info useful for looking back at and comparing like for like sessions.
It’s also useful to see if people are sandbagging or claiming they are finding sessions easy when they are obviously finding them hard. I’ve never met anyone who can force their heart to slow down or speed up regardless of the pace or wattage.
I find it extremely useful for runners who have a background of running at the same intensity all the time. You’ll give them an easy run and a tempo run and they’ll run them at the same heart rate. In those kind of scenarios a heart rate is invaluable. Also find it useful for pacing for long sessions (e.g. flat effort for 3 hours) where people generally tend to go out a little too hard when they’re feeling good.