Finding max hr. and training zones.
 

I have a question about finding a persons max heartrate. Is it the
average heart rate over a set time like a min. or is it the max rate
that you can get your heart up to. I ran the Wabasha bidge last year
as fast as I could and at the top I reached 192. So I used that number
as the base for setting my zones last year. But last month I did a
sprint (Skate skiing) workout up some hills balls out and I topped out
at 196. So is that my max or was that really my max plus 110%?

A max HR test of the kind you ran should be set up as a series of
~1-minute runs (after warming up), building up to a final go (typically
4x). There's a track test that's good for this with running (do a
google search), or you can use a long hill, such as that bridge.
It helps to have a friend to hold the watch and egg you on. Steve's
correct about the usefulness of LT for most of us. Do you have any
1-2hr ski race results? That will give you an indication of your LT
for that length of time, tho note that skating HRs will typically be
higher than striding (and on snow a bit higher than rollerskis). For
running, to clarify, the LT-HR is the highest one (hardest) at which you
can maintain a steady pace (once warmed up) for 30-60 minutes. Piotr
Bednarski (http://www.gotraining.us/) does multisport lactate testing
in the TC and Prof. Dan Carey of St. Thomas does testing on a treadmill
or bike in their lab for a relatively low fee
(http://www.stthomas.edu/hhp/FacultyIndex/Carey.htm).

Gene

"Steve Thatcher" wrote:

You max heart rate will usually be higher for sking than running
because you are using your arms as well. More muscles involved, more
load on the heart, higher rate. Most people base their training zones
on Lactate Threshold heart rate. That is because LTHR is a better
indication of potential and it can be trained. LTHR is the item you
want to get higher. Read up on it. A good way to determine LTHR is
to go as heard as you can for 30-60 minutes and take your average HR
during that period. Then look up the zones bases on LTHR and plan
from there.

Hi all, I'm J, from The Netherlands, 29y/o.
I'm new here, this is my first-ever newsgroup post, hope all works out okay.

When I was at the gym, many years ago, I helped the manager figure out the
new treadmill and it's built-in software. One was the "Bruce Test", and I
was appointed volunteer to take it. Instructions said to keep so and so many
nurses and so and so many doctors with heart equipment ready. It's a hard
test.
It started with a relaxed walk up a slight slope, and over the course of
maybe 5 or 10 minutes, speed and slope were increased, till at one point I
ran 10.8km/u at 14% I think it was.
I had to indicate a couple seconds before totally crashing down, so the
emergency button could be hit and the mills brought a a no-too-abrubt halt.
My final heartrate was 203bpm. On a bike, I am a mountainbike racere, onder
many different conditions, I had always given 195 as a max.

So if you have a similar hill around, and used to some running, warm up a
bit, and then attack the hill with an ever-increasing intensity such that
you pretty much drop dead after a minute or 5-10. On a bike a test up to
20mins is fine. As long as the heartrate and intensity are increased fast
enough that fatigue is not a factor, neither is the slow response of the
heart, and not too quick for the muscles to run full of acid.

I'm a XC ski newbie, never done anything but one evening of indoor
snowboarding, and my mind is now set on becoming an XC skier in a pretty
much snowless country. I'd be interested to see myself beat my own present
running max heartrate (it's bound to be lower af ter a few years) on ski's,
ever. My first attemps on my www.crosskate.com skates hardly see me get
aerobic at all, due to toal lack of skills. I get exhausted though, and want
more.

I'll be reading back 3200 posts now,

J

"Gene Goldenfeld" schreef in bericht
et...
A max HR test of the kind you ran should be set up as a series of
~1-minute runs (after warming up), building up to a final go (typically
4x). There's a track test that's good for this with running (do a
google search), or you can use a long hill, such as that bridge.
It helps to have a friend to hold the watch and egg you on. Steve's
correct about the usefulness of LT for most of us. Do you have any
1-2hr ski race results? That will give you an indication of your LT
for that length of time, tho note that skating HRs will typically be
higher than striding (and on snow a bit higher than rollerskis). For
running, to clarify, the LT-HR is the highest one (hardest) at which you
can maintain a steady pace (once warmed up) for 30-60 minutes. Piotr
Bednarski (http://www.gotraining.us/) does multisport lactate testing
in the TC and Prof. Dan Carey of St. Thomas does testing on a treadmill
or bike in their lab for a relatively low fee
(http://www.stthomas.edu/hhp/FacultyIndex/Carey.htm).

Gene

"Steve Thatcher" wrote:

You max heart rate will usually be higher for sking than running
because you are using your arms as well. More muscles involved, more
load on the heart, higher rate. Most people base their training zones
on Lactate Threshold heart rate. That is because LTHR is a better
indication of potential and it can be trained. LTHR is the item you
want to get higher. Read up on it. A good way to determine LTHR is
to go as heard as you can for 30-60 minutes and take your average HR
during that period. Then look up the zones bases on LTHR and plan
from there.

Jan, try regular rollerskis instead of crosskates, which are more of a
gimmick or specialty item.

The treadmill test has a standard protocol or two. The problem, which
you indirectly allude to, is building up to max HR too quickly.
My experience is that a common way the test is given is relatively
linear in buildup, not allowing sufficient time for physiologic
adaptations at each level. A typical max HR/VO2 max test for someone
with average capacity is done in more or less 11 minutes, with no
warmup outside the test. Imagine going from cold to more than max
(hyperventilation) in a workout in 11 minutes, or a few more for those
of us with higher limits. Some years ago Stephen Seilor of Norway fame
wrote me that tests for Norwegian skiers allowed their normal warmup
and typically took somewhere closer to 30 minutes. That's not all
capacity.

Gene

"Jan Gerrit Klok" wrote:

Hi all, I'm J, from The Netherlands, 29y/o.
I'm new here, this is my first-ever newsgroup post, hope all works
out okay.

When I was at the gym, many years ago, I helped the manager figure
out the new treadmill and it's built-in software. One was the "Bruce
Test", and I was appointed volunteer to take it. Instructions said to
keep so and so many nurses and so and so many doctors with heart
equipment ready. It's a hard test.
It started with a relaxed walk up a slight slope, and over the course
of maybe 5 or 10 minutes, speed and slope were increased, till at one
point I ran 10.8km/u at 14% I think it was.
I had to indicate a couple seconds before totally crashing down, so
the emergency button could be hit and the mills brought a a
no-too-abrubt halt. My final heartrate was 203bpm. On a bike, I am a
mountainbike racere, onder many different conditions, I had always
given 195 as a max.

So if you have a similar hill around, and used to some running, warm
up a bit, and then attack the hill with an ever-increasing intensity
such that you pretty much drop dead after a minute or 5-10. On a bike
a test up to 20mins is fine. As long as the heartrate and intensity
are increased fast enough that fatigue is not a factor, neither is
the slow response of the heart, and not too quick for the muscles to
run full of acid.

I'm a XC ski newbie, never done anything but one evening of indoor
snowboarding, and my mind is now set on becoming an XC skier in a
pretty much snowless country. I'd be interested to see myself beat my
own present running max heartrate (it's bound to be lower af ter a
few years) on ski's, ever. My first attemps on my www.crosskate.com
skates hardly see me get aerobic at all, due to toal lack of skills.
I get exhausted though, and want more.

I'll be reading back 3200 posts now,

J

"Gene Goldenfeld" schreef in bericht
et...
A max HR test of the kind you ran should be set up as a series of
~1-minute runs (after warming up), building up to a final go
(typically 4x). There's a track test that's good for this with
running (do a google search), or you can use a long hill, such as
that bridge. It helps to have a friend to hold the watch and egg
you on. Steve's correct about the usefulness of LT for most of us.
Do you have any 1-2hr ski race results? That will give you an
indication of your LT for that length of time, tho note that
skating HRs will typically be higher than striding (and on snow a
bit higher than rollerskis). For running, to clarify, the LT-HR is
the highest one (hardest) at which you can maintain a steady pace
(once warmed up) for 30-60 minutes. Piotr Bednarski
(http://www.gotraining.us/) does multisport lactate testing in the
TC and Prof. Dan Carey of St. Thomas does testing on a treadmill or
bike in their lab for a relatively low fee
(http://www.stthomas.edu/hhp/FacultyIndex/Carey.htm).

Gene

"Steve Thatcher" wrote:

You max heart rate will usually be higher for sking than running
because you are using your arms as well. More muscles involved,
more load on the heart, higher rate. Most people base their
training zones on Lactate Threshold heart rate. That is because
LTHR is a better indication of potential and it can be trained.
LTHR is the item you want to get higher. Read up on it. A good
way to determine LTHR is to go as heard as you can for 30-60
minutes and take your average HR during that period. Then look
up the zones bases on LTHR and plan from there.

Gene, as I replied on my own thread, rollerski-speeds freak me out, I might
as well leaves the poles at hole and swing my arms skating skeelers?

For each athlete the ideal protocol (highest heartrate reached) will be
different, I think.

Perhaps if a fit cyclist accompanies a runner on an ever-steepening hill, he
could set a pace that would increase ~0,5km/h every minute. Start on the
flat, 7km/u, a mild job. 10 minutes later you're fighting your way up the
steepening hill at 12km/u. The moment you let go of the bike's rear wheel
for more than a couple meters, you ought to be on the road like an XC skier
at the finishline. Maybe harder to execute than I'm telling it.
Bike needs a rear rack and towel for the runner to be brought back down the
hill safely :-)

"Gene Goldenfeld" schreef in bericht
et...
Jan, try regular rollerskis instead of crosskates, which are more of a
gimmick or specialty item.

The treadmill test has a standard protocol or two. The problem, which
you indirectly allude to, is building up to max HR too quickly.
My experience is that a common way the test is given is relatively
linear in buildup, not allowing sufficient time for physiologic
adaptations at each level. A typical max HR/VO2 max test for someone
with average capacity is done in more or less 11 minutes, with no
warmup outside the test. Imagine going from cold to more than max
(hyperventilation) in a workout in 11 minutes, or a few more for those
of us with higher limits. Some years ago Stephen Seilor of Norway fame
wrote me that tests for Norwegian skiers allowed their normal warmup
and typically took somewhere closer to 30 minutes. That's not all
capacity.

Gene

"Jan Gerrit Klok" wrote:

Hi all, I'm J, from The Netherlands, 29y/o.
I'm new here, this is my first-ever newsgroup post, hope all works
out okay.

When I was at the gym, many years ago, I helped the manager figure
out the new treadmill and it's built-in software. One was the "Bruce
Test", and I was appointed volunteer to take it. Instructions said to
keep so and so many nurses and so and so many doctors with heart
equipment ready. It's a hard test.
It started with a relaxed walk up a slight slope, and over the course
of maybe 5 or 10 minutes, speed and slope were increased, till at one
point I ran 10.8km/u at 14% I think it was.
I had to indicate a couple seconds before totally crashing down, so
the emergency button could be hit and the mills brought a a
no-too-abrubt halt. My final heartrate was 203bpm. On a bike, I am a
mountainbike racere, onder many different conditions, I had always
given 195 as a max.

So if you have a similar hill around, and used to some running, warm
up a bit, and then attack the hill with an ever-increasing intensity
such that you pretty much drop dead after a minute or 5-10. On a bike
a test up to 20mins is fine. As long as the heartrate and intensity
are increased fast enough that fatigue is not a factor, neither is
the slow response of the heart, and not too quick for the muscles to
run full of acid.

I'm a XC ski newbie, never done anything but one evening of indoor
snowboarding, and my mind is now set on becoming an XC skier in a
pretty much snowless country. I'd be interested to see myself beat my
own present running max heartrate (it's bound to be lower af ter a
few years) on ski's, ever. My first attemps on my www.crosskate.com
skates hardly see me get aerobic at all, due to toal lack of skills.
I get exhausted though, and want more.

I'll be reading back 3200 posts now,

J

"Gene Goldenfeld" schreef in bericht
et...
A max HR test of the kind you ran should be set up as a series of
~1-minute runs (after warming up), building up to a final go
(typically 4x). There's a track test that's good for this with
running (do a google search), or you can use a long hill, such as
that bridge. It helps to have a friend to hold the watch and egg
you on. Steve's correct about the usefulness of LT for most of us.
Do you have any 1-2hr ski race results? That will give you an
indication of your LT for that length of time, tho note that
skating HRs will typically be higher than striding (and on snow a
bit higher than rollerskis). For running, to clarify, the LT-HR is
the highest one (hardest) at which you can maintain a steady pace
(once warmed up) for 30-60 minutes. Piotr Bednarski
(http://www.gotraining.us/) does multisport lactate testing in the
TC and Prof. Dan Carey of St. Thomas does testing on a treadmill or
bike in their lab for a relatively low fee
(http://www.stthomas.edu/hhp/FacultyIndex/Carey.htm).

Gene

"Steve Thatcher" wrote:

You max heart rate will usually be higher for sking than running
because you are using your arms as well. More muscles involved,
more load on the heart, higher rate. Most people base their
training zones on Lactate Threshold heart rate. That is because
LTHR is a better indication of potential and it can be trained.
LTHR is the item you want to get higher. Read up on it. A good
way to determine LTHR is to go as heard as you can for 30-60
minutes and take your average HR during that period. Then look
up the zones bases on LTHR and plan from there.

In article ,
"Jan Gerrit Klok" wrote:

Gene, as I replied on my own thread, rollerski-speeds freak me out, I might
as well leaves the poles at hole and swing my arms skating skeelers?

Skeelers are typically considerably faster than rollerskis; it is
probably not the speed but the balance and feel of rollerskis (which
differs considerably from that of skeelers) to which you are not yet
accustomed. However, it does not take too long to adapt to the feel of
rollerskis; it's probably a good idea, if you can, to find someone
experienced in rollerski training to help you get started.

[...]

Hi Steve,

I am interested in your comment below.

Steve Thatcher wrote:
You max heart rate will usually be higher for sking than running
because you are using your arms as well. More muscles involved, more
load on the heart, higher rate. Most people base their training zones
on Lactate Threshold heart rate. That is because LTHR is a better
indication of potential and it can be trained. LTHR is the item you
want to get higher. Read up on it. A good way to determine LTHR is to
go as heard as you can for 30-60 minutes and take your average HR
during that period. Then look up the zones bases on LTHR and plan from
there.

I thought this as well. Until I got tested.

First a bit of background. I was doing triathalon training and had some
treadmill testing done. This is where they crank up the speed every
three minutes until you cannot continue. They monitor your heartrate
and every three minutes take a blood sample. The blood is used to
figure out the latate levels. At the end of the day you get your
standard set of five training zones. (The LTHR being the boundry
between zones 2 and zone 3.)

They did the same thing for me on a bike. The bike zones were about 20%
lower.

The following winter I did a similar test with me skiing around a 400m
track. The surprising results were that the ski zones were about the
same as the bike zones, not higher than the run zones as I would have
expected.

My skiing ability is far superior to my running and cycling ability
(~20 years of ski training as opposed to two of triathlon training).
Two other people we tested that day and they had similar results. (I
skate skied they did classic). I understand the theory of more muscles
involved = more load on the heart, so I have always been puzzeled by
the results.

Is it generally known that the ski zones are higher? Is it highly
variable between individuals? Has anyone else been tested in a similar
manner for skiing?

Cheers,
Alvis

Wouldn't lactate levels be different for each sport? With the little running
I do I just seem to get "cramped" (not cramps) near the end of an up-tempo
10km. With cycling, depending on the shape I'm in, the lactate can become a
huge pain all through the legs.
Skating I have to build technique to get even close to the red zone.

There's lots possible with LTHR's to complicate things. On my first bike
lactate test, I had a huge dip in lactate as I came close to the HR
threshold. My body seemed to get rid of lactate super effective at that
heartrate, I that period I actually enjoyed the burn of 1.5-2hr maximum
rides. In training if I slowed down a little bit, I would get the full
lactate and just about die. If I'd crank it up, the pain would go. Far from
usual, but very real. Riding hard was fun then, now it's a chore.

Perhaps the ability to breath freely also affects how well your heart
perform and how badly lactate builds.

"Alvis" schreef in bericht
ups.com...
Hi Steve,

I am interested in your comment below.

Steve Thatcher wrote:
You max heart rate will usually be higher for sking than running
because you are using your arms as well. More muscles involved, more
load on the heart, higher rate. Most people base their training zones
on Lactate Threshold heart rate. That is because LTHR is a better
indication of potential and it can be trained. LTHR is the item you
want to get higher. Read up on it. A good way to determine LTHR is to
go as heard as you can for 30-60 minutes and take your average HR
during that period. Then look up the zones bases on LTHR and plan from
there.

I thought this as well. Until I got tested.

First a bit of background. I was doing triathalon training and had some
treadmill testing done. This is where they crank up the speed every
three minutes until you cannot continue. They monitor your heartrate
and every three minutes take a blood sample. The blood is used to
figure out the latate levels. At the end of the day you get your
standard set of five training zones. (The LTHR being the boundry
between zones 2 and zone 3.)

They did the same thing for me on a bike. The bike zones were about 20%
lower.

The following winter I did a similar test with me skiing around a 400m
track. The surprising results were that the ski zones were about the
same as the bike zones, not higher than the run zones as I would have
expected.

My skiing ability is far superior to my running and cycling ability
(~20 years of ski training as opposed to two of triathlon training).
Two other people we tested that day and they had similar results. (I
skate skied they did classic). I understand the theory of more muscles
involved = more load on the heart, so I have always been puzzeled by
the results.

Is it generally known that the ski zones are higher? Is it highly
variable between individuals? Has anyone else been tested in a similar
manner for skiing?

Cheers,
Alvis