Climbing and HR

Caroline_ie

Hi all!

LDB and me were having a little a chat about your HR and the way we climb. I know I am very slow lazy on climbs and it's very rare that I go above my anaerobic HR while climbing in WW got example and would spend most my climbing in my Aerobic zone too... never above 160/165.

*all this tells me I can push more and I am just a lazy cow.

Whats your's climbing HR?

zzzzzzzz

Caroline_ie wrote: »

Hi all!

LDB and me were having a little a chat about your HR and the way we climb. I know I am very slow lazy on climbs and it's very rare that I go above my anaerobic HR while climbing in WW got example and would spend most my climbing in my Aerobic zone too... never above 160/165.

*all this tells me I can push more and I am just a lazy cow.

Whats your's climbing HR?

I'd usually aim to climb at around 80% HR out training but would often hit 90-95%.

Lumen

My max HR on the bike is 190, and that was on Kippure.

My "flat out on long climb" rate is 180.

I normally climb at 160-170.

I'm 35, with a RHR of about 80. :eek:

ROK ON

Pretty much try to stay under 175bpm. But will go up to 185/190bpm om steep gradients.
It is at this popint that Lumen tells me that I am pushinh myself too hard (which maybe the case).
I find that if I start a climb at 150 and push up to 165/170 that I can sustain it for quiet a long while. But that sometimes means takin cadence breaks (ie slowing down to reduce hr before the next steep bit).

When I go over 180 breathing becomes problematic.

36yrs and 95kg fwiw.

Chips Lovell

Caroline_ie wrote: »

Whats your's climbing HR?

Most hills I'd be at around 90% or more of my max HR

Lumen wrote: »

My max HR on the bike is 190, and that was on Kippure.

My "flat out on long climb" rate is 180.

I normally climb at 160-170.

I'm 35, with a RHR of about 80. :eek:

My max HR is 193. Going very hard is 180 for me too. Usually climb around 170-175. But what I really want to know is how your RHR is 80? You're in pretty good shape, right? Even when I'm going full bore on the cancer sticks, mine is around 70ish. Off the smokes it appears to be nearer the high fifties.

Caroline_ie

I can hit and hit the 180's if I want to ... have done up hill too, but legs hurt ... is that the proof i am really lazy?

I am 29 and resting HR is 49.

/Phew

So many acronyms in this thread.

TLAs FTW!

Chips Lovell

What's your max, Caroline?

If your legs are hurting at high HR it sounds like maybe it's them that are the weak spot?

But there is a certain amount of pain (delicious pain) always to be found on climbs.

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

But what I really want to know is how your RHR is 80? You're in pretty good shape, right? Even when I'm going full bore on the cancer sticks, mine is around 70ish. Off the smokes it appears to be nearer the high fifties.

I have no idea why - it's always been that way. It probably means that heart problems will kill me before cancer or stroke; I read some research which (I think) suggests this, and suggested there might be underlying heart problems, but when I raised it with my GP she didn't seem that bothered.

I got a full batch of heart and blood tests done recently (including 24 hours with a holter monitor including a Wicklow spin) and it didn't turn anything up.

Hopefully a few years of cycling should sort it out, but it definitely beats dying from cancer.

ROK ON

My legs have never really hurt on a clim. Usually if I push too hard I get to a point where I simply have run out of breath. I hate that.
Sometimes get back pain but think that was due to seat position.

Caroline_ie

el tonto wrote: »

What's your max, Caroline?

If your legs are hurting at high HR it sounds like maybe it's them that are the weak spot?

Not sure what my max is probably 191. never been there ...

The pain is muscle lactic acid build up pain thingy in my thighs ... the same pain that we re supposed to embrace as cyclists.

Maybe I should give the pain a go like Jens does and feel Ze taste of ze blood in mein mout ...

Chips Lovell

That's what I'd try.

crashoveroid

When i climb i try to keep it around my Lactate Threshold which is between 178 and 182 . But flat out on a climb my heart rate will hit its max of 205 but wont be long till i blow my lights .

DirkVoodoo

I need to start using my HR monitor, no idea of what my max is, I just go by effort. Most times on a climb I don't push myself too hard, but I also have quite a low limit, when it starts to hurt I tend to ease off.

That hill in wicklow that Blorg took us up last year, after meeting some farmer in a tractor, is one of the few times I have felt like my heart was going to burst out of my chest.

I am reminded of that Kimmage story about Sean Kelly in the Sauna, I don't think I would even be stepping inside the thing, that's how bad I am.

Is a burst up kippure at full tilt the best way to work out my max HR?

ROK ON

+1 on what Tonto says about pain.

There are two types. (1) the pain of over exertion and you are about to blow. (2) the pain of a heavy bloke climbing at a limit that is just about sustainable for the entire climb.
The 2nd one I got on Shay Elliott climb from Laragh, the first one I get on Shay Elliott from Drumgoff bridge.

One is brilliant. You feel like an eagle (a big fat bloated eagle, but an eagle nonetheless).
Interesting thing is that the HR diff between the 2 for me is only about 5 to 7bpm.

LDB

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I need to start using my HR monitor, no idea of what my max is, I just go by effort.

I'm the same. Going to start using one from tomorrow if I can find it. One of the lads in the club suggested that I use one for training on the hills.

blorg

Depends on the length of the climb. If you go anerobic on a long climb and don't get to the top you could be fecked. A short bump you can power over it and recover on the way down.

Generally for climbing I would think keep it aerobic. Main reason you need to be able to go anaerobic would be to close gaps in a race, etc. - e.g. you just have to put in the effort to stay in the bunch (due to the aero benefits) and you can recover later.

In general if in a time trial or other situation where aerodynamics advantage is not relevant I believe a steady sustainable approach will get you the best time.

If actually time trialling over typical distances you want to near kill yourself but if doing a longer event pacing is essential.

For your situation though if planning on the Marmotte next year I think you need to stay aerobic and focus on the endurance; this is also most effective for sustaining weight loss which is essential for attempting that event.

This is what I averaged during the Marmotte climbs, I was giving it a go for the best time I could manage (my max is 200:)

Glandon - 168 (84%) 1h30 - two small descents on this so actual climbing HR a tad higher
Telegraph - 166 (83%) 1h01
Galibier - 157 (78.5%) 1h40
Alpe d'Huez - 158 (79%) 1h24

As you can see there is a drop off on the later climbs (I certainly felt weaker), I wonder if I went too hard at the beginning.

By contrast last night's race averaged 174 (87%) for a bit over an hour, that was very jumpy so was well above and well below... last week's 16km time trial a more consistent 184 (92%) for a shorter period, not that it helped me get a good time!

blorg

Caroline_ie wrote: »

The pain is muscle lactic acid build up pain thingy in my thighs ... the same pain that we re supposed to embrace as cyclists.

That is also the pain that lead to cramps and will prevent you from finishing a long distance hilly event... pacing is essential. If you have pain in the legs but no problems breathing try going into an easier gear and increasing your cadence. You want to avoid the burning lactic acid build up pain at all costs, the only place that has a place is racing where you are bridging a gap or sprinting to the finish. Bring it on in an endurance event and you will compromise your performance later. Weary muscle/contact point pain later in an event is a different sort of pain, to be expected and somewhat unavoidable.

ROK ON

Stupid question, in that I should know the answer.
But at what %hr does one cease to be aerobic.

DirkVoodoo

ROK ON wrote: »

Stupid question, in that I should know the answer.
But at what %hr does one cease to be aerobic.

Is it over 80%?

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Is a burst up kippure at full tilt the best way to work out my max HR?

I find the whole "max" thing a bit confusing. On the bike, off the bike, in the saddle, out of the saddle?

I prefer to base effort on actual data from group rides where I am pushed right to my limits.

Here is some data from a recent hard group ride including a decent hill:

Peak 1min: 353W, 175 bpm
Peak 2min: 337W, 171 bpm
Peak 5min: 317W, 173 bpm
Peak 10min: 293W, 174 bpm
Peak 20min: 246W, 167 bpm
Peak 30min: 215W, 162 bpm
Peak 60min: 198W, 157 bpm

This illustrates several things:

- Over short intervals (<10 min) HR is not a good indicator of actual effort (power).

- Despite the theory that threshold is the max effort you can sustain for an hour, it is very difficult to ride at this pace for one hour. Threshold is approx 95% of peak 20min power, which would give 235W here, but my peak 60min power was only 198W. Then again it was a 100k ride.

I think you should therefore try to find a 20 minute climb, which you hit the start of at decent pace, and go hard for the whole thing, in and out of the saddle. Reset the lap timer at the bottom and when you finish the effort, and take the average HR as your "20 minute max". Maybe take a stronger companion to shout encouragement and boost you along. Check after the ride (in Garmin TC) that you didn't fade at the end - if you did that probably means you didn't pace correctly and went too hard at the start.

You can then subtract a couple of BPM and use that as the "threshold" around which you climb.

HTH.

Poncherello

I think it depends on the individual, you need to do a VO2 max test where they take blood samples every 3 minutes to determine exactly where it is.

niceonetom

In an actual distance event lactic acid should, of course, be avoided, but as I understand it, the way to raise your lactic threshold and get more comfortable at hight BPMs is to go over it. Sure, on a Saturday spin that might make the ride home a little more painful but that's the price of changing your physiology.

It's important to make a strong distinction between racing and challenge sportives (Marmotte etc) on one hand where conservation of resources is paramount, and training on the other hand, where judicious use of overgearing, over threshold BPMs, grinding, spinning, etc. can all serve a purpose that goes beyond getting you up the hill you are climbing at that very moment.

or

Stay aerobic on the marmotte. Go anaerobic (very) to train for the marmotte.

penexpers

All this talk has me tempted to buy a HRM.

Chips Lovell

Good advice from Tom there, methinks.

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

Stay aerobic on the marmotte. Go anaerobic (very) to train for the marmotte.

AFAIK anaerobic training is useful to improve lactate tolerance and recovery from anaerobic efforts, but the recommended way to raise your lactate threshold is to train at it.

That means 20 minute intervals.

Training for racing is a different kettle of fish.

In other words, train for the event.

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

- Despite the theory that threshold is the max effort you can sustain for an hour, it is very difficult to ride at this pace for one hour. Threshold is approx 95% of peak 20min power, which would give 235W here, but my peak 60min power was only 198W. Then again it was a 100k ride.

I think the fact it was a three hour ride is very relevant, riding at threshold for an hour will probably leave you unable to stand up never mind ride a bike for a further two hours.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

I think the fact it was a three hour ride is very relevant, riding at threshold for an hour will probably leave you unable to stand up never mind ride a bike for a further two hours.

Yeah, I keep meaning to do a 1hr TT, but I'm too lazy.

Trojan

175-180 is the max I like to go, tipping along at 165-170 is enough to keep me going.

RHR was 43 at my fittest last year (measured by sleeping with HRM on and checking first thing in morning).

Trojan

Also I believe that the best way to prepare for anything is to do it. E.g. nothing prepares you for playing 80 minutes of a rugby match except playing 80 minutes of a rugby match (why training != match fitness). I'm sure most of the same principles carry over to cycling and other sports.

scottreynolds

My experience is somewhat different. I have a fairly good felling of where my HR is sustainable, about 170. As soon as I go over that I start to really feel the plain and usually end up slowing down. I have averaged around 170 for the 25m TT I have done but I'm going to do more TT workouts after the cycling season is done.

Endurance training is more important than lactate threshold training for a sportive. Threshold training is the icing on the cake to make you stronger / faster.

rflynnr

Stupid question alert: when we're talking about max HR here, are we referring to a theoretical maximum arrived at using something like the 220-age formula or do we mean highest actually observed HR?

Chips Lovell

The former is very inaccurate. The latter is the way to go.

rflynnr

scottreynolds wrote: »

I have averaged around 170 for the 25m TT I have done but I'm going to do more TT workouts after the cycling season is done.

170 bpm over 25 metres? This is not good.

Trojan

rflynnr wrote: »

Stupid question alert: when we're talking about max HR here, are we referring to a theoretical maximum arrived at using something like the 220-age formula or do we mean highest actually observed HR?

The former is normally the way it's done (but inaccurate). The latter is more accurate but only if you really, really, really push it. I don't like to do that to my heart, even on crazy climbs

Chips Lovell

Trojan wrote: »

I don't like to do that to my heart, even on crazy climbs

I think someone needs to say hello to the wimp list.

Lumen

scottreynolds wrote: »

Endurance training is more important than lactate threshold training for a sportive. Threshold training is the icing on the cake to make you stronger / faster.

It depends on how long the sportive is. I assume since you're a hard b'stard you mean anything over an imperial century, in which case I'd agree.

For fast rides under four hours threshold training is useful, IMO. Obviously you still need an endurance base.

ISTR one of the racers saying that he hadn't done more than 100km before the WW200, and he did it hours faster than me.

scottreynolds

Lumen wrote: »

For fast rides under four hours threshold training is useful, IMO. Obviously you still need an endurance base.

One hour at my threshold was hard enough.... infact if you threshold is your max one hour effort you can't do it for four hours surely......

Lumen

scottreynolds wrote: »

One hour at my threshold was hard enough.... infact if you threshold is your max one hour effort you can't do it for four hours surely......

That's not the point, or rather is exactly the point.

If your threshold is 200W, then sustaining 200W for 4 hours is impossible.
If your threshold is 300W, then sustaining 200W for 4 hours is a piece of cake.

So, raising your threshold (bigger engine) will make you faster in endurance events.

Endurance training essentially gives you a bigger fuel tank, so you don't blow up 2 hours in.

rflynnr

Lumen wrote: »

That's not the point, or rather is exactly the point.

If your threshold is 200W, then sustaining 200W for 4 hours is impossible.
If your threshold is 300W, then sustaining 200W for 4 hours is a piece of cake.

So, raising your threshold (bigger engine) will make you faster in endurance events.

Endurance training essentially gives you a bigger fuel tank, so you don't blow up 2 hours in.

Why is it that these kind of contributions ineluctably lead me to have visions of Lumen wearing a white coat while staring at a multiplicity of computer monitors in a secret room in his house? The man is a source of reams of data: betcha he's had his head upgraded with extra RAM.

Trojan

el tonto wrote: »

I think someone needs to say hello to the wimp list.

Happy to go tackle v tackle with you on a rugby pitch

Chips Lovell

Trojan wrote: »

Happy to go tackle v tackle with you on a rugby pitch

Deal. I've been sent off more times then you've had hot dinners.

Trojan

el tonto wrote: »

Deal. I've been sent off more times then you've had hot dinners.

I see, well if that's how you want to play it, fair enough

Chips Lovell

I'm sure pink-jersey-wearing-heart-rate-maxing ROK_ON will take you up on that as well.

Trojan

No probs. Two of you might make it fair.

Diarmuid

scottreynolds wrote: »

Endurance training is more important than lactate threshold training for a sportive. Threshold training is the icing on the cake to make you stronger / faster.

I guess it depends on your level. Lots of sportives are run over hills/mountains. Here you can drive up at your threshold say for 20min-1hr and recover on the descent before the next climb. However if you are just starting out then obviously you need to be able to make the distance first before worrying about doing it as fast as possible.

My HR on climbs in a race is about 183. (max around 200). It's tough work.

Chips Lovell

Trojan wrote: »

No probs. Two of you might make it fair.

Ooooh. I love the trash talk.

Trojan

el tonto wrote: »

Ooooh. I love the trash talk.

Oh yeah? Oh yeah? Well my dad...

(and don't you make me use a gawddamn smiley here)

niceonetom

el tonto wrote: »

Deal. I've been sent off more times then you've had hot dinners.

Ah tonto, In fairness to Trojan I think he's had a fair few hot dinners.

**Timbuk2**

My Max HR is 204 (well it was the highest I ever got on a bike!).
My Resting HR is 46.

When I climb, it's only in the 165-175 range - I think my legs need more work

When I'm sprinting or going really fast, it can be in the 180s or 190s.

Trojan

niceonetom wrote: »

Ah tonto, In fairness to Trojan I think he's had a fair few hot dinners.

rofl. True.