Heart rate nearly always high - overdoing it?

[Nearholmer]

Why are ‘we’ (and I include myself in that), obsessed with what our max HR might be?

Personally, I’m only interested in it because it gives a peg from which to hang various intensities of exercise, and at that level I’m convinced that it has value.

I know that I can trundle along for hours on end, days in a row, not really getting tired if I stay below 80%HR, fed, and watered. Take it up to 90%HR, and my ability to sustain it drops noticeably, while residual tiredness increases a bit, and go above 90%HR and I can really only take it in short bursts, otherwise it leaves me a bit whacked the next day.

And, so what? Well, I can look at a route, and the weather, and take a fair stab how it will turn out in terms of the above, so how tiring or not it will be, whether I will feel whacked the next day, and whether it is completely beyond me, all of which is useful stuff.

I found it particularly useful when building-up after covid, because I used HR and duration as the two things that I progressively, gently increased over time, and that avoided the “go too hard then relapse” problems suffered by both my son and my neighbour.

And yes, having restarted “proper cycling” in my late 50s, I can say that something, presumably power at given HR, does improve with practise (and fall away again surprisingly quickly if you cease to exercise enough). Quite how/why it improves, I’m not sure, but I’d guess in my case mainly aerobically, cos I don’t think my legs have ever called a halt before heart and lungs.

[Dingdong]

I've been using a heart rate monitor in one form or another for about 20 years now, almost without a break. I record my resting pulse every morning, and in all those years it's rarely varied between 48bpm and 62bpm, which to me seems quite a steady, narrow range. It's not something I obsess about, but I have noticed that for no good reason there are 'bad' days when it might go up to 70/75 and on those days I tend to avoid intensity and big rides. It has to be said that occasionally these bad days often coincide with a night of boozing, which is a relatively rare thing for me.

Even when I had COVID it rarely pipped above 90 and I was really quite ill. I suppose it's good to keep a record of your general fitness, but also wise to take into account the fact your body is not a machine, and there are myriad factors which contribute to its overall performance and condition.

[Nearholmer]

Interesting you mention HR when you actually had covid, because I was astonished to find my resting, and I mean really, seriously, doing nothing, lying in bed, HR was 20-25 beats faster than normal for several days in a row …… it was like I was taking a slightly brisk walk for c100 hours uninterrupted, even while asleep, so it’s no wonder the bug leaves you worn out.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
When I had a resting heart rate of about 53 tho I never measured it in the morning, in my early 20s, I woke up in intensive care and was in hospital for just under two months, my heart rate never dropped below 100-110.
I left hospital after losing a third of my body weight.

I had just recovered approximately 40% of my lost body weight so still underweight, when I took up marathon running training again.
At this weight when I went back to work I realised my mistake when I got to Wednesday full time, but I made it through the week somehow.
I should've stayed off work at least 6 or more months even a year maybe.
I was bored out of my mind spending all day doing nothing, so I was only off work less than three months in total

I never return to successful running ever now 40 years on, took me 30 years to get back into regular exercise, Mostly due to the side-effects of medication which was not related to my stay in hospital but just the way my body developed hypertension early age.

Specific heart rate of an individual isn't really important, it's more important that if you want to get fit and stay fit that you can hit some percentages of your max for periods of time in the week.

The fitness the lack of it, slope will steepen With age, if you don't puff a bit, sweat and grit your teeth whilst exercising.
Three1 hour sessions a week would change most peoples lives.

[Nearholmer]

Sounds awful. What on earth was it that hit you so hard at such a young age?

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Ruptured spleen from a motor accident.

Several litres of blood in the abdomen.
Took a whole week for them to work out what was wrong with me they just suspected and then decided to scan me after one week.

Four operations later, one to remove A clot in my leg artery.
I now have PAD in that leg, which can't be cured or treated, except with antiplatelet medication and exercise, Exercise mostly will stabilise the situation, but at the present time there is nothing can be done, they and I suspect that the restriction in my artery at the moment is probably scar tissue from the original operation to remove the clot.

[Nearholmer]

Nasty!

Best of fortune in managing the condition.

[tenko]

Maybe check out "MAF" heart rate, 180 minus age plus adjustments. This is roughly consistent with Zone 2 training. At this heart rate you are working your aerobic base. Most people are surprised how low it is and how slow they need to go.

Alternatively, take the advice of the first replier and ride mostly at the pace where you can maintain a conversation apart from steep hills.

[Blondie]

According to the 220 minus age formula, my max heart rate is 157, but I regularly see HR above 160. 169 the other day and 163 on today’s ride, without going particularly hard or going up any big hills.

It’s a trend line, some will be above some below and some on it. It’s not and never was intended to calculate a max heart rate for an individual.

[TrevA]

According to the 220 minus age formula, my max heart rate is 157, but I regularly see HR above 160. 169 the other day and 163 on today’s ride, without going particularly hard or going up any big hills.

It’s a trend line, some will be above some below and some on it. It’s not and never was intended to calculate a max heart rate for an individual.

That was mainly my point. The 220-age formula is not necessarily true for any individual. I don’t worry that my heart rate is higher than might be expected, or that a higher than expected heart rate means you are overdoing it. Some of us are Diesels and some are Ferraris.

[Blondie]

Some of us are Diesels and some are Ferraris.

The diesels will pass the Ferraris, the latter broken down at the side of road, after their engines blew up from too much revving. Else the Ferrari will have crashed off side of road for similar reasons.

[Audax67]

Some of us are Diesels and some are Ferraris.

The diesels will pass the Ferraris, the latter broken down at the side of road, after their engines blew up from too much revving. Else the Ferrari will have crashed off side of road for similar reasons.

These days I'm a 1947 2CV (rara avis, that) with a dodgy dynamo cable and sine-wave steering.

Anyway, anent the OP's question my old GP (retd), who had interned in sports medicine, once told me that I didn't need to worry about how high I pushed my heart as long as it came down again. Other less agreeable authorities told me with relish that high heart rates might dislodge a bit of arterial plaque that could cause a stroke but I don't think they were cyclists so they don't count. And anyway you have to live before you die.

[maximus meridius]

I’ve been cycling now for about 3 years, and I’m in my early 40s. I was quite overweight when I started, but through cycling (and very little else) I’ve managed to reduce my weight to where I am now just about in a healthy BMI for the first time in over a decade. However, since I bought a heart rate monitor I’ve noticed that I spend a significant amount of time in the higher heart rate zones, and regularly hit close to my theoretical max heart rate.

Where I live it’s quite hilly and I find myself addicted to pushing myself up the local climbs, even though it’s definitely a slog at my current level of fitness. I certainly couldn’t talk to anyone while doing it, and I’m breathing hard. However, I get such a sense of achievement and rush at the top and feel energised for the rest of the ride. I never feel close to passing out - quite the opposite, I feel strong. But I’m usually good for nothing the next day.

Am I overdoing it? Should I be sticking to flatter (duller) routes along towpaths and cycle tracks until my fitness is improved, or should I trust my instincts that my body is coping with this and my fitness is improving? Would my fitness improve quicker if I took it easier (as some have suggested)?

For background, I recently had to see a cardiologist for what turned out to be a false alarm, so I’m pretty sure I have no underlying heart problems to worry about.

I wonder what you are using to determine your "theoretical max heart rate"?

A while ago, at the age of 62, the first time going up a short, but very steep hill, my heart hit 182 bpm. Whereas the usual 220-age would suggest that 158 is my maximum heart rate. 220-age is thought to be very unreliable, especially for older people.

Even the slightly more complex ways of calculating maximum heart rate:

https://www.brianmac.co.uk/maxhr.htm

...still only give me a maximum heart rate (then) in the low 160s.

(My resting heart rate, by the way, is in the low 60s.)

So I attempted to find my "real" maximum heart rate as it applies to cycling (because MHR is different for different activities, apparently) by doing something like number 3 from here:

https://padyakracingteam.com/2022/04/02/max-heart-rate/

There are various versions of the "outdoor hill climb test", but they are all more or less the same. My max heart rate then was 173. Though I think I could have tried harder. I daresay if I had prepared for it in terms of rest and nutrition, as though I was getting ready for a marathon or something, I might have tried harder, and got a higher MHR.

Anyway, the point is my MHR seems to be way higher than any of the calculation methods.

As far as I understand it, only a genuine supervised stress test can determine your maximum heart rate. I've thought about doing one, but I'm not an athlete in training, so precise measurement isn't that important to me. But to establish the "zones" this sort of thing might be as useful as any numbers:

https://www.bicycling.com/training/a200 ... ing-zones/

I often feel that I'm taking it a bit easy cycling, especially as I've got stronger. Even though my heart rate spends some time in the 140-150 range, which according to the calculated methods is close to my maximum.

I suspect your "maximum heart rate" is higher than you think.

My HRM is a polar H10, by the way. Which is usually thought to be very accurate.

[axel_knutt]

As far as I understand it, only a genuine supervised stress test can determine your maximum heart rate.

I've had two at the hospital, they terminated both of them at 220-age.

My HRM is a polar H10, by the way. Which is usually thought to be very accurate.

My HRM is a Polar M52, it's always agreed with the paramedics' ECGs.

[Blondie]

Whereas the usual 220-age would suggest that 158 is my maximum heart rate. 220-age is thought to be very unreliable, especially for older people.

That was never intended to give a max heart rate for a person. You cannot use a formula to determine your max heart rate, no more than you can use one to work out how tall you are.