Options
HR monitors...Yay or Nay?
gruffymax
Posts: 21
in General Chat
I'm new to Triathlon and have already started my training. I cannot decide whether to use a HR monitor or not. I understand the benifits of training within a % zone, however I would like to see if anybody says no to this modern technology and just judges their 'zone'.
All opinions and ideas would be great!
Gareth
All opinions and ideas would be great!
Gareth
0
Comments
For example the next thread was partly about it: http://forum.220magazine.com/tm.asp?m=10016 .
I'll probably be one of the minority who doesn't use a hrm. Recent study in England has shown that people can actually recognise training zones through their own body's behaviour and reaction. There are guys in my club who can actually tell their heart rate almost exactlybefore even watching their hrm.[image]http://forum.220magazine.com/micons/m6.gif[/image]
I know that there will follow some pro-hrm propaganda now. I believe that hrm's can be helpfull, but definetely not a necescity.
(please don't shoot me all at once[8D]).
If im honest, I like the idea of training without one so that you feel more in tune with your body. Perhaps using one at first to demonstrate the zones and feelings related to 80% max would be useful.
Nice to back it all up with data though ;-)
When I am trying a new routine/workout I pay more attention, but once I have it nailed, I download & confirm..so as said before, a great toy/tool but do not become its slave...go run like you just stole something, go ride like you just got rid of your stabilisers, go swim like....ummm
I'm using one these days - it's a simple one though, without all the fancy gizzmo's and charts etc as I am a bit of a techno numpty and don't understand all that stuff.
However I've been using it to really try and work within the right HR zones. I seem to have all the stamina/endurance I need and am really happy plodding along at my own pace, which I can do for absolutely ages. However, ask me to sprint and I'm worn out in no time. I also really struggle on the run - I'm just rubbish at running basically. So, I was advised that I had to do lots and lots of zone based training to get my body used to producing energy more efficiently and allow me to speed up.
Like the others, I think each to their own - you've got to do what feels best for you.
I coudl be sitting here comparing my last two weeks rides to work vs heart rate vs speed vs cadence vs altitude.... but i've spent too much already!
Get a cheap HRM give ita go and see if you like it - I find it sometimes nice to focus on while putting in the miles.
This too is my first season and I have bought an HRM, as whenever I read anything about training it always suggest what zone to train in etc.... So I thought to aid my training and help improve my performance I'd buy a HRM. Last week I used it for the first time. Going by a training plan in 220 magazine I set the HRM to 60-70% and set off on my regular run. A couple of minutes into the run I check the HRM, it read 92%! It remained in this zone for most of my run and although a knew I was working hard, it felt comfortable. Like I said my regular run at my regular pace. If I was to 'run' at 60-70% I don't think I would hardly be moving and therefore probably feel as though I've haven't achieved anything. So am I doing something wrong, or is it the case that maybe we should just listen to what our body is telling us??
Jax
i am fimally buring off the stubborn fat.
if i go any faster, and i can go a lot faster ,especially over the half marathon distance, i have drink loads of sports drink to stop me boinking.
i am trying to do what that guy did in last months mag. resist going fast, and training my anerobic engine.
I agree you do get to learn where you should be, but you have to have used a HRM for a while to get this, so those that dont use one are going on knowledge gained from when they did use it.
I think it gives you something to focus on too, even without the graphs, rather than 'just running' etc. I use the zones stuff too, but I wouldnt use the percentages, I worked out my Max HR and kept it in bands.
92% of max HR being comfortable sounds highly inplausable, as you should be right up in your anaerobic range there and couldnt keep that up for ever
So, if you have max HR of 200 and resting of 60, 85% training rate would be 179 BPM (200-60 x 85% + 60).
Compare this to 85% of max HR: 170 BPM.
This is why a lot of people train at the wrong intensity for what they are trying to achieve.
but seriously i did a sprint last sunday and came out after the swim at 160bpm, couldn't believe it. By monitoring I could ensure didn't go right into lactate zone and so completed rather than blow up. I put my high bpm during the swim to a spot of sheer panic when some walrus swam over the top of me and scared the living poo out of me. Live and learn. Good fun though cos he went off in totaly the wrong direction, oh how i laughed, coughed spluttered.......
I’ve been using a HR monitor for ages in training and racing, lets me know how good or bad I’m doing as well as what I should be doing. However, for my birthday this year my wife kindly bought me a Garmin 305!!! Result. Not only do I have stats on % HR etc but a whole host of other GPS stats like average speed, pace per mile, distance covered and so on. Talk about graphical information overload, it reminds me of some sort of A-Level exam question. Saying that though, it is an excellent piece of kit, and comes in around the same price as some of Polar’s top end HR monitors. If you’ve got the cash, or a kind wife, go for a Garmin !!!
Go figure
I.