5

After working my way to understand the benefits of taking 2 or 3 leisurely longer rides (ones in which I remain in Heart Rate Zones 3 or 4) for every brief all-out ride (in which I spend more time in Heart Rate Zone 5), I have been keeping an eye not on the absolute heart rate, but on the heart rate zone, inspecting the number every time I feel that my heart is starting to race.

[Edit 1: Why is it useful to keep track of one's HR? Let me quote a comment by Andrew Henle, who sounds like he really knows what he's talking about: "FWIW, riding hard like that all the time right at your threshold is a great way to get good at being mediocre. Getting FAST really requires riding a lot at about 1/2 to 3/4 threshold power to build your pure aerobic power." I don't have a way of measuring my power, and so I am taking the next best thing and using my HR, by remaining in HRZ 3 to 4. Is it unreasonable to assume there is a correlation?]

Every time I approach the 4.8-4.9 heart rate zone (yes, it's displayed as a fractional number), I calm my thrill down and ride more slowly.

Still, when I inspect afterwards how much time I've spent in each heart rate zone, I get numbers that are heavily skewed towards HRZ 5.

Zone    Heart Rate
1       00:00   
2       00:16   
3       11:52   
4       72:43   
5       91:22

Why is my HRZ 5 so high, even though I'm certain I have rarely, if at all, entered 5.0+. Is it the case that the "zone" measures from -0.5 to +0.5, and so HRZ 4 is really a count of the time spent in the interval [3.5, 4.4]? Is HRZ 5 really measuring 4.5 to 5.0?

Also, is there some special significance for the HRZ maxing out at 5? Is it, for example, a hint that remaining for a long time above 5 is somehow detrimental? What about racers? Don't they remain in 5 basically all the time?

In case it makes a difference, I'm using a chest heart rate strap with electrical connections.


The HRM is from Lezyne. It is wireless; smallish; has worked impeccably for about a year now; just about the only negative I can say about it is the little chill I get from the contacts when they first touch my chest, but that's presumably a necessity since it's electrical with metal electrodes, and it lasts only a moment. Plus the battery (a common Lithium disposable battery) drains extremely slowly.


Edit 2: Another way of asking the question is this: I have access to a Heart Rate Monitor, as well as to a cadence sensor and a speedometer, but not to a power meter. I have so far been using bar charts such as the one quoted above to check whether I did indeed remain in Heart Rate Zones 3 (or 4), as I intended. How can I ensure I remain in Heart Rate Zone 3 (or 4) using a Heart Rate Monitor?

On a bike we're rather lucky we can get four measurements. This Q&A ask the same if all we had were a heart rate measurement. In the context of cycling the additional issue is whether the three other meters can assist in determining the training zone.

Sam7919
  • 9,112
  • 4
  • 28
  • 92
  • 3
    This is a question about your heart rate monitor and its software, not really about bikes or even training. But to me those numbers look cumulative (which is a silly way to present them), or perhaps we should imagine that every zone in the first column is prefixed with "less than", or "up to" as decimals in the zone numbers don't really make sense. I've seen an indication of high/low in the zone, so perhaps that's what they're aiming at. How long was the activity you've shown the results for? – Chris H Jun 01 '21 at 18:33
  • 2
    I’m voting to close this question because it's not about bikes or cycling, but about the quirks of a heart rate monitor – Chris H Jun 01 '21 at 18:34
  • 3
    Also note that heart rate zones are all very well, but actually getting them correct is much harder than just doing percentages of a simply-calculated maximum – Chris H Jun 01 '21 at 18:35
  • @ChrisH well, I was hoping that you in particular would opine on this. I guess I'll have to wait until I get a power meter, and then it will surely be a strictly cycling question, since joggers and swimmers have no way (I think) of measuring their power output. – Sam7919 Jun 01 '21 at 19:52
  • It's been a while since I had a functioning heart rate monitor, and that was a pretty crude one. You might want to edit in the make and model of the monitor - while I think this isn't really on topic despite being interesting, plenty of people may think otherwise, including some who know more about heart rate training than I do – Chris H Jun 01 '21 at 20:08
  • I'm happy to leave it open because it's about an apparatus used while cycling, training for cycling. Though I don't know the answer beyond the numbers look weird. How are you recording the data - can you create any other visualisations? – Swifty Jun 01 '21 at 21:01
  • I don't have a good answer to this, but this question does seem to be within the remit of bicycles.SE. – Adam Rice Jun 01 '21 at 21:05
  • 1
    160 minutes in Zones 4 and 5, How were your zones established? – mattnz Jun 01 '21 at 21:32
  • Also, which HRM and which cycling computer are involved? – Weiwen Ng Jun 01 '21 at 23:48
  • @WeiwenNg The HRM is from Lezyne. It is wireless; smallish; has worked impeccably for about a year now; just about the only negative I can say about it is the little chill I get from the contacts when they first touch my chest, but that's presumably a necessity since it's electrical with metal electrodes, and it lasts only a moment. Plus the battery (a common Lithium disposable battery) drains extremely slowly. BTW, I should thank you in particular, because it is on your (implicit) advice that I went with this brand—I selected a bundle that includes a HRM, plus cadence and speed sensors. – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 01:11
  • @mattnz I have no clue how the device calculates. When I asked the question, I imagined there must be a common standard for the meaning of heart rate zones (that, yes, is broader than just cycling). Did I not read you writing in some other post saying that the power meters are overly expensive and that it's quite hard to extract useful information from them? If they are anywhere near as useful as, even now, a HRM is to me, I wouldn't hesitate, but first I need to understand this bit. The data set is massive enough as it is. – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 01:15
  • @Swifty The data is taken from the website of the manufacturer, where my ride data gets uploaded automatically at the conclusion of each ride. I trust them allowing me to access the data (my own!) after some years more than I trust Strava, who reportedly conceal the data after 12 months unless one signs up for the pro package. Conceivably, they have a bug and these numbers don't actually make sense. – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 01:17
  • @ChrisH Given how serious a cyclist you are, judging by what you write here, I'm a bit puzzled you gave up on HRMs. They offer intriguing challenges. Here is one of many. When you're riding with a less challenging group, can you keep up with them without allowing your heart rate to climb past (say) 110? This is on the (possibly false) assumption that when you succeed in doing this, you know that you have a more substantial "reserve HR" kept for harder rides. – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 01:22
  • 4
    @Sam - If you are using Zones calculated by the device, they are wrong. All the ways to calculate HR zones require you to do stuff, and stuff that 'hurts' like working out your lactate threshold heart rate. If you can maintain Zone 5 for more than 5 minutes, its not zone 5. If you are in zone 4 for more than 30-45 minutes, you will know it and have more will power than most if you last that long. Max Hr, LTHR and Zone boundaries are very individual and change with fitness and age, to get meaningful numbers you have to run though some tests. – mattnz Jun 02 '21 at 01:35
  • @mattnz Yes, the device displays the zone (as an integer and one decimal digit of precision) in realtime during the ride, and as an aggregate on their website after the ride—plus a very handy .fit file with more data than I can handle at my level of understanding. The device initially asks for bike weight, and rider's weight, sex, and age. I assumed it has a formula to calculate the zone based on this quadruple of numbers. Did I fall in a sales gimmick? – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 01:39
  • 1
    This is heading off into the weeds of chat - perhaps [chat] would be a better place to refine the question in this back-and-forth way. Sadly the Q&A format of SE doesn't mesh well with this style. – Criggie Jun 02 '21 at 02:10
  • "chest heart rate strap with electrical connections." This provides the most accurate reading you can get, so it is worthwhile to use directly the HRM data rather than the Zone values. – EarlGrey Jun 02 '21 at 12:09
  • 1
    @EarlGrey Indeed. And the sensor-to-calculator-to-display remarkably has no discernible lag. Now it seems I have to disregard the zone as indicated by the cyclocomputer itself, and figure out a pair of numbers that 1- for me 2- on that day, represent the upper and lower bounds of Zone 3. – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 13:25
  • @Sam I'm into endurance, not speed. Apart from hills (unavoidable where I live), I'm working at an effort I can sustain for 8+ hours. At that point metabolism becomes more important than heart rate, and while monitoring is interesting I never found mine to read sensibly for more than a couple of hours at a time, too short to matter much. My playing on the local 10 mile TT route might be worth HR training if I try it for real,but for now, on a good day, I'd be not quite last despite riding a heavy steel tourer. – Chris H Jun 02 '21 at 19:47
  • Close vote retracted after edits and discussion. Now IMO it's enough of a training question – Chris H Jun 02 '21 at 19:48
  • @sam consider asking a series of more specific questions - looking at all the divergent topics raised, this should probably be closed as too-broad (which means there's a lot of potential in the subject-area.) The ideal question is of a focus that can be answered by a post in maybe 2-12 paragraphs. – Criggie Jun 03 '21 at 06:21
  • 1
    @Criggie you're entirely right. Even I (OP) got confused, needing to track down the order in which the answers/comments appeared. There are really two (but only two) questions throughout: 1- "What the heck? My cyclocomputer says I've spent a lot of time in HRZ 5 even though over 50 km I was looking (almost unsafely) all the time to ensure I do not cross the HRZ 5 number" and 2- "Okay, never mind what the cyclometer says about my HRZ; that seems nonsensical. The heart rate number itself is accurate and that ought to be enough; now how do I determine my HRZ 3?". – Sam7919 Jun 03 '21 at 11:14

3 Answers3

7

It's most likely that your bike computer is using your age to determine a maximum heart rate and then determining some zones based on that. This is common practice amongst devices that use HRM data, and equally commonly wrong.

I answered this in a similar question before:

Max HR isn't a particularly useful metric. Not only is it particularly difficult to measure/estimate, but it can't be used to accurately define training zones, as there are large variations between individuals with regards to % of MHR they can sustain for various durations. It can even change for an individual based on their current state of training.

Basing zones on Lactate Threshold Heart Rate (LTHR) is a much more useful metric for determining appropriate training zones. The most common way to determine LTHR is by performing a 30 minute solo time trial as if it were a race, and taking the average HR for the last 20 minutes of the effort. https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/joe-friel-s-quick-guide-to-setting-zones/

Finally, you can (and should) use RPE (Rate of Perceived Exertion) alongside heart rate to try to ensure you are in the correct zone. Numerous effects such as fatigue, caffeine and even time of day can have a large impact on HR, so learning how zones feel is very useful. For example i find if I'm no longer able to breathe through my nose, i've moved into Tempo zone.

Here's a very handy chart: ICA zone chart

Sam7919
  • 9,112
  • 4
  • 28
  • 92
Andy P
  • 18,268
  • 2
  • 36
  • 69
  • 1
    Basing zones on Lactate Threshold Heart Rate (LTHR) is a much more useful metric for determining appropriate training zones It's certainly better than using a percentage of the 220 - age wild-ass-guess "max hr", but using a percentage of your LTHR to establish training zones can still be off, and for some it can be way off. As @mattnz alluded to in his comment, you really need to do full VO2 max testing. And for the cost of that you can probably get yourself a decent power meter and just train with power... – Andrew Henle Jun 02 '21 at 10:08
  • What does RPE stand for? – ojs Jun 02 '21 at 10:12
  • @ojs Rate of Perceived Exertion - updated answer to clarify – Andy P Jun 02 '21 at 10:13
  • @AndrewHenle But AndyP also is saying, I think: to ensure you remain in zone 3, get a power meter and measure your functional threshold power. Now the question to you is: this requires both getting a power meter and doing a VO2 max test to figure out one's (maximal) FTP. What am I missing? – Sam7919 Jun 02 '21 at 10:33
  • 1
    @AndrewHenle I am not certain that a full VO2max test would get the OP a better way to set their training zones. They would get ... their VO2 max? Isn't % of LTHR the best guess available to the OP given no power meter? – Weiwen Ng Jun 02 '21 at 12:37
  • @WeiwenNg A full test will also give you your actual HR zones based on measured metabolic effects - so it's not a guess at all. – Andrew Henle Jun 02 '21 at 17:08
  • @Sam Now the question to you is: this requires both getting a power meter and doing a VO2 max test to figure out one's (maximal) FTP. What am I missing? If you get a power meter, the heart rate monitor becomes a bit superfluous. After some experience, your HR is a useful indicator of things like how fatigued you might be, or "Umm, that effort got my HR up to 190, which means I overdid it, I've blown myself up, and I'm about to get dropped..." Because once you get a power meter, you know where your training zones are and they're pretty independent of HR. – Andrew Henle Jun 02 '21 at 18:39
  • (cont) HR becomes useful in combination with a power meter when you start looking at things like "cardiac drift". What does your HR do when you put out a long, sustained effort at steady power? If you're in good shape, it will remain constant - and I mean *good* condition, as in pretty much racing shape. If you're not, your HR will probably go up over the course of the effort. (For cardiac drift to be meaningful, efforts probably have to be at least 10-20 minutes long, maybe even longer.) – Andrew Henle Jun 02 '21 at 18:43
  • One problem with doing a 30minute time trial (or other max effort test) is novices starting out with a HR monitor (The target audience for this advice) do not have the required skill and fitness to do the test properly. They either blow out too soon, or finish with heaps in the tank. I do not like how the difficulty of doing this kind of test accurately is trivialized to the point that for unsupervised novices it is probably no more accurate than the 220-age test. (Otherwise a great answer) – mattnz Jun 02 '21 at 21:30
  • @mattnz yep, you are correct, its not an easy test to get right. In my experience having observed some novices trying to do the test, the biggest problem is that they are either unwilling or didn't learn to suffer yet = as you say finish with heaps in the tank. – Andy P Jun 02 '21 at 23:10
4

Answering the question as written at the time of answering and avoiding all side tracks about the meaning of the zones: Whenever you find yourself above the target zone, slow down. When you are below the target zone, ride harder. To avoid overshooting the target, do the changes gradually, do not jump to full stop or maximum effort right away. If you go right over the target zone at the beginning and can't get to the zone, start with a slow warmup and approach the target zone from below.

ojs
  • 21,985
  • 5
  • 41
  • 83
  • 1
    But how is one supposed to recognize that he/her is "above the target zone" and "below the target zone"? That is the whole point of this question. – Vladimir F Героям слава Jun 02 '21 at 13:01
  • 1
    By looking at the HRM. Of course I could have missed some detail that prevents the OP from doing so... – ojs Jun 02 '21 at 15:08
  • I'm with @ojs on this one. When I first started using an HRM, some time in the mid 1990s, it would beep when I dropped below or went above the target range that I set (eg 150-180). So I just work harder or less. I also think that OP is reading the numbers wrong or making some mistake understanding the equipment. – jqning Jun 02 '21 at 17:00
  • @Sam whilst a power meter is the gold standard, I actually did quite the opposite to saying 'forget about it and get a power meter'. I told you how to get the best approximation of zones without a power meter – Andy P Jun 02 '21 at 23:06
  • @Sam no. You look up how the HRM calculates the zones (if it doesn't show them right on the screen) and adjust your riding to match. It is not good way to train, but at the time I wrote the answer the question was about having the right numbers at end of ride, not doing training rides that make any sense at all. – ojs Jun 03 '21 at 05:27
  • 1
    BTW, the zone 1 isn't usually about resting heart rate, because the HRM is supposed to be used for exercise, not for resting. – ojs Jun 03 '21 at 05:28
  • I’ve always treated Zone 1 as recovery ride or an aid in quickening up recovery – Dan K Jun 03 '21 at 08:07
  • In the question the zones seem to be arbitrary numbers with no connection any physiological limits. – ojs Jun 03 '21 at 09:01
3

I guess the data you are seeing and posting here are "zone" not in the sense of "Heart Rate Zone" (let's call them HRZ) but in the sense of some proprietary "manufacturer(r) Training Zone " (let's call them MTZ).

Probably your sensor is recording HRZ, then the page where you visualize the data is doing some processing to calculate the MTZ. Then it can be anything, it can be that MTZ = 4 if HRZ is between 3.5 and 4.4, it can even be that MTZ = 5 if HRZ = 1 ... that would make sense with yor MTZ = 1 being null, since you stated that you never crossed HRZ 4.8/4.9 .

Then, given the data you posted, it can be everything, it can even be cumulative, as someone commented, in the sense that

  1. MTZ = 5 means simply HRZ >0.5,
  2. MTZ = 4 is HRZ > 1.5,
  3. MTZ = 3 when HRZ > 2.5

and so on ...

EarlGrey
  • 3,533
  • 7
  • 27