Heart

[Ajax Bay]

Is it better for people to take note of their HR using a simple but less accurate method than to ignore HR because the calculation is too complex?

On the nail. You can just imagine the meetings at BHF, where an item on the agenda was whether they should adopt a 'better' formula than 220-age. Though you say it's not taxing, the majority shy away from all but the simplest maths. And, setting specific to individual training HR levels apart, 220-age is not going to do anyone any harm. Anyone prepared to push themselves, like the OP (up to 190bpm) will soon reckon that that formula's poor and look for something better.
I first used an HR for running training in 1981 (so fairly early days, top-of-the-range Polar HR). So 30+ years ago (ie when I learnt that 220-age was of limited use, and well before Tanaka, Monahan, & Seals (2001)), 205 minus half-age was mooted as a better formula, especially for athletes. But the best way to establish what your HRmax is is to warm up and then cycle or (better) run up a hill about a mile long, ideally one which gets progressively steeper, accelerating in stages till the rider/runner is on max effort plus before stopping. It's difficult to take your pulse manually in these circumstances ('cos you're phoobarred and counting 30+ in 10 seconds implies a likely high error rate) so best done with a monitor. This year on my bike, the highest I've seen my HR is on the final crux ramp of Hardknott Pass.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

On the nail. You can just imagine the meetings at BHF, where an item on the agenda was whether they should adopt a 'better' formula than 220-age. Though you say it's not taxing, the majority shy away from all but the simplest maths. And, setting specific to individual training HR levels apart, 220-age is not going to do anyone any harm. Anyone prepared to push themselves, like the OP (up to 190bpm) will soon reckon that that formula's poor and look for something better.
I first used an HR for running training in 1981 (so fairly early days, top-of-the-range Polar HR). So 30+ years ago (ie when I learnt that 220-age was of limited use, and well before Tanaka, Monahan, & Seals (2001)), 205 minus half-age was mooted as a better formula, especially for athletes. But the best way to establish what your HRmax is is to warm up and then cycle or (better) run up a hill about a mile long, ideally one which gets progressively steeper, accelerating in stages till the rider/runner is on max effort plus before stopping. It's difficult to take your pulse manually in these circumstances ('cos you're phoobarred and counting 30+ in 10 seconds implies a likely high error rate) so best done with a monitor. This year on my bike, the highest I've seen my HR is on the final crux ramp of Hardknott Pass.

Part of the 220-age problem is that some people find it correct, which is mere coincidence rather than actual scientific basis. A lot of people then fall into the "I've got the tech but no idea" mind boggling numbers trap.

While I ride with HR,I don't train to it (raised HR is just a non-specific product of activity) Ye olde 220-age is 14 beats wrong for me, which is neither a good rule of thumb nor a good guess. It's plain nonsense

 

[mjr]

[QUOTE 4996629, member: 9609"]i tried to take my pulse last night when out on the bike - not a chance on a level road let alone at full tilt on a big climb. May be I don't want to know, its 71 sitting here doing nowt. [/QUOTE]
If you've a reasonably modern phone (Android 4.4 or later, supporting Bluetooth Low Energy), heart-rate monitor smart watches are pretty cheap now, £30 for a http://www.mi.com/en/miband2/ and down to £10 for some clones. Some are accused of inaccuracy but not wildly so, so it would give anyone who wants to see the effect some idea.

 

[Ajax Bay]

While I ride with HR,I don't train to it (raised HR is just a non-specific product of activity) Ye olde 220-age is 14 beats wrong for me, which is neither a good rule of thumb nor a good guess. It's plain nonsense

I use my HR display to provide additional information of a quantative nature to help me decide whether I'm going too hard during long audaxes. I use it to limit my effort when pulling on the front and if I'm just hanging on in a group but still too high (from experience), then I make a judgement as to whether the benefits of riding in the group are worth it. Lower down the effort spectrum, I also use it to alert me when I'm taking it too easy and as a nudge into working harder.
30+bpm error for me in ye olde 220-age formula.

 

[mjr]

[QUOTE 4996833, member: 9609"]Do blood pressure monitors giva a heart reading ? and would one of them work on a bike at full power? I know where I could borrow one.[/QUOTE]
Blood pressure monitors give a heart reading but the small one I had strapped to me for 24 hours years ago could not get a reading while cycling at moderate intensity and damn near took my arm off trying!

 

[Cronorider]

Was looking at my Strava feed and saw that a couple of the better riders had been out together, one of them being very, very fast, one of the top riders around here. Just out of curiosity, I had a look at their rides because these are two guys that always use HR monitors and BPM will show up in their stats. The really fast guys average HR was around 115 BPM for the whole ride. No wonder he is so fast. The other guy had an avg of around 150 BPM for the whole ride. Quite a difference.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Was looking at my Strava feed and saw that a couple of the better riders had been out together, one of them being very, very fast, one of the top riders around here. Just out of curiosity, I had a look at their rides because these are two guys that always use HR monitors and BPM will show up in their stats. The really fast guys average HR was around 115 BPM for the whole ride. No wonder he is so fast. The other guy had an avg of around 150 BPM for the whole ride. Quite a difference.

Yet, the guy with a 115 avg could have a low maxHR, while the 150avg bloke could have a higher maxHR. Chap with 115 avg could be very fatigued too,chap with 150avg could be stressed at work, not sleeping, on medication...

The numbers don't tell the real story

 

[Cronorider]

Yet, the guy with a 115 avg could have a low maxHR, while the 150avg bloke could have a higher maxHR. Chap with 115 avg could be very fatigued too,chap with 150avg could be stressed at work, not sleeping, on medication...

The numbers don't tell the real story

Appears that you are correct in that 115avg rider's HR is always lower overall. I scrolled through his KOMs (he has every hill around) and his heart rate is consistently 10-20 beats lower than those behind on the leaderboard.

 

[Andrew_P]

Yet, the guy with a 115 avg could have a low maxHR, while the 150avg bloke could have a higher maxHR. Chap with 115 avg could be very fatigued too,chap with 150avg could be stressed at work, not sleeping, on medication...

The numbers don't tell the real story

I have a low exercise HR and I am not the fastest 52 year old in the pack. After a long lay off I might, just might see 155/160 but once back in my normal level of fitness lucky to see 130-135. Used to really worry me when I looked on Strava segments and did it by age. Spoke to my GP ages ago and it was basically do you get giddy/pain etc if not no problem. An average ride in to work at reasonable pace average is 108! THe only comfort I got from Strava was people like Steve Abraham who averages insanely low HR's

 

[400bhp]

This is pretty useless advise to be honest, there is too much variability in HR rates and between different forms of exercise to make much use of this. A counter example is that I'm 36, and struggle to get my HR above 165, even when really pushing hard.

To the OP, there is really nothing wrong with being concerned about your heart rate. At this stage though I would personally just assume that I'm a little unfit and that it would come down with exercise, your heart is like any other muscle, it works better the more you exercise it. Your heart rates are a little higher than most here would see (especially those who cycle more), but that's to be expected, everyone is slightly different.

I'm presuming that you are posting here because aside from the recorded HR track you've not noticed any other adverse effects like nausea or light headedness during or after cycling.

Ultimately though, as has already been pointed out upthread, the only way to be sure you are OK is to go and see your GP and get a referral to a heart specialist, if you remain concerned after reading this thread, then you must do that.

This ^^

 

[400bhp]

I use my HR display to provide additional information of a quantative nature to help me decide whether I'm going too hard during long audaxes. I use it to limit my effort when pulling on the front and if I'm just hanging on in a group but still too high (from experience), then I make a judgement as to whether the benefits of riding in the group are worth it. Lower down the effort spectrum, I also use it to alert me when I'm taking it too easy and as a nudge into working harder.
30+bpm error for me in ye olde 220-age formula.

I agree with you. If you use a HRM a lot you really get tuned into your body (caveat, climatic conditions similar-numbers jump up 5-10 bpm when I’m in relatively humid conditions).

 

[Alan O]

Possibly both organisations are using this because it provides a safe and simple means to encourage people’s interest? Is it better for people to take note of their HR using a simple but less accurate method than to ignore HR because the calculation is too complex?

I remember having a talk to one of the cardiac rehab people after my heart attack 10 years ago about this very subject, and she said they didn't generally encourage people to check their heart rate at all - because for most, they're never going to push it it anyway, and checking their HR just gives them something to worry about.

Looking round my class of rehab patients, I could see what she meant - I was really the only active one with any interest in exercise and physical activity, together with 15 or 16 relative couch potatoes (and at 48 I was the youngest by some margin).

I suspect it's moved on now that fitness monitors have become popular and cheap, and the 220-age thing is used exactly as PaulSB suggests.

Addition: The rehab people were far more interested in blood pressure at the time than HR.

 

[PaulSB]

@Alan O my experience of the rehab class was exactly the same. I was the only fit person there. I felt pretty disgruntled I had had a heart attack when I looked around me!!! Half the class lacked any sort of physical coordination to do the very basics. If I had given up smoking earlier I might have avoided it.

My physio at the class was very keen on HR. Measured at start, during and not allowed to leave until I had dropped to 70.

 

[Evenflow]

Use my HRM connected to my edge to check out my heart rate zones. Found when climbing I was going at it too hard and died half way. Now I'm much better, keeping it around 128 (resting 54). The girl I ride with has a fast heart and easily gets to 200. Her resting heart rate is quite high so was sent to a cardiologist and put on the running machine looking at the pics of her heart working. It went up to 235 max. Apparently she has a perfectly good heart, its just fast.
So max heart is your individual biological number and is more or less fixed. Of course, if as you age, you become inactive and just sit about then it will decrease
I found a reasonable accurate calculation of max heart rate is:-
210 - 50% of your age - 5% of your weight + 4 if male, +0if female

Using your resting rate you can then work out your reserve, burn and burst zones.
It worked for me.

 

[JtB]

I have a pacemaker which gets interrogated by the pacemaker clinic once a year. The clinic occasionally express concern at some of the peak HR’s logged but when I correlate them to bike rides recorded on Strava they reassure me that all’s well. Out of curiosity I did use a HR monitor a few times on my rides and my HR peaks at between 170 and 180. But I never got into the habit of using a HR monitor because my cardiologist’s advice was just to let my body tell me how hard to push it.