Does any one do max heart rate training anymore? I don't think that the 26 year old Coach realizes there is a difference between 220-26= her max hr and 220-50= mine. I am not sure I would recognize heart palpitations with some of the short interval work we get.
I have been using a HR monitor for the last 2months. Very interesting. First the 220- your age is worthless. A better measure is:
210 minus half your age minus 5% of your weight plus 4 (if you are a man)
That last calculation is much closer for me 181 whereas the former calculation yields a 161.
I am also beginning to believe that for the most part we go too hard, too fast too much. Karlyn Pipes-Neilsen has a good article on this in the current Swimming World although you have to access the article on-line.
I have also discovered in doing some research that your swimming HR max is 13% or 17 BPM lower in the water than running. This is due to the cooling effect of water plus the fact that you are horizontal etc.
The U of Richmond coach has his swimmers wear HR monitors and uses it all the time in training. In many sets he'll tell the swimmers where their HR should be.
But it is a women's team so they can wear them under their suits to keep them in place. I can't keep one in place, no matter how tight I make it, it falls off on the first push-off.
I've worn them on the bike. Maybe I'd reach 180 on uphill sprints; no way do I reach it in the water. I think I read somewhere that max HR is genetic and that being fit doesn't affect its value or how it declines with age. (Though certainly exercising changes the lactate threshold HR.)
In HS and college I would regularly and easily get above 200 in the pool, now I have a very hard time getting above 170, kind of depressing really.:cane: I've often wondered if this is the reason that young swimmers have a "fifth gear" that I don't seem to have anymore: I am generally much closer to them in practice than in a meet. (Or maybe they are just slackers in practice :))
The heart-rate monitor that I use when swimming doesn't require a strap. I leave it on the deck and check now and then. Some models:
www.amazon.com/.../ref=sr_1_16www.amazon.com/.../ref=sr_1_13www.amazon.com/.../ref=sr_1_31
You press the buttons and it gives a reading (most of the time) - it's not perfect around the water, even though it's water resistant ...
It was old school measurement and we routinely had push sets to see how high we could get the heart rate up to, we did have to cool down and recover to 120 bpm before we could start the next one.
I think we are swimming a lot more reduced interval to failure type swims and not getting sufficient recovery to drop back into an aerobic range of training. There was probably a point to long slow distance in the first part of the training season to build up the base. I would like to burn some fat rather than work out in the anaerobic zone all the time.
Yes, I train daily with a Polar HR monitor. I'm 49, so my max HR should be 171 according to the prevailing calculation below.
When I do reach my max, it's consistently at around 190 and that's usually when I'm doing overload endurance or longer race pace training sets.
So, I'd be wary of using the calculated estimate. Nonetheless, you aren't likely going to reach the HR levels of a 26 year-old.
Does any one do max heart rate training anymore? I don't think that the 26 year old Coach realizes there is a difference between 220-26= her max hr and 220-50= mine. I am not sure I would recognize heart palpitations with some of the short interval work we get.
All the 220 minus age calculations are total bogus -- somebody came up with this because it was close to the average they saw in aging about 30 years ago (not based on aging athletes by the way). Now it's become the "gold standard". I would never use this for any serious swimmer - or really for anybody.
However, I think using heart rates is one of the best ways to train and check your effort + Progress - it's just that most people have their own levels.
It's tough to measure max heart rate in the water -- you can't really use a monitor and counting gets very difficult at 180+ . I think you should know your heart rate for aerobic sets and you should pretty much check 2-3 times during every main aerobic set. After a few weeks, you get a great feel for it and you can start your own training guide.
I do have to disagree on using a HR monitor - you just have to find the right one that works in the water. I use a Polar S720i, and it works just fine if you take good care of it.
All the 220 minus age calculations are total bogus -- somebody came up with this because it was close to the average they saw in aging about 30 years ago (not based on aging athletes by the way). Now it's become the "gold standard". I would never use this for any serious swimmer - or really for anybody.
However, I think using heart rates is one of the best ways to train and check your effort + Progress - it's just that most people have their own levels.
It's tough to measure max heart rate in the water -- you can't really use a monitor and counting gets very difficult at 180+ . I think you should know your heart rate for aerobic sets and you should pretty much check 2-3 times during every main aerobic set. After a few weeks, you get a great feel for it and you can start your own training guide.
I have never found one that will stay on (chest strap) while pushing off the wall (unless it will cut off all blood flow).
Phone around to fabric stores in your area and ask if they carry that sticky "gripper" elastic that is used on the legs of cycling shorts and replace your chest strap elastic with it. I think it usually comes in 1/2" or 3/4" width, which should work. Or, you might be able to find it on an on-line site that sells sports fabrics/accessories such as Rocky Roads or Peak Fabrics.
In HS and college I would regularly and easily get above 200 in the pool, now I have a very hard time getting above 170, kind of depressing really.
My theory is that maximum heart rate levels go down, because we do not use it. The vast majority of all excercises is aerobic in nature (even swimming is 95% in that area) - which also lowers the MHR. I could not find any research on this - I would really like to see how Masters sprinters (running) compare in something like this. I have seen some random articles where people have maintained the MHR well into their 60s.
I agree - this is one of the reasons practice times and race times seem to be much closer than they used to be. :dunno:
