A Rant on Power-Based Training
Moderator: Moderator Team
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
-
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am
Here we go again...
My first statement:
"There is some physiological difference in maximum heart rate between people of the same gender of the same age, but if there are significant differences I would be suspicious of something else such as an inaccurate measurement of max heart rate or an underlying health issue."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4919019/
"The mean age, maximal heart rate (HR), and maximal aerobic capacity of the cohort were 43 ± 12 years, 178 ± 15 beats per minute, and 36.1 ± 10.6 mlO2 · kg−1 · min−1, respectively."
So we are looking at a variability of 15 beats per minute between a cohort of 4,796 test subjects with a mean age of 43, or a range of roughly 8%.
If you need age-by-age analysis, take a look at the scatterplot in Figure 1, you see a trend based on age, coalescing around a downward trending mean line, with a few outliers.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3935487/
This is a study (there are many) showing that the 220-age equation is pretty inaccurate, but surely you don't dispute this fact.
Also: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10688280
Which states that although HR max remains relatively unchanged with training, evidence suggests that modest changes can be achieved with training. Which leads us to infer that HR max can indeed vary among people of the same gender of the same age.
Regarding the portion of the statement dealing with being suspicious of something else, is this seriously up for debate?
I'm being trolled again aren't I?
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts
Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts
Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts
- onemanpeloton
- Posts: 367
- Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:30 am
- Location: Edinburgh, UK
Feel free to expand. Forget about the one-to-one and remember the hundreds of people that might read this. If you'd like to point out where the OP is wrong it would help promote the discussion and educate people
2020 Trek Boone
2017 Merida Reacto
2017 Trek Superfly AL
2017 Merida Reacto
2017 Trek Superfly AL
The bros are out for blood in this thread, but they don’t have much in the way of cited sources or demonstrated reading comprehension. Seems pretty effing obvious to me that your power output can vary day to day with the same heart rate, but the effort the body is producing is more accurately measured by heart rate from a training perspective. Nobody said power is unimportant. Oh well, I’m sure the nay sayers are perfectly content with whatever they’re doing right?
-
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am
To be fair, I did write my OP a bit obnoxiously...spartacus wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 4:30 pmThe bros are out for blood in this thread, but they don’t have much in the way of cited sources or demonstrated reading comprehension. Seems pretty effing obvious to me that your power output can vary day to day with the same heart rate, but the effort the body is producing is more accurately measured by heart rate from a training perspective. Nobody said power is unimportant. Oh well, I’m sure the nay sayers are perfectly content with whatever they’re doing right?
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts
Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts
Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts
Hang on, first you say that significant differences indicate a potential health issue, then you quote a report that has a potential range of 30 bpm between two apparently healthy subjects, and it isn't a significant difference to you? Weird. Thats around 20% of my entire range from RHR to MHR.iheartbianchi wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 1:41 pm"There is some physiological difference in maximum heart rate between people of the same gender of the same age, but if there are significant differences I would be suspicious of something else such as an inaccurate measurement of max heart rate or an underlying health issue."
"The mean age, maximal heart rate (HR), and maximal aerobic capacity of the cohort were 43 ± 12 years, 178 ± 15 beats per minute, and 36.1 ± 10.6 mlO2 · kg−1 · min−1, respectively."
So we are looking at a variability of 15 beats per minute between a cohort of 4,796 test subjects with a mean age of 43, or a range of roughly 8%.
God no, i'm currently about 30 bpm outside this. 45y/o and 205 max, and a pefectly heart (i was tested quite extensively last yeariheartbianchi wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 1:41 pmThis is a study (there are many) showing that the 220-age equation is pretty inaccurate, but surely you don't dispute this fact.
for another, thankfully unrelated, issue.)
Not at all.
Whoops was reading too many of iheartbianchis posts
-
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:42 am
Builds a strawman argument for "rant". Gets called on it. Builds another strawman about FTP (which no one mentioned). Gets called on it.iheartbianchi wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 11:14 amI thought I’d give you a chance to make a substantive point but it seems I was a bit naive. I will no longer be engaging with you but please feel free to carry on.
Yeah, I can see why you don't want to engage.
Aimed at nobody.
Please stop this 'trying to be right on the internet' game. You are not a shark and other people's ideas are not chopped up fish floating in the ocean.
There's nothing terrible about being wrong. If someone is corrected politely using evidence, that's fine. That's how we learn. 'Convince' other people of your 'correctness', try citing evidence in the form of studies and even personal examples and anecdotes.
Going in for the jugular using personal attacks, basically saying 'you're wrong asshole' is stupid and childish. Not only because it makes you look like a giant douche, but it makes people cringe because they're trying to read your crap. It makes other people not want to post things that are interesting and contraversial becuase they'll be attacked by some tag team of 'right' people. Worse other people will discount your 'oh so correct and valuable opinion' because they think that 'it's just people being dicks on the internet again'. Oh, and please don't have no clue and run off to Google it to seem right, that's just as bad, nobody needs a reguritiation of other people's knowledge and experience, they've probabaly already read it.
Please stop this 'trying to be right on the internet' game. You are not a shark and other people's ideas are not chopped up fish floating in the ocean.
There's nothing terrible about being wrong. If someone is corrected politely using evidence, that's fine. That's how we learn. 'Convince' other people of your 'correctness', try citing evidence in the form of studies and even personal examples and anecdotes.
Going in for the jugular using personal attacks, basically saying 'you're wrong asshole' is stupid and childish. Not only because it makes you look like a giant douche, but it makes people cringe because they're trying to read your crap. It makes other people not want to post things that are interesting and contraversial becuase they'll be attacked by some tag team of 'right' people. Worse other people will discount your 'oh so correct and valuable opinion' because they think that 'it's just people being dicks on the internet again'. Oh, and please don't have no clue and run off to Google it to seem right, that's just as bad, nobody needs a reguritiation of other people's knowledge and experience, they've probabaly already read it.
It's also a bit suspicious when someone comes in with a brand new and anonymous account and their only contribution is picking on someone else. I'm surprised that admins let this go on.
-
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:42 am
Not picking on the person, just the incorrect facts they are posting. Training doesn't need more obsfuscation with misleading and incorrect threads such as this.
-
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:42 am
Being "right" is highly subjective. But being blatantly misleading through the use of strawman arguments can ,and should, be called out.Lewn777 wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 11:32 pmAimed at nobody.
Please stop this 'trying to be right on the internet' game. You are not a shark and other people's ideas are not chopped up fish floating in the ocean.
There's nothing terrible about being wrong. If someone is corrected politely using evidence, that's fine. That's how we learn. 'Convince' other people of your 'correctness', try citing evidence in the form of studies and even personal examples and anecdotes.
Going in for the jugular using personal attacks, basically saying 'you're wrong asshole' is stupid and childish. Not only because it makes you look like a giant douche, but it makes people cringe because they're trying to read your crap. It makes other people not want to post things that are interesting and contraversial becuase they'll be attacked by some tag team of 'right' people. Worse other people will discount your 'oh so correct and valuable opinion' because they think that 'it's just people being dicks on the internet again'. Oh, and please don't have no clue and run off to Google it to seem right, that's just as bad, nobody needs a reguritiation of other people's knowledge and experience, they've probabaly already read it.
-
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am
I copied and pasted my statement again.mattr wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 7:46 pmHang on, first you say that significant differences indicate a potential health issue, then you quote a report that has a potential range of 30 bpm between two apparently healthy subjects, and it isn't a significant difference to you? Weird. Thats around 20% of my entire range from RHR to MHR.
"There is some physiological difference in maximum heart rate between people of the same gender of the same age, but if there are significant differences I would be suspicious of something else such as an inaccurate measurement of max heart rate or an underlying health issue."
If I see a range of 30bpm between two healthy subjects of the same age, I will obviously suspect an incorrect measurement and ask them to test again. Your 30bpm potential range are statistical outliers. There is a very clear mean heart rate that declines with age. Statistically speaking, it is VERY UNLIKELY that you will find two people of the same age with a heart range difference of 30bpm. But yes, do pick on the exceptions.
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts
Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts
Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com