Overestimating How Hard We Exercise

[wombatK]

Until reading this article, I've found it hard to work out just what doctors meant
when they talked about moderate exercise. And I worried about whether my
150 km riding a week might have been over-the-top (some doctors thought so).

But after reading this, if anything, I need to ride a little harder...

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/1 ... blogs&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Who else is surprised to find they might be under-achieving a moderate exercise or vigorous exercise target ?

[anttismo]

I'm not particulalry suprised. Sounds like moderate is endurance pace, and vigourous is tempo?? Should be plenty for people to keep in great shape and does take some effort.

I'm also not suprised most under estimated either, because I think a few years ago I would of as well. It was somewhat of a suprise to me how uncomfy threshold pace is and how long I can hold it when I first started doing that kind of thing. That is beyond "vigourous" by the sounds of it....

[casual_cyclist]

Who else is surprised to find they might be under-achieving a moderate exercise or vigorous exercise target ?

I have a heart rate monitor so it is easy to tell if I am in the target range or not. Use one of those a for a while and you soon learn how it feels to be in moderate or vigorous.

[Alex Simmons/RST]

One of the first things many people realise when they measure power output is how much they soft pedal/crystal crank and that they can trainer harder.

[warthog1]

One of the first things many people realise when they measure power output is how much they soft pedal/crystal crank and that they can trainer harder.

Glad I haven't got one then
I suspect I'm alot softer than I like to think.
There's a bloke in our local vets club we call crystal cranks. Soft and missing turns in handicap races then brings out a killer sprint at the end.

[mikesbytes]

Those articles are generally discussing minimum fitness levels and don't apply to most if not all the people in this discussion

And the definition of moderate and intensive is based on a % of your max heart rate. While many of us have discovered our maximum heart rates, which are usually well above the estimations 220-age or 211-(age*0.64) or some other calculation.

Mine is 29 bpm higher than 220-age so if I walked into the place testing and said I didn't know my max heart rate, they would be forced to do the calculation and I'd be able to cruise on what was deemed the 75% mark

[casual_cyclist]

Those articles are generally discussing minimum fitness levels and don't apply to most if not all the people in this discussion

Looking at my garmin data, my max heart rate would be somewhere around 190 bpm. My "moderate" intensity rides are cycle commuting to work and my "vigorous" rides are King's Park intervals.

According to the article:

During moderate exercise, according to the Canadian guidelines, your pulse should rise to about 64 percent to 76 percent of your maximum heart rate; during vigorous exercise, your pulse should hover between about 77 percent and 90 percent of your maximum.

Therefore, my commute should be between 121 bpm and 144 bpm.
My intervals should be between 146 bpm and 171 bpm.

Obviously, this is a guide because I don't know my true HR max.

My actual commute average ranges from 106 to 131 bpm with quite a few of those rides falling lower than 121 bpm.
My actual interval average ranges from 118 to 153 bpm with most rides falling lower than 146 bpm.

I have apparently been slacking off.

[mikesbytes]

Well you do know your true max heart rate, its around 190. In the future your maximal fitness may have increased so your true max heart rate would be different, 195 for example

The commute average may be lower than its working average if it has stops in it, traffic lights etc causing the heart rate to drop while you watch the cages drive past

By interval average do you mean the entire ride or the interval itself? What are the duration of the intervals? I'm wondering if lag is coming into play?

[redsonic]

Mine is 29 bpm higher than 220-age so if I walked into the place testing and said I didn't know my max heart rate, they would be forced to do the calculation and I'd be able to cruise on what was deemed the 75% mark

The article does state that they actually found the participants' max HR by running them on a treadmill first.

Before I bought my HR monitor, I used to manually take my pulse while exercising and found it remarkably consistent - my body "knew" what high intensity exercise felt like. Now I have a HR monitor, and calculated my percentages of maximum given in the article, I am not surprised to find I am exercising at high intensity according to their criteria (and my estimated max using either of their calculations).

I really doubt that the "sedentary" people chosen for the study would (in general) have the experience of exercising while fit that most on this forum would have.

[casual_cyclist]

The commute average may be lower than its working average if it has stops in it, traffic lights etc causing the heart rate to drop while you watch the cages drive past

I rarely have to stop on my commute but I do a lot of soft pedalling!

By interval average do you mean the entire ride or the interval itself? What are the duration of the intervals? I'm wondering if lag is coming into play?

I was taking that off the whole ride including cool down, which is not really the correct methodology. I will collect some better data tonight and let you know.

[mikesbytes]

I know a rider who does heaps of long rides. Excellence endurance fitness but way slower than one normally is with that level of fitness. I suggested to him to get some short intervals in by taking it easy on the commute and gunning it off some of the traffic lights, a mix of very short maximal sprints and a little longer near maximal sprints

[casual_cyclist]

I know a rider who does heaps of long rides. Excellence endurance fitness but way slower than one normally is with that level of fitness. I suggested to him to get some short intervals in by taking it easy on the commute and gunning it off some of the traffic lights, a mix of very short maximal sprints and a little longer near maximal sprints

That is what I am aiming for. I haven't really been monitoring my intensity during my rides though. I have ordered a garmin 500 which should help with that.

[mikesbytes]

Before I was a sports rider I was doing intervals on the commute without realising it, for example 'light sync sprint' where you sprint off a particular traffic light to get the green for the next light, cos you know the sync.

[jules21]

cycling is a bit different to some other forms of exercise, in that it tends to be of longer duration. while it's a waste of time going to the gym for 1/2 hour and walking on the stare master, it's also a trap to try and ride your bike 10 hours a week in the 'hard' effort zone. you will just hit the wall. you need to mix it up on the bike - lots of easy-moderate riding, then shorter, hard efforts and particularly if you're competing - very short maximal ones.

[casual_cyclist]

cycling is a bit different to some other forms of exercise, in that it tends to be of longer duration. while it's a waste of time going to the gym for 1/2 hour and walking on the stare master, it's also a trap to try and ride your bike 10 hours a week in the 'hard' effort zone. you will just hit the wall. you need to mix it up on the bike - lots of easy-moderate riding, then shorter, hard efforts and particularly if you're competing - very short maximal ones.

Agree. Up to now I have been only doing lots of easy riding with some occasional moderate. I have been trying to put in one hard effort a week for less than half an hour. I collected better data yesterday and during the "hard" part of the intervals I am averaging 151 with a max of 159. I will probably be able to more in the next couple of weeks. I only want to do one hard session and one moderate session a week for now until I build up a bit more fitness.