Hey guys,

I'm well on my way within a daily phys routine prior to deployment to Iraq, this includes a 30 minute treadmill run at a speed ranging between 10.5k and 12k per hour (depends on how I feel on the day) a good 10 minutes+ on the rowing machine together with free and machine weight routine covering major muscle groups (bearing in mind a lot of this is upper body to help in prep for carrying 32lb's worth of body armour and associated kit)

I'm normally burning aprox 500+ calories per session.

I bought a heart rate monitor today on a spur of the moment thing having been told a while ago they can help with phys, thing is having set it up, I'm clueless in how that actually helps.

For your info, I'm 42, 6' and 103kg

I see and feel my fitness improving but now have a limited time left before I start PDT and deployment on the 8th September.

Your comments/advice appreciated.

Dave

El macho and some of these guys can be helpful, but if you want to really maximize the thing, from what I have heard, Maffetone wrote some good books on working with heart rates and goals, etc. The reason I mention that is that his books have all the charts and so on in them, so you can match weight etc.

One other use for a heart rate monitor is that if you are over training, when you wake up and check you resting rate, and it is elevated, that means you are over training and it will hurt your recovery. Now, I read this in Science of Sports Training, but if anyone can confirm this is Bullshit, I'd be interested. Sports training is constantly being updated, so I'd like to know as well.

I stumbled upon some research thingy... that said that you build your body best at 90% heart rate over 4 minutes then rest.. It had to do with running, physical appearance and endurance.. I think the prinsipp could be applied to other types of training.. maybe you could try boost up your heart rate before doing a set.. run or something.

No disrespect intended mate but that sounded like a load of old bollocks.

My average workout including running, rowing and weights lasts almost 2 hours -every day-

I used my HRM today in the gym; my supposed maximum HR for my age is 178 bpm and through a 20 min run at 11kmh a 10 min row on high level resistance and the weight routine I alternate through, my HR didn't top higher than 165.

One other use for a heart rate monitor is that if you are over training, when you wake up and check you resting rate, and it is elevated, that means you are over training and it will hurt your recovery. Now, I read this in Science of Sports Training, but if anyone can confirm this is Bullshit, I'd be interested. Sports training is constantly being updated, so I'd like to know as well.
I think this is legit... I vaguely remember seeing it in Bompa's Theory and Methodology of Training (although obviously you don't need a heart rate monitor to just take your pulse).

Rock Ape, what information does your heart rate meter track?

I could have sworn I saw combo Pedometers, heart rate meters, and distance clocks that track everything and allow you load them into your computer for tracking. If you want to do the math and figure out exact numbers that would be an excellent way to track things.

I prefer distance or time myself, heart rating is a little too precise for me to concentrate on my running/walking and that at the same time.

It probably is.. here is my sorce anyway.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17414804

Rock Ape, what information does your heart rate meter track?Too much lol.. Dunno exactly at the moment off hand as I don't have it with me but off the top of my head..

It records actual HR
Highest
Lowest
Training zones (which are set by the user)
% between the low and high as you exercise

And other stuff.

It probably is.. here is my sorce anyway.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17414804

Hey, thanks for providing the source. From the paper:


The present study consists of four training interventions. To equate the total amount of work for each of the training sessions, a thorough calculation was carried out.

1. Long slow distance running (LSD): The first group performed a continuous run at 70% HRmax (137 +- 7 bpm) for 45 min.
2. Lactate threshold running (LT): The second group performed a continuous run at lactate threshold (85% HRmax, 171 +- 10 bpm) for 24.25 min.
3. 15/15 interval running (15/15): The third group performed 47 repititions of 15-s intervals at 90-95% HRmax (180 to 190 +- 6 bpm) with 15s of active resting periods at warm-up velocity, corresponding to 70% HRmax (140 +-6 bpm) between.
4. 4 x 4-min interval running (4 x 4 min): A fourth group trained 4 x 4-min interval training at 90-95% HRmax (180 to 190 +- 5 bpm) with 3 min of active resting periods at 70% HRmax (140 +- 6 bpm) between each interval.

And from the results section:


The high-aerobic intensity training performed by the 15/15 and 4 x 4 min groups increased absolute VO2max significantly compared with LSD and LT training. Between the 15/15 and the 4 x 4 min groups, no significant difference in training response was observed.

So they're basically saying that interval training (whether long or short intervals) had an effect on VO2max, whereas the constant-velocity running didn't.

Potential caveat:


The velocity at LT (vLT) was, however, significantly improved by an average of 9.6% in all four groups as a consequence of changes in running economy and VO2max

I don't know much about endurance exercises (most of my limited knowledge is focused on strength training), but this sounds to me like the net effect on running performance was the same across all four groups - the first two showed gains in their energy-efficiency at running ("running economy"), and the latter two showed an increase in delivering energy.

Jeez... This is going to be just as confusing as learning to use my mixed gas diving computer

Well, I think the gist of it is that the same volume of running work will give you the same results in terms of your ability to run, but if you do intervals instead of constant-paced stuff, you'll get better endurance in other activities as well. I still have some reservations regarding the assumptions made in the study, but to keep it simple, if you're getting your heart rate up, you're already halfway there.

If you can figure out your maximum heart rate (I'm not sure how - maybe someone else knows?), you can try out some of the interval patterns they used in the study, although the basic concept is fairly simple: go fast for a while, go slow for a while, repeat.

220 - age

= 178 bpm

I'll try the interval training idea and let you know how I get on.

Here is a preview of maffetone's book. I imagine it really depends on your goals, but heck, you can see what his stuff is like at least-

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=IhoHURCGS8wC&dq=maffetone&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=uAxaxB49BI&sig=Oy7Wdhfgt4dH2Oenv9egE36idhM&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=10&ct=result

I stumbled upon some research thingy... that said that you build your body best at 90% heart rate over 4 minutes then rest.. It had to do with running, physical appearance and endurance.. I think the prinsipp could be applied to other types of training.. maybe you could try boost up your heart rate before doing a set.. run or something.


No dude. That's wrong. That's one way to up your metabolic conditioning, which is fine and dandy if that's what you want or need. There is no such thing as "building your body", at least not as a blanket, cookie-cutter, fit-all statement. It would certainly not be a good thing to do for bodybuilding proper.

Anyways, Dave, I'd say get the heart rate monitor if you haven't done it already. Something simple, nothing complex. At the very least, you can use it upon waking up, while still lying on your bed, to check your daily heart rate. If you see an increase of, say, 7-10 or above (or something like that, can't remember), from your average daily HR, it means you are close to overtraining (or about to get sick) and in need to deload or get some rest.

Also, it makes it more accurate to see your performance (and see if you are actually reaching target level of exhaustions) as opposed to going by feeling.

Ta mate..

Always appreciated

This guy is going to Iraq so I doubt that he needs bigger muscles. I thought that the goal was higher energy/better endurance since he will be running around with a backpack, body armor, and a weapon of some sort and it is very important for him to be able to stay awake.
Do you think that this kind of training can be good for that?