Heart rate monitors - worth using ?

[Rock Ape]

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

[new2bjj]

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.

[Rancid Pantaloons]

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.

[Rock Ape]

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.

[TheRuss]

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?

[polishillusion]

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.

[Rancid Pantaloons]

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

[Rock Ape]

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.

[TheRuss]

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.

[Rock Ape]

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