Race with HR monitor or not?

[GinnySellars]

Some of you are trying to decide whether to wear a HR monitor or not at IMC. A few thoughts...

- as we have discussed in our EES sessions, the lactate balance point can vary based on numerous limiting factors. When a rested individual takes an LBP test, the LBP will likely be the same unless you are making large changes in your physiology. So the HR at which your lactate, output, and heart rate are stable is generally the same at a given level of fitness. This is not so during a very long and intense race or training session. The transition point to accumulating lactate may change due to other limiting factors. As systems are stressed, and systems have reduced ability, the LBP might be reached at a different heart rate. I say this because the HR numbers don't necessarily work during a long race. A simple example of this is dehydration. As the blood volume lowers, the HR has to increase to keep the cardiac output the same.

- are you using your HR to slow you down or speed you up?
- are you interested in seeing the data afterwards to learn from it?
- do you have other biomarkers or methods of knowing how hard you are working, and what you can sustain? For instance, do you know what breath rate you can maintain, or what cadence you can sustain over the long haul? Do you use your watch to notice cadence?

So, as you can see, I don't have an answer for you. One of the women I coached through IM I suggested she wear a HR monitor, as she was very prone to working too hard initially, then fading fast in the last half. One of the more experienced men I coached raced too conservatively, and needed to stop looking at his watch, pay attention to his breath rate, and race with passion!

I would love the data from the HR monitor, and am yet to decide whether it's comfortable enough to race with. I tend to find my breathing is so weak on the run, that the effort of stretching the HR monitor strap with each breath is obvious. Pathetic I know...

[Andrew]

I think Ginny has made some excellent points, and clearly outlines the potential difficulty with using HR alone as a guide. The same can be said for guiding intensity using only wattage, or any other sole biomarker. The most important thing is having an excellent feeling for what your body is doing. Whether you use your HR, respiration rate, power, or a combination of the factors to help you guide our intensity is not as important as enjoying the race, and experiencing the joyful challenge of completing a truly epic adventure.

So, use what you are comfortable with. Hold back if you feel you are pushing too hard, and be ready to push through some discomfort. Everybody reaches a point in the race where the only thing that matters is getting to the finish line, and no amount of monitoring is going to help you do that. So, take a deep breath, remind yourself how strong you are, and keep moving forward towards your dreams.

[Peter O'Brien]

Personally, I feel like I can push harder without. At the Tuesday night TT, I tried covering my HR monitor for the first five minutes, then checked. I was riding at LBP + 15, feeling great, whereas I would have been holding a steady LBP + 0 feeling like I was pushing it. If I don't know I'm over LBP, I feel better, and race better.

This may be a very good thing for shorter races, but could hurt in a longer one. At Robb's ride I rode LBP - 10 for the first day, riding at the front of B-group. The morning after was a 29.7 km climb. B-group dropped me within 15 minutes. My heart rate would simply not go higher than what would have been LBP - 20 the day before.

This is a bit off topic; what is the limit of training one can do in succession before efficiency of benefit is lost? The last day of that training weekend where we went to Oliver, I had trouble completing a 20 km ride. Was this overkill?

Peter

[Andrew]

GREAT question Peter...
The answer as always is not a simple one.

To first respond to the HR comment. Everyone should remember that Heart Rate is only ONE biomarker we can use to reflect intensity. And this biomarker is only ONE of those that reflect what the heart is doing. The cardiac output is a combination of HR and Stroke Volume. So, using only HR, and ignoring all other factors will be a poor reflection on what is happening to your body. Take for example the difference noted between the HR achieved during our standard 3 minute step test, and one in which you ramp up to 300 watts after just a few seconds, as you would do in a TT situation. If you want to use your HR, then it would be best to begin your TT after a step test on a trainer to slowly bring your HR up to LBP, then try to start your event as close to completing the warm up as possible. Which happens to be very similar to what you would see at the Tour. If you are sitting, waiting for the event to start, with a resting HR of 65, and you suddenly increase intensity to race pace, the lack of venous return would force the heart to contract very quickly to maintain cardiac output to the muscles. And you will see a MUCH higher HR for the intensity you might have seen at the same intensity at the end of a step test...and consequently have a completely different feeling despite the very high HR.

My reason for doing some races with HR is to collect the information for future events, and for training. And having the attitude that every race is a preparation for a future event, helps make that process fun. I chose NOT to wear my HR monitor in Wisconsin, so that I was not held back by the numbers, and did not feel any restriction with my breathing. I will wear it at every race next year up until Kona.

Now to answer the question about recovery and training.
Training can be done every day, without a break.
However, each system that is trained must also be given time to recover.
In your case Peter, you likely stressed your cardiac system with the very long first day of riding, then stressed it again during the hill climb, which made Day #3 feel so bad. If you had been taking control of your training for those three days, knowing that it would be longer than you had ever ridden, it would have made more sense to ride at lower intensity (LBP-20 to LBP-30) on Day #1 (which I remember suggesting when we were first riding at the back of the pack). This would have allowed an easier time for the cardiac system, and might have allowed you to work on your musculo-skeletal system on Day #2 during the long climb, doing slow cadence and still low HR. The on Day #3, you could have worked on coordination and breathing during the short ride, and possibly some running ideas afterwards.

So, training every day IS possible, as long as you understand that each system needs recovery. So, we are putting together a training plan for our athletes that suggests three longer days with specific focus, then a full day of rest, and then 2 days of more functional work, with a focus on a specific area of weakness, followed by another rest day. In some cases, after focusing training on the weakness, it may take 3-4 days for full recovery, and ANY training in that time, will need to allow the weakness time for recovery. So, if cardiac system has been stressed in your case, and likely was your weakness, then either complete rest, or a session that works on strength WITHOUT stressing cardiac...hiking, or weights for example.

It will continue to become more clear during the training session with the team this winter.

[Peter O'Brien]

So when I start the race having sat around, I could be at what would be LBP + 10, without really being over? My heart is compensating for the rest of my body while it warms up? I'm guessing this would tax the functionality of the heart; is this necessarily a bad thing in a short race? Do all systems suffer when doing this?

Wow, asking one question soon leads to another dozen... Sorry.

On Robb's ride I got waaaaaay too excited riding in a big group, and rode off the front at LBP - 10. It felt easy at first, and I thought I was going to survive this ride and be able to recover. On the last hill following Craig and yourself, I'm sure I went over LBP and taxed my heart to a point where it would not recover in time. Day two I had suppressed heart rate, and I worked on musculoskeletal co-ordination coming up that brutal 29.7 km mountain. By the last 40 km I was fried in that department as well, struggling to hold on to anyone's wheel. The third day in Oliver was just plain painful (awesome). Next time I'll definitely listen to you more; I was overconfident and over-excited. I think that would have not been overkill if I had not ridden the third day.