Mission Statement

The K.M.C. Cycling Club is a diverse group of people from across the Kaiserslautern Military Community (KMC) brought together by a common interest in cycling and cycling advocacy. Whether through racing, group rides, community involvement or social events centered on cycling, K.M.C. Cycling's primary purpose is to further the sport of cycling in the KMC, and provide a valuable cycling outlet to its members. We are a not-for-profit organization that values diversity, friendship and, above all, a good ride.
Latest topics
» New landstuhl trail opening.
Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:33 pm by Zenkem

» Forest Night Ride. "No Drop"
Fri Sep 23, 2016 3:54 pm by Zenkem

» Winterberg bike park trip!
Tue Sep 13, 2016 8:02 am by Justachillin2

» Lunch in France... (Sat 17Sep2016)
Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:27 pm by Pritch

» Weekly Thursday NO DROP MTB group ride Gelterswoog 2016 season!
Thu Sep 08, 2016 4:26 pm by Pritch

January 2018
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Calendar Calendar

Like Us
KMC Cycling Forums

Percieved Exertion vs. Heart Rate

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Percieved Exertion vs. Heart Rate

Post by Jonesy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 4:35 pm

I'm starting a training plan next week. This plan uses zone training in 5 zones (actually it's eight zones with the subzones of zone 5).

These zones are based on percentages of Lactic Threshold Heart Rate, but also give guidelines for a scale of Rate of Percieved Exertion. I understand the concept of the Lactic Threshhold and the Lactic Threshold Heart Rate and how a heart rate monitor cna be used to help control which zone you are in. I also can 'get' the idea of using RPE to figure out which zone you are in and adjust your effort accordingly.

I'm curious if the more serious racers out there have some advise/experience with these two techniques of gauging your zone.

Here's what I think based on the research I've done so far on the pros and cons of each:

RPE-Rate of PErcieved Exersion

PROS:
-Don't need to buy anything or strap any more doo-dads to my bike (this is a BIG plus for me)
-Less distractions allow me to focus more on riding and enjoy what I'm doing
-I'm probably smart enough to handle this one

CONS:
-Not as precise (not sure I'd be able to distinguish between the sub zones of zone 5 at ALL)
-Not as reliable



Heart Rate Monitor

PROS:
-Precise and accurate
-Reliable

CONS:
-More crap on my bike
-more distractions
-Something new to have to learn and I'm pretty sure I'm not smart enough to figure out all the various bells and whistles
-Somehting else I need to buy

Those are my thoughts so far... what are y'all's thoughts?

Jonesy
Officer
Officer

Posts : 1007
Join date : 2010-11-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Percieved Exertion vs. Heart Rate

Post by spookyload on Wed Aug 03, 2011 6:53 pm

If you have ever ridden with a HRM, you will quickly see that how you feel has very little to do with your heart rate. You can feel like hammered poop and you heart rate will still be low. On the other hand you can feel great and when you look at your pulse it is 170 (very common with races). I don't think you can judge a zone based on how your "feel". I know we did it for years, but the first real tool cycling got to put science to racing was HRM. Now we have power meters which brings even more data in. The "how I feel" training method is a couple generations old.
avatar
spookyload

Posts : 1167
Join date : 2010-11-21
Age : 48
Location : Vogelweh, Germany

Back to top Go down

Re: Percieved Exertion vs. Heart Rate

Post by Jonesy on Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:16 pm

Matt, thanks for the insight! Ill chat you up for advise on monitors at the ride tomorrow.

Jonesy
Officer
Officer

Posts : 1007
Join date : 2010-11-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Percieved Exertion vs. Heart Rate

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum