From: wilson@mailhost.aa.cad.slb.com (David Wilson)
Newsgroups: misc.fitness
Subject: Re: Aerobic Heart Rate Question
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:34:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: aa.1992Oct2.163448.20862
Organization: Schlumberger CAD/CAM; Ann Arbor, Michigan (USA)

In article <1992Sep26.161752.14135@wam.umd.edu> sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell) writes:
>
>  I've recently been getting into the ins and outs or aerobic exercise and
>have read some interesting things lately.  I have some questions I would be
>greatfull if someone more knowledgeable then myself could point me in the
>right direction.
>
>  I've read recently that it isnt best to aerobically exercise very close
>to your maximum AEROBIC heart rate since it is possible to into a slightly
>anaerobic state without knowing it.  According to the reports I read this
>will result in not getting the benefits of aerobics....ie fat burning or
>better long haul endurance.

I bought a Polar Vantage heart rate monitor from Creative Health Products
about six months ago.  At the same time, I bought three books on training
utilizing heart rate, from the list of books in their catalog.  I've found
that most books give vague and/or contradictory advice.  The one that had
the most detailed information on lactic acid levels had little that I could
understand as far as the basics -- how long should I workout, and at exactly
what heart rate.

The best book I've found is "Serious Training for Serious Athletes" by
Rob Sleamaker.  It's in the C.H.P. catalog.  The copyright date is 1989,
and it's published by Leisure Press (1-800-747-4475).

This book specifies five levels of training intensity:

   Level I:   60-70%
   Level II:  71-75%
   Level III: 76-80%
   Level IV:  81-90%
   Level V:   91-100%

The percentages are applied to the range between your resting and maximum
heart rates.  For example, if your resting rate is 70 bpm, and your maximum
is 170bpm, then 60% heart rate is 70 + .60 * (170 - 70) = 130 bpm.

The book suggests 220 - age as an estimate of your maximum heart rate if you
don't know the real value from a medically supervised stress test.  I'm 41,
so the rule of thumb yields 179, but I have hit 185 during sprints of a few
minutes duration on my Nordic Track.  So I use 185 when I do the level
calculations.  You will have to use your own judgement in this area.

Level I (60-70%) is suggested for what the book terms "overdistance" workouts,
of 60 to 180 minutes duration.  The majority of total training time should be
devoted to overdistance workouts.  The effort should seem easy, maybe "too"
easy.  The duration is enough stress in itself.

Level II (71-75%) is suggested for what the book terms "endurance" workouts,
of 30 to 60 minutes duration.  "This is the level at which the vast majority
of people train day in and day out.  Although this certainly has a positive
training effect, especially with untrained or beginning exercisers, we find
that for serious endurance athletes, too much training at this intensity
precludes optimial adaptation need from training at Level I intensity".

Level III: pretty useless.  Too low for interval training, but too high for
overdistance and endurance workouts.  If you treat aerobic training the same
as weight training, that is always push a little harder/longer than you could
the workout before, you will wind up in this area, or higher.  The result is
that you will start to hate the very thought of working out.  Your body will
be telling you something.  Sound familiar?

Level IV is suggested for interval training.  Also called anaerobic threshold
training.  "Training at or slightly below the AT usually results in the ability
of the body to buffer or recycle lactate during high-intensity work."  

Level V is for peaking and race preparation.  If you are that serious about
you training, buy the book and read all of it.  You are out of my league!

-----------------------

The first couple of years I had my Nordic Track, I tried to systematically
edge up the duration/resistance/speed of my workouts.  I refer to this as
the weightlifting mentality.  The correct mindset for progressive-resistance
training is not the right way to approach aerobic training.  (I make these
statements on the basis of reading this and other books.  I'm not in such
fantastic condition that ANYONE would want to swallow my advice without doing
their own homework!)

At any rate, I went through the same cycle a number of times.  I would start
out easy, progress nicely for a while (and enjoy it), then begin to have to
force myself, and finally get so sick of it I would quit for weeks or more.
Now I (finally) understand what was happening.  I was pushing up into Level
III, or even close to Level IV, but using a workout duration suitable for
Level II.  Also, I was NEVER content to keep the intensity down in Level I,
nor reach the durations of an "overdistance" workout.  So I was never getting
the benefits of "OD" training: "The secret of OD is in the physiological
changes it causes.  Basically, there are two adaptations the body makes in
response to OD training.  First, you'll be training your body to increase its
efficiency for releasing and burning free fatty acids over long distances, as
enzymatic and hormonal changes in the muscle cells make it easier for fat to
be utilized as fuel during long-duration exercise.  ..."

My advice is to buy this book.  It is in paperback, and cheap (no I don't 
remember the exact price).  You should also pick some others.  (C.H.P.'s
catalog is a good starting place (1-800-742-4478).)  While I didn't find
any book that told me everything I wanted to know, in a way I could understand
and directly apply, Sleamaker's came by far the closest.  Still, some of
the others fill other gaps.  One book that had "lactic" in the title (see
the C.H.P. catalog) was the only one that REALLY explained why lactic acid
levels are the real measure of how hard the body is working.  It also explained
why heart rate is a sufficient substitute for most of our purposes.  That
book's drawback was that it didn't explain how we mere mortals could APPLY
the information.  Sleamaker seemed best in that respect.

My other advice is to invest in a good heart rate monitor, and use it.
Aerobic training without one is equivalent to weight training without knowing
how much weight is on the bar, varying the weight at random, not counting
reps or sets, etc.  Shooting in the absolute dark, in other words.

Dave Wilson
Newsgroups: misc.fitness