For the first time ever, I did the Roark's cove rd climb with someone, Dr. Scott is an recreational endurance athlete, has run marathons. With the feeling of competition, I was motivated to go hard, despite my soreness from yesterday's first running. Biking apparently doesn't do too much for the hams.
Hot, heat index in the 90ºs, possibly mid 90ºs.
Roark's Cove Rd climb - 22:30
Max HR - 185
Avg HR - 167
HR over 170 - 14:17
Avg speed - 6.2 mph
I was comparing HR with Scott on the way up and mine was generally 15 bpm higher. He's 62 and peaks in the high 160s.
Moved my seat forward a little, made a difference. Was better.
Went swimming and had a rare beer afterward. Good to be in Sewanee when it's warm.
The Sewanee track seems to be finished and by the time I return, it'll probably be lined. Feels good. Looks... ok... I guess.
Interesting to see your HR comparisons with Scott. Hard sustained HR of 150s (15 bpm lower than you) and his max of late 160s is very similar to mine. I wonder if your ability to sustain a very high average and max is a contributor to your success over 400m. Providing the aerobic capability in the latter stages of a 400.
ReplyDeleteIn the end it is total volume of blood pumped that matters. So in a sustained hard aerobic event, at the same MEQ (metabolic equivalent) a higher heart rate subject pumps less blood per beat than a lower heart rate subject. So essentially smaller heart chambers or chambers that have a little lower ejection fractions beat faster to provide the necessary oxygen. Sprint and strength athletes hearts adapt differently. Their heart muscle walls tend to be a little thicker than endurance athletes and their heart chambers don’t expand as much. I don’t remember all the specifics but those are two key differences. Bills heart is for sure adapted well for his event and has pretty good aerobic power by making up for smaller stroke volume with higher HR. Genetics is likely playing a role as well. Consider that anaerobic energy production, which is taken to exhaustion in a 400 meter run, uses 16 times the amount of oxygen than aerobic energy production (I think, anyway it is multiples). The aerobic demand for anaerobic work is after the anaerobic work. So after his very fast but short training run his heart has to deliver oxygen to and remove waste from muscle cells. This leads to higher heart rates in the recovery period. I suspect this type of cardiac demand models the heart differently than sustained hard aerobic work. Sustained hard aerobic work gets pumping assist from muscle contraction.
DeleteAnother contributor to high heart rate is intra abdominal pressure. Anytime you exert physical force pressure within the abdominal cavity increases. Exerting force in a more compressed position (hunched over a bike) increases IAP more than if you are in a relaxed position. This causes more stress on the heart. It’s not harmful though. Having too long of cranks means your knees at the top of the pedal stroke are closer to your chest so your downward stroke you are in a more compressed starting position and have higher IAP. Shorter cranks help with this two ways one is that the crank is shorter and the other is that the shorter crank allows you to raise your seat height. This will reduce compression and IAP at the top of your stroke and also allow you to put more leg power into it. There is less leverage though. 172.5 are way too long for you. Suggest 155’s. 155 are a custom build though. You might be able to find some at $200 or so. The shortest stock one’s available are typically 165 but there might be 160’s now since mountain biking has become popular (shorter cranks mean less rock strikes). In my recumbent indoor trainer I use 155mm as I set it up for Amy. My legs are probably 8 inches longer than yours. I use 172.5 outdoor on my road bike and 175 on my mountain bike. Both of those lengths are considered appropriate for me but 155 are considered too short. At the same power output level (200 watts) my HR runs 10 to 15 BPM lower with the shorter cranks as the heart doesn’t have the extra stress from compression. I don’t believe the work out is any less as I seem equally winded and fatigued when done. I do notice leg fatigue in different areas between the longer and shorter cranks, the shorter cranks the fatigued and soreness is lower in the quads closer to the knees longer cranks more evenly distributed.
ReplyDeletehttps://canfieldbikes.com/products/canfield-bikes-am-cranks-new-standard-offset?variant=44270137737508
ReplyDeleteI have these 155 mm cranks and a 1x11 set up on my recumbent road bike. Your bottom bracket might not be compatible. But the 34 teeth should be about right especially since you just do climbs. Trend for road bikes is 1x meaning only one single chain ring in the front.
ReplyDelete