Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Training Load Focus is based on what? Heart rate zones are so different!

6127713
over 4 years ago

I would like to train more in my low aerobic area and fill my green bar. But in which heart rate area should I train? How is it calculated? Is the training load focus connected to how I set my heart rate zones or to a different value?

Because then I would be confronted with a problem.

I realized that there is a big difference on how the heart reate zones are calculated respectively on what they are based on. The heart rate zones based on lactate threshhold and max heart rate deviates very much from each other.  

For example, if I train in Zone 2 

- according to %LS I'm pysically challenged (130 - 144 bpm)

- according to %max heart rate I'm not challenged at all. (109 - 127 bpm)

Would that mean it depends on how I set my zones, the training load focus bars will fill up? And if yes, which calculation should I pick?

Thanks for your help.

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    This is just my personal opinion. But I think that lactate threshold-based zones are most accurate, compared to the other methods. 

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to Steve.E

    Hey Steve, thanks for your fast reply. Could it be, that it's less about accuracy and more about two different philosophies behind the two different calculations?

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to 6127713

    Of course everything revolves around having an accurate max heart rate. Yours correct?

    A long slow run mostly in zone 2 would help fill in the low aerobic shortage you have.

    Edited to change zone from 1 to 2.

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to hogmemberisold

    Thanks for the reply. Yes, the max heart rate is correct. Maybe one point higher, but this doens't change the major deviation of the two methods. I would like to know the heart rate range I need to run in, in order to fill the green bar. I'm a beginner. I need easy. I need gamification. And it's super frustrating, if I run in a certain range and it does't fill the bar. I'm wondering why the system is so confusing and misleading. 

  • +1 over 4 years ago

    Hey,

    I believe the low-aerobic, high-aerobic and anaerobic is not based on how you have setup your heart-rate zones, but rather on some form of "magic" done by firstbeat algorithms.

    Sports scientists often divide up zones by looking at certain turning points, such as the ventilatory threshold 1 and 2 (VT1 and VT2). Often it is said that Zone1+Zone2 are below VT1, Zone 3 is from VT1 to VT2 and Zone4+Zone5 are above VT2. My assumption behind these graphs is, that Firstbeat tries to estimate VT1 and VT2 HR levels, and divides your training time into the three bins created.

    Note on names:

    • Ventilatory Threshold 1 (VT1) ~= Aerobic Threshold (AeT) ~= Fat-burning Threshold
    • Ventilatory Threshold 2 (VT2) ~= Anaerobic Threshold ~= Lactate Threshold (LT) ~= Critical (Pace, Power, HR) ~= 1 hour max effort (Pace, Power, HR)

    So, if you want to be running low aerobic, you should be running below VT1, but where is your VT1? The laboratory way of measuring this is to wear a mask during exercise, and to find the speed+heart-rate+power at which your body begins to use predominantly glycogen as fuel, and no longer fat oxidation dominates. A much more practical method is the "talking test", where you run *very* slow at first, and converse with a partner, steadily and slowly increasing the speed to try to find the point at which talking gets less comfortable. Some people also recommend the nose-breathing test: Breathe only through your nose, start really slow and increase your speed gradually step-wise to find the point where the urge to breathe through your mouth becomes strong.

    My suggestion is to try some of these tests, perhaps the talking or nose-breathing one as they are free, and to use that heart-rate as upper value for your z2.

    Guessing VT1 from maxHR (or LT) can be very far off individually, e.g. in the book "Training for the uphill athlete" p63 there are three athletes compared, one has his AeT@56% maxHR, the second at 73% of maxHR and the third at 88% of max HR.

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to Fredderic

    Great answer. This is something I can work with. 

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    Z1/2 are low aerobic. Zone 3/4 are aerobic high. You can run in Z2 and occasionally go to Z3, still it will be low aerobic. To get high aerobic, best bet is to do intervals.

    The watch uses calculation you choose. As Steve said, I also think that %LTHR is the most accurate.

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    Firstbeat Training Focus activity identification is quite poor in my experience. It works well if your session is like 2x20 at sweetspot and total duration is 1 hour, or a few VO2 intervals with similar total duration.

    If you do an interval session followed by 1h of endurance riding or running, all you get is Training Focus = Base. No matter all the hard work in interval part. :-( That's quite lame.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to gtom

    This is true. I did a 5 hour ride with 6k feet in elevation gain. It included 2 hours in zone 2, 2 hours in zone 3, and a full hour in zone 4 at elevations over 9,500 ft. Garmin called that base training and said I was unproductive, and that my training load was dropping. Did some other big climbs later in the week and my high aerobic scores continued to fall. Maybe try breaking the ride up into multiple shorter rides on the device to get it to read more accurately. Stop and save the segment as a ride after a long duration in a high aerobic zone, then start a new ride. It may also be based on a combination of power zones and aerobic. I read somewhere else that to be considered high aerobic, the ride was measured against your FTP. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to 1343928

    so, how to do 'high areobic' ? am i doing something wrong? Slight smile

    i have no 'high areobic' in last weeks (probably months - always?) just Anaerobic (as i like to push hard sometimes, like 90-91%HRmax on short climbs - up to 4-5 mins)

    Anaerobic

    424
    High Aerobic
    0
    Low Aerobic
    1396
    but why High Aerobic is 0 ? in last weeks/months ....