mr_obvious Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 So, summarizing our consensus...... It comes down to individual commitment and ability, rather than some academic / theoretical / universal fitness statistic. Ja?A couple years ago, I'd regularly train in the 190-200bpm range for 18 mins, three times a week. I had some medical problems set me back almost two years since then; so I'm working on getting my mojo back I know I'm pushing it real close to the limit. For one, I have to actively force my breathing, passive respiration isn't enough. Two, if I miss a breath (like while wiping sweat or taking too long to swallow saliva, etc.)......that's pretty much the end, can't catch up oxygen wise, time to slow down. So it becomes more than just a cardio session, it's an outright exercise in focus and concentration.Pretty funny when I go see my GP lately though. They freak out at my idle heart rate around 45bpm....then see all the bruises on my arms and legs. Not the usual patient they see, I s'pose!
todome Posted January 24, 2010 Posted January 24, 2010 What I won't agree to is allowing the exception to denegrate the rule, particularly when an important part of that rule is that there will be exceptions and includes the corollary is that individual field testing is by far more accurate when done properly. The various formulas for theoretical maximums have their practical value and serve the majority well when it comes to defining target training intensities and designing regimes to meet goals. we all have our moments
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now