Took my resting pulse in bed this morning. 48bpm. It might have been lower, but I had to get out of bed to get the heart monitor and strap it on!
Still,I'll settle for 48.
What I'm uncertain about is my max HR. As I rapidly approach my 54th birthday then the '220 minus your age' rule of thumb (or should that be rule of ventricle?) gives me a max of 166. But on my bike ride the day before yesterday I had an average of 152, or 92% of my theoretical max. Now I'm pretty sure no-one can exercise at 92% of their max for 44 minutes, so I think my own max HR must be higher.
Until I can get out and do a maxHR test, I'm going to use 180 as my max. This is a figure from my last maxHR test, performed at least 10 years ago. Even this higher figure means that I was biking along at 84% of max, and, when walking yesterday (I went to post a letter in the village and took the longer way home, walking briskly all the while [isn't 'briskly' a fabulous word?]) my average was 95, or 53% of max.
I think I need to find the more sophisticated rule of ventricle for working these things out. Can anybody help? It seems the height of conceit to imagine I'm doing my stuff with the heart of a 40 year old.
No comments:
Post a Comment