's Forum Archives - Racing

Archive Home >> Racing(1 2 3 )

Testing Testing Lactic Threshold ...(8 posts)

Testing Testing Lactic Threshold ...Tahoe Gator
Mar 6, 2003 1:28 PM
Does anyone know of a surefire way to do a Lactic Threshold test with a trainer and heart rate monitor? I did a test where I increased my speed 1 mph every minute until I could not go any faster and recorded my heart rate with a Polar S710 monitor (downloads to PC). I was expecting a bend in the curve somewhere to indicate my threshold, but all I got were 2 straight lines (speed and heart rate). I tried scatter plotting one versus the other, regression line fitting, etc., but still just straight lines. Is there a better testing procedure or way to read the results? Web links or whatever appreciated?
re: Testing Testing Lactic Threshold ...Jon Billheimer
Mar 6, 2003 4:10 PM
The best non-lab way to get your lactate threshold heartrate is to do a 40k competitive time trial. Your average heartrate, after the first ten minutes or so, will be pretty spot on to your LTHR. Or do a 20K TT and your av. heartrate once you're warmed up will be about 103 to 105% of your LTHR.
Like Jon said NMS-U-B
Mar 6, 2003 6:25 PM
Do you differentiate between 'training LT' and 'racing LT'?hrv
Mar 6, 2003 7:14 PM
The reason I ask is I'm about to do another LT test myself and was going to use the 'go all out for 30 min., take avg. hr last 20 min.' as my LT, along with checking the onset of 'deep, labored, breathing'. According to Friel, which is the program I'm using, you could divide by 1.03 - 1.05 if you basically can simulate a race performance, which I can't on my trainer!

Their belief is if you set your LT to that determined in a race you'll end up (for the avg. athlete) with zones that are too hard for training and don't promote good recovery. And any program that says you can get better results with easier training I'm all for! Do you think I'm selling myself too short?

Do you differentiate between 'training LT' and 'racing LT'?Jon Billheimer
Mar 7, 2003 8:15 AM
Yup, you're selling yourself short:)- LT is LT regardless of where and how you're riding. It's a physiological parameter. Generally, in training you won't/can't push yourself as hard as you do in a race, which is why during a 20K training TT you'd accept your average HR as an accurate LTHR, whereas in a TT of similar length your av. HR would be somewhat above LT.
'training LT' and 'racing LT'?allervite
Mar 7, 2003 9:58 AM
Yup, Lt is Lt. However, you guys are using a "shotgun" approach to come up with this Parameter. So the question is not, "is there a difference between training and racing Lt," but what is the best method to determine LT? Obviously the lab, but that's expensive. So here we go trying to estimate. I'm not so sure hrv is selling himself short.
What I really meant washrv
Mar 8, 2003 5:36 AM
for me to use an avg. hr derived from a race TT for training would be wrong because I get so amped up in a race environment the subsequent zones I would set up would be too hard for training. Except that's when I would divide by 1.04, correct? So I do the field test TT and combine it with when I notice my breathing is becoming labored and my RPE to get a darn good enough guess of my LT, that is easily repeatable.
What I really meant wasJon Billheimer
Mar 8, 2003 8:30 AM
Correct. LTHR, although it's an essential training tool, by any standard is a fuzzy concept. First, there are several different definitions of LT, which clouds the lab test scenario (you've got to know how they're determining LT). Second, even if you have a lab-tested benchmark, lactate threshold heartrate can vary by as much as 10 bpm or more on any given day due to state of training, recovery, and nutritional state. So the TT test is as good as any, especially when combined with rpe.