Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Improve VO2Max

12346»

Replies

  • tsazanitsazani Posts: 591Member Member Posts: 591Member Member
    I agree. This has been a fantastic thread. I love the idea of dosing exercise as if it were medicine. My measuring device was just under measuring my daily dose by one ZONE. Now I'm close thanks to this thread.

    IMHO under exercising is better than not exercising. So no mortal sin committed. Only venial ones. Which are being corrected as we speak.
    Do not despair if info is being taken/listening into account or not, there are several folks that read AND SERIOUSLY LEARN AND BENEFIT from the advice posted here, we lurk and learn and thank everyone for time and energy to help us all with these wonderful and EDUCATING replies. Please folks, please continue with advice knowing it benefits the MANY.

  • aokoyeaokoye Posts: 1,368Member Member Posts: 1,368Member Member
    tsazani wrote: »
    OldAssDude. Yes. I listen to everybody. I'm just playing around with my toys. I'm still doing the exercise. IMHO 80% of exercise success is just showing up.

    You do know that 80% of the adult population doesn't even do the minimum recommendations of exercise. So just showing up puts me in the top 20%.

    I wanted to see what exercising like a 220-age = MaxHR 49 year old would feel like. It felt like cardio used to feel when I didn't use "instruments". For the first time in months.

    Earlier this year you wanted to your VO2 max number to be in the "elite" category.
    My VO2Max is 32. As a 61 year old male this is considered "moderate". I'd like to get to 41 which is "elite" for my age and sex
    If you want to get to an elite level of fitness you're going to have to a whole heck of a lot more than just showing up. Significantly more. Really if you want your VO2 max to go up in general (never mind to elite levels), you'll have to do more than just show up.

    At the end of the day, it doesn't matter to your success if 20% of the adult population (whose adult population?) is getting a recommended amount of exercise a week. It's not a competition. Of course it also doesn't make your MaxHR calculation any more valid.
  • tsazanitsazani Posts: 591Member Member Posts: 591Member Member
    My MaxHR calculation is good enough for my purposes. I want to do the least amount of exercise that will keep my blood sugars in check. And keep me reasonably fit and healthy.

    If I can improve my VO2Max that's a bonus. Let me have some fun with my Polar toy.
  • awinner_auawinner_au Posts: 215Member Member Posts: 215Member Member
    tsazani wrote: »
    I pushed my birthday back 12 years and did cardio. For the first time since I've been using my Polar Beat it FELT like REAL cardio. Using 220-age in GREEN zone always FELT too easy.

    Ave HR over 30 min = 74% MHR. I even sweated a bit. I could sing as I exercised but not easily. Burned a few more calories too.

    Tomorrow I'm going to do cardio again but with my correct birthday AND putting MHR = 171. See how it feels.

    Good stuff, you are heading in the right direction. Ultimately you just need to push yourself a little bit at a time to see improvements, however if you use the zones and have a bit of structure to your exercise you will see faster improvement.
  • tsazanitsazani Posts: 591Member Member Posts: 591Member Member
    I really need to let my lower back get completely better before I test myself for my real MaxHR.

    Wearing my chest band I'm going to run 400 M as fast as I can and then walk back. Repeat run / walk 3 more times.

    Thinking about my back. Maybe I'll free style swim 100 M as fast as I can. Slow breaststroke back. Repeat FS/BS 3 more times.

    I'll use the highest HR as my MaxHR.
  • aokoyeaokoye Posts: 1,368Member Member Posts: 1,368Member Member
    tsazani wrote: »
    I really need to let my lower back get completely better before I test myself for my real MaxHR.

    Wearing my chest band I'm going to run 400 M as fast as I can and then walk back. Repeat run / walk 3 more times.

    Thinking about my back. Maybe I'll free style swim 100 M as fast as I can. Slow breaststroke back. Repeat FS/BS 3 more times.

    I'll use the highest HR as my MaxHR.

    Earlier in this thread AnnPT alluded to this (and I agreed), don't try and do any sort of performance related testing when you're sick and/or injured. Remember that logical rule you had of not getting injured? Apply it here. Of course you can't always control whether or not you'll get injured, but this is one of those times when you're firmly in the driver's seat.

    Also this post on the TrainerRoad forums might be food for thought.
  • tsazanitsazani Posts: 591Member Member Posts: 591Member Member
    Did cardio using my own age (61). Duration 30 minutes. AveHR = 73% MaxHR. Burned 300 cal.

    As a 49 y/o yesterday. Duration 30 min. AveHR = 73% MaxHR. Burned 335 cal.

    The effort/intensity I used was exactly the same. Time of day the same.

    It seems my 49 year old self burns 10% more calories than my 61 year old self.
  • Duck_PuddleDuck_Puddle Posts: 2,343Member Member Posts: 2,343Member Member
    tsazani wrote: »
    Did cardio using my own age (61). Duration 30 minutes. AveHR = 73% MaxHR. Burned 300 cal.

    As a 49 y/o yesterday. Duration 30 min. AveHR = 73% MaxHR. Burned 335 cal.

    The effort/intensity I used was exactly the same. Time of day the same.

    It seems my 49 year old self burns 10% more calories than my 61 year old self.

    Did you also change your max HR on your profile for your correct age?
  • tsazanitsazani Posts: 591Member Member Posts: 591Member Member
    Yes. MaxHR is 171 for both versions of myself.
  • AnnPT77AnnPT77 Posts: 9,354Member Member Posts: 9,354Member Member
    If you're using a device that estimates total (gross) calories during the exercise time period, of course it'll give you a higher calorie estimate for the same duration/intensity of work, if you tell it a different age. Gross calories include BMR (basal metabolic rate, pretty much what you'd burn in a coma).

    The BMR component of these estimates are based on research about BMR, and the research results suggest BMR declines with age. The calorie difference from the device, for the "same" exercise at a different age, is a logical outcome of the estimating algorithms, coupled with the research data they utilize.

    It's all estimates. They use algorithms and research data. If you could know the true, actual calories (you can't outside of a research lab), it probably isn't 300 or 335.

    BTW, if there's sufficient HR variation within the workout, you can get different calorie estimates for workouts with the same average heart rate/duration while using exactly the same age/size/etc. settings. Simplistically, you can get to a particular average heart rate in a couple of ways: (1) Working very close to that average heart rate for the whole workout, or (2) working both well above and below that heart rate to average to that rate. Depending on the algorithms in use (and the individual device's hardware capabilities), that may result in a different calorie estimate.

    Meh.
  • kjauthierkjauthier Posts: 24Member Member Posts: 24Member Member
    Have you considered signing up for endurance events ie run/triathlon? This can motivate you to train and at the end of the day maybe learn if you are improving given you’re current methods.
  • tsazanitsazani Posts: 591Member Member Posts: 591Member Member
    I'm going to do my basic 30 min / day 7 days per week exercise as medicine. But with much more accurate zones.

    For fun and more fitness I'm going to start playing tennis again. If I can play 3 hours per week that would be nice.
  • NorthCascadesNorthCascades Posts: 7,968Member Member Posts: 7,968Member Member
    Tennis might be great for you. People who can find a type of exercise they love and look forward to have it made.
12346»
Sign In or Register to comment.