Sunday, September 07, 2008

Turns out I *am* in better shape

Last summer I rode up to the top of Brush Mountain and back home again and vowed never, ever to attempt it.  I say "rode" -- that means I got a third of the way up before I nearly collapsed, trudged alongside the bike for what seemed like a mile (probably a quarter to a half mile), biked, walked, and biked the rest of the way.  But I've been on my bike so much this summer that I was really getting curious as to how I would do if I tried it again, so I did.

Better, it turns out.  Not great, but better.  I stayed on the bike the whole way, going really, really slowly, but I made it to the top and never felt like I was going to die.  I just kept pushing the pedals around one more time, and then one more, and that got me there.  I took the long way home (very hilly, more down than up, and it turned out to be a lot of fun) for a round trip of fifteen miles.  I seriously considered continuing on the Huckleberry Trail to add another five miles, but my back was getting tired from leaning over (my legs were fine) and the trail was packed with people on foot today (not surprising -- it's gorgeous out).  Maybe next time.

My other evidence that I'm in pretty good shape is that I put on Daniel's heart monitor before I went out.  I lay down and my heart rate dropped to 57 inside of a minute.  So my resting heart rate is really good.  While I was out my peak rate was in the low 180s, even on the mountain.  Most of the time it was in the 160s, which is where I like it to be at the gym -- I know they have complicated formulae for determining ideal exercising rate, but that's where I perceive exertion without exhaustion (over 170 my face gets red).  I got stuck at a traffic light and it dropped to 131 before the light turned about a minute later.  The average for the trip was 168.  Not shabby. ;-)  Gadgets are fun.

2 comments:

Sarah said...

Good for you! I keep thinking I should invest in a heart rate monitor. I use the ones on the treadmills, but I don't know how accurate they are. They always seem really high when I'm not feeling out of breath at all (they'll read 172, but I think I could carry on a conversation). I also don't know how much I should pay attention to the recommended maximums for my age. According to them, at 172 bpm I should be on my way to the hospital.

Emily said...

I read a lot about the heart rates the other day on this site:

http://exercise.about.com/od/cardioworkouts/ss/findtargetheart.htm

They have the perceived exertion scale that I've seen elsewhere:

http://exercise.about.com/cs/fitnesstools/l/blperceivedexer.htm

When I'm in the 170s I'm just at a level 7. I definitely don't believe the standard age-based scale!