[Canyon Monkey]

Can someone please tell me based on the metabolic test I took what my AeT should be? I attached the test. I am thinking 175 bpm, but it seems high to me. I am 52 years old in in average shape (I think). I am doing the 6 months training program for Denali and want to make sure I am doing it correctly in Training Peaks.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

Topic

[Canyon Monkey]

Canyon Monkey on December 28, 2019 at 11:16 am #35112

Also, not sure if it natters but my VO2 score was 58.7. New to all of this and it is very confusing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous on December 28, 2019 at 5:44 pm #35123

Thanks for writing in to us with your questions. As you may know. Not all these types of test are the same. Did you read this before selecting a lab?

It matters a lot how long the stages were in your test. And it matters how they define zones. It is best if you or we can get a copy of the raw data before they hand out this sort of colorful chart.

If the stages were around 3 minutes and you had a decent warm up then I’d go with their results.

However you can easily verify this with your own simple HR Drift test.

These do seem like very high heart rates across the board for anyone in their 50s. But there is a lot of variation among individuals.

Scott

[Canyon Monkey]

Canyon Monkey on December 28, 2019 at 6:54 pm #35126

Thank you SO much Scott for the reply. I did the test on an treadmill and they had me to a 12 minute warm up. The test took about an hour and they seem to be upping the speed and incline every 2-3 minutes until I went to total failure. It’s confusing that I read your AeT should be 70% of your max which is much lower than what the test shows. I can see if they can provide the raw data as an accurate AeT seems like a critical component of the training.

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on December 30, 2019 at 11:30 am #35173

Hi Canyon Monkey,

As Scott says, we’re all different but these do seem very high. As a point of reference I’m 63 and did (twice) the Treadmill HR Drift test and started my UA training program at a HR of 110. Yes it is low, and yes it was hard to believe it was doing anything, but I stuck to it, tested monthly and raised it in line with test results to current 120 which I’m now holding. I’m as fit now as I was in my early 20’s, maybe even fitter, and I started in fairly good shape, albeit mostly from typical Z3/Z4 training.

It’s maybe a useful point of reference.

Derek

[Canyon Monkey]

Canyon Monkey on January 1, 2020 at 6:45 pm #35284

Scott…Does this raw data help? They revised my AeT to 158.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Canyon Monkey]

Canyon Monkey on January 10, 2020 at 10:24 am #35919

I just had a second test. Here is the data. Any help would be appreciated.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Dada]

Dada on January 11, 2020 at 12:59 am #36037

Puh, the last test is a though one. I think it’s inevitable that one of the coaches jumps in. Why did they not provide you an AeT number this time?

[Canyon Monkey]

Canyon Monkey on January 11, 2020 at 7:22 am #36039

They did. See attached. 163 Aet and 196 AT/LT. But they seem less than confident as my results are not typical. Might be that I eat a very low carb diet?.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Reed]

Reed on January 17, 2020 at 10:06 am #36425

Hi Tom,

The fat / carbohydrate crossover point tends to correlate fairly well with aerobic threshold (AeT), from what I have read. The interesting thing about your test is that the percentage contribution from carbohydrates fluctuates above and below 50% as your heart rate increased from 150bpm to 185bpm before finally increasing above that point. Graph from your raw data attached.

You say that you’re training for Denali. I’m curious if you’ve developed a particular efficiency moving at a 5mph on a 6% grade. That might explain some of your test results and could suggest that your AeT might be higher, closer to 180bpm. It might be worth triangulating with a lactate measurement test at constant grade with increasing speeds.

I think the definition of aerobic threshold in the report is wrong, or at least substantially different from the more useful definitions used here and in Scott & Steve’s books. From the report: “Exercise at heart rates below AeT are done for active recovery, not to build fitness.”

My two cents: the zones listed in the report seem fine. Consider your AeT to be the top of Zone 2, or 183bpm. Your AnT is 196, only 7% higher than your AeT, suggesting a solid level of fitness.

-Reed

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Canyon Monkey]

Canyon Monkey on January 18, 2020 at 9:50 am #36494

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I did not have any specific training prior to these tests as this was the start of the 24 week expedition training program in training peaks. Really hard to say for sure. Seems like these are not very typical results. Very frustrating as the program revolves so heavily on the AeT number.