If you are a Spinning® or Indoor Cycling instructor you will likely remember the workshop you took to be certified to teach. Well, at least you’ll remember bits and pieces of it, since it’s usually like trying to drink from the proverbial firehose; it may quench your thirst but you’ll be left with a “what just happened there” feeling. In my early days as a combined studio owner and cycling instructor I took many different certification courses just to see what all the differences were. While there was less than 30% that distinguished one from the other (usually focused on the bike they represented), the need to convey a ton of information was the common thread.
Fortunately for me, my first master instructor encounter was from someone who also rode and competed outside. She told me about the heart rate “bible” for training by Sally Edwards – the original “Heart Rate Training for Cyclists” written when heart monitors were just making their way to the consumer. While I took a variety of workshops all around the country, I was also devouring everything I could get on heart rate training. I came away with a single but overwhelming conclusion. To wit… while heart rate training is not complicated in itself, there is certainly too much to learn to try and squeeze it in during an initial instructor training course.
So in the tradition of not doing heart rate training justice, and trying to cover too much information in too little time (or space as in the case of this blog), I thought I would add my fuel to the fire and list the 5 things you aren’t likely to learn in an initial instructor training course.
#1: The 220 Minus Your Age Formula Is Just Wrong
No matter how much science has been produced to show how this method of determining ones maximum heart rate is not accurate, it still continues to be the number one heart rate “fact” trainers and instructors seem to remember. It is of course not a fact. It’s easy, it’s convenient, it’s plastered on every piece of literature or equipment made before 1995 or so, but it’s flat out wrong. Some would say that it isn’t supposed to be highly accurate, just something to get people going in the right direction. Unfortunately, human nature is such that once you start something in a certain way, it’s very hard to break out of it. We are creatures of habit, and while the intention may be to do a proper field test “later”, when that later never comes, you end up with people either training well above where they should be and risking either injury or demotivation, or well below their potential and risking the wasting of a lot of time or again, demotivation. Like anything used this pervasively, it will get “lucky” and be correct sometimes, and I suspect that is why it continues to survive. Solution? Learn how to conduct a field test. There are several methods, they are not difficult. If you are a professional, it should be part of your minimum data set of knowledge.
#2: Max Heart Rate vs Threshold Heart Rate
Maximum Heart Rate is a valid approach to training if you conduct a proper field test or metabolic test to estimate your max within a reasonable tolerance (not able to be accomplished via the 220 – age business). However, it is not the only way. Many instructors (yes even Master Instructors from every program I’ve encountered) do not know the difference between Max Heart Rate training and Threshold Based training.
While they are both valid methodologies, a strong argument can be made for the more serious athlete to use the Threshold system because of the simple fact that they can actually train/affect their thresholds (yes there is more than one) while your Max heart rate is genetically determined and unlikely to change over your lifetime. You might think that would be a good reason to use Max heart rate, but again, as a more competitive athlete or just someone that really wants to see improvements, this would lead to not adjusting your zones with your improvements in fitness. You are then helping to insure the dreaded “plateau effect”; the leveling out of your performance or improvements. Solution? Learn what Threshold Training is and how it differs from Max Heart rate. Learn how to do field tests that determine threshold as part of the education you obtain.
#3: Analog, ANT+, Bluetooth Are Not Just Tech Speak
As little as five to ten years ago, the average instructor was not using an iPod or smartphone to play their music, but CDs and some tapes were still being used. I know, it’s hard to believe but it’s true. The advancements in technology over the past 10 years have been so rapid and its adoption so pervasive that even the smart phone alone, has become more the expected piece of equipment not the exception. As such, we can not continue to let our eyes glaze over when someone mentions terms like Ant+ or Bluetooth or a term seldom even said these days; “Analog”. These are merely the agreed upon method of communication between the transmitter belt one wears (usually right underneath the chest) that listens to the heart rate and then sends the information to the receiver (the watch portion of a heart rate monitor, or perhaps the console/computer on the bike). Knowing or at least being familiar with what these terms mean, and their implication for the instructor is not difficult and not knowing will only make one look as if they are resistant to change at best, and “old” at worst. Solution? Use the enormous free library that sits at your fingertips most every day – the internet. There is more than enough information there about what these protocols are, and I suspect plenty of videos as well to help you retain the knowledge.
#4: How Rate Of Perceived Exertion Relates To Heart Rate
I would venture to say that the vast majority of Spinning® instructors, and a fair number of Indoor Cycling instructors still use RPE to direct their class. It’s a well known fact that most indoor riders do not own heart rate monitors unless they are competitive athletes or avid outdoor riders. Being that this is such as small part of the universe of Indoor enthusiasts, the common thought is “why teach to heart rate when no one is wearing a monitor”. Good question, but also one that will leave our industry “stuck” on RPE for God knows how long.
As good as RPE is for convenience and as a way of promoting the ever important “body/self awareness”, there are risks that also can end up confusing someone who wants to do more than exercise, but instead wants to train ( a separate comparative subject too involved to elaborate on in this post). Suffice it to say that your heart monitor is a true reflection of the stress you are under, but your perception of yourself and how you feel will be tainted by emotion, ego, and a host of other non-tangible elements that make it “beg” so to speak for some objectivity. Solution? Spend a couple weeks working out with a heart monitor on, and from time to time, after you have NOT been looking at the display for a few minutes, record your RPE value on a piece of paper, then look at your heart monitor and write the heart rate down. Over time, how consistent are they? How big of a range are you experiencing? All of this should provide insight into yourself even beyond just training.
#5 The Power & Importance of Training Load
To date, none of the instructor workshops I attended ever spoke about training load. That being said, now that there is power on some of the bikes, we do have some programs spending a bit more time with this and other real concepts of training. However, remember that this will be the clear minority of master instructors since just 5 years ago the only thing on the typical stationary bike handlebars was sweat, not computer console s.
Training load is calculated as a function of heart rate predominantly, but is then further embellished by some coaches and training systems to include some aspects of power. The importance of this comes back to probably the most fundamental fitness training principle of all times; that without stress, there is no adaptation, and without adaptation, you will likely not reach your goals. How this is calculated was made uber simple and user friendly by Sally Edwards, based on the early research done by Eric Banister from Canada who developed one of the first models of training load. The Heart Zones® system simply multiplies a weighted factor to each minute you spend in a given heart zone to come up with a numeric value of Training Load for a given workout.
Again, this is a concept too involved to cover in this post, but it makes the overall point of this article – proper heart rate training and education – especially for someone who will be leading others, can not happen in the same day one takes the primary certification course. That dog simply won’t hunt. Solution? Purchase one of Sally Edwards books on training with a heart rate monitor, or take a dedicated workshop that focuses on Heart Zones® .