Forum rules
Please always provide all needed information to identify your problems. Screenshots and detailed descriptions makes it easier for us to help
briangc
Neuling
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed 26. May 2021, 20:31

Polar H9 for Aerobic Threshold estimation

Hi - I am using a Polar H9 for my running (and some cycling activities), however the Aerobic Threshold (AeT) estimations seem to be all over the place for my workouts, ranging from 114bpm to 138bpm. I *think* my threshold is around 145bpm based on other tests/measures but I was hoping to use RR intervals to confirm that. Is the H9 a suitable HRM for this type of estimation? I purchased it as it was supposed to be identical to the H10 except for dual Bluetooth ability and a slightly different strap. Now I'm not so sure.
User avatar
laufhannes
Core developer
Posts: 594
Joined: Mon 29. Jul 2013, 20:59

Re: Polar H9 for Aerobic Threshold estimation

Can't say anything about the Polar H9 (I think it should be fine), but some remarks:
- You know that this is the aerobic threshold or VT1, not to be confused with the anaerobic threshold or lactate threshold, right?
- How many artifacts are reported for your raw data? Does your data look correct? Does Runalyze correctly detect all artifacts?
- Did you do any dedicated ramp test? (Easy to achieve for indoor cycling, hard to achieve for outdoor running)
- Does the regression line in the result plots look valid? Does changing the threshold for SDNN and artifacts affect the results a lot?

I use a fenix2 with Garmin's HRM-Run chest strap via ANT+, which is not recommended. Still, even though I get > 3% artifacts some times, the resulting AeT is always in the same range ~132-138 bpm for me.
User help -- short questions via Twitter, Facebook
briangc
Neuling
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed 26. May 2021, 20:31

Re: Polar H9 for Aerobic Threshold estimation

Thank you for the reply.

I do know it's AeT, I am trying to confirm what I believe is my AeT so I can see how it correlates to AnT (i.e. too wide a gap between the too can mean the AeT is underdeveloped - this can drive training methods).

I only recently discovered that Runalyze does this kind of analysis, previously I was recording on HRVLogger and then exporting the csv files for review later but that method has many limitations. I only discovered Runalyze's ability on a throwaway comment in the Uphill Athlete forum, so I quickly created an account and uploaded my recent activities using the H9. Previously I only wore the H9 on cycling activities as chest straps can be uncomfortable, I was using a Scosche Rhythm+ for my running but while it says it can capture HRV/RR data, the results are not usable in my experience. So I specifically did a few runs with the H9 to see what those results look like.

I have done one Ramp test on an indoor treadmill and that was the best so far with AeT estimated at 137. Everything else has just been outdoor runs, some of which have been unusable as HR varied up and down too much.

Artifacts were lower than 2.2% on the one ramp test. Unfortunately I am not familiar with some of the other settings you suggest, is there a FAQ on Runalyze that explains how to set these for different results?
pepelisbon
Neuling
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat 22. Jun 2019, 22:04

Re: Polar H9 for Aerobic Threshold estimation

Best practices for Runalyze and DFA a1 thresholds:

http://www.muscleoxygentraining.com/2021/05/
briangc
Neuling
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed 26. May 2021, 20:31

Re: Polar H9 for Aerobic Threshold estimation

Thank you this is exactly what I was looking for. No comments on using the H9 (as opposed to the H10) but I am going to continue to assume they are identical for this purpose.

Return to “Discussion, Feedback & Questions”