Sportsmith 1000 banner
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Heikki Rusko Orthostatic Test for over training

  1. #1

    Default Heikki Rusko Orthostatic Test for over training

    Does anyone know when performing this test to determine over training is the increase (10 beats/minutes or more) in the 120 second-post-standing measurement in relation to the original reading at rest or the 15 second reading?

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gottoshopalot View Post
    Does anyone know when performing this test to determine over training is the increase (10 beats/minutes or more) in the 120 second-post-standing measurement in relation to the original reading at rest or the 15 second reading?
    Not sure of the Heikki Rusko test, but Joe Friel, in his Total Heart Rate Training book, details an orthostatic test. He also mentions a study of Finnish athletes showing a 10-beat-per-minute increase at 2 minutes in overtrained athletes. I wonder if the Finnish study is the Heikki Rusko?

    "Wearing a heart rate monitor, lie down for 10 minutes. Check your heart rate and then stand up. At 15 seconds after standing, check your heart rate again. Look at your hear rate again at 2 minutes. The 15-second, peak heart rate is usually interpreted to reflect parasympathetic nervous activity and the 2-minute heart rate sympathetic activity. They both are good indicators of overtraining."
    The measures are a comparison between tests, not a measure of difference between the time intervals.
    Work and train smart, not hard. But be smart enough to know that sometimes it does take hard work to accomplish your goals.

    Follow me on Twitter

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CycleGuy View Post
    Not sure of the Heikki Rusko test, but Joe Friel, in his Total Heart Rate Training book, details an orthostatic test. He also mentions a study of Finnish athletes showing a 10-beat-per-minute increase at 2 minutes in overtrained athletes. I wonder if the Finnish study is the Heikki Rusko?



    The measures are a comparison between tests, not a measure of difference between the time intervals.
    You're exactly right, Rusko did a study on Finnish athletes. The measures are comparisons between the test - my question is about the the increase of 10 bpm at 2 minutes. Will the athletes' heart rate be 10 beats higher than it was compared to the 15 second reading or 10 bpm higher than it was from the initial reading lying down?

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gottoshopalot View Post
    You're exactly right, Rusko did a study on Finnish athletes. The measures are comparisons between the test - my question is about the the increase of 10 bpm at 2 minutes. Will the athletes' heart rate be 10 beats higher than it was compared to the 15 second reading or 10 bpm higher than it was from the initial reading lying down?
    The 15-second HR is representative of a different system (parasympathetic nervous activity) than the 2-minute HR (sympathetic nervous activity). So the two cannot be compared. Friel doesn't provide a reference point for over-training; he just indicates that the two measurements are good indicators of over-training. So...

    I am taking it that the measure is the difference between two tests. Example:
    Before start of training cycle, do the test and record the three HR.
    After some weeks of hard training, redo the test and record the three HR.
    Compare the results. If the second test is higher than the first, then you are in a state of over-training. The Finnish study indicated a difference of more than 10 bpm at the two minute marks indicated over-training.

    I did the test yesterday (out of interest). I have been doing no training due to a surgery that I am recovering from. So my assumption is that I am not at all overtrained and am fully rested.
    10 minutes lying down: 46 bpm
    15 seconds after standing: 98 bpm
    120 seconds after standing: 62 bpm
    So now I have a base. When I get back to training, and start doing some hard sessions, I can redo the test and compare.

    If I do the test during training and find results like:
    10 minutes lying down: 46 bpm
    15 seconds after standing: 102 bpm
    120 seconds after standing: 72 bpm
    I would have reason to believe I am over-trained. Perhaps my resting HR is the same, higher or lower. My 15-second HR is higher. Hmm...maybe too much training? But look at my 120-second HR - it is 10 bpm higher - which according to the Finnish study indicates I am over-trained.

    Now on the flip side of that, if my 15-second HR had been still higher, say 108 bpm (so 10 bpm higher than base) but my 120-second was only 66 bpm, am I overtrained? Might, but according to the study, it I may not be.
    Last edited by CycleGuy; 12-13-2010 at 06:49 PM.
    Work and train smart, not hard. But be smart enough to know that sometimes it does take hard work to accomplish your goals.

    Follow me on Twitter

  5. #5

    Default

    001cy2-300x300
    OMG makes perfect sense. It's amazing every esplaination I found was text book and exactly the same and at the base didn't clearly explain the measurement represents reading from different nervous systems.

    Thanks and speedy recovery to you!

Similar Threads

  1. VO2 Test
    By Spook in forum Heart Zones & Heart Rate Training
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 10-07-2009, 03:12 PM
  2. Fit Test
    By nordorcyclist in forum Heart Zones & Heart Rate Training
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-07-2007, 06:09 PM
  3. Training Fuel: During training & Post training recovery
    By supermario in forum Diet, Health & Nutrition
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-30-2007, 07:35 AM
  4. Heart Rate Training and weight Training for Women
    By carpediem in forum Books, Movies, & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-10-2006, 04:52 PM
  5. Where is the test?
    By greekgoddess in forum Spinning ®
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-08-2005, 02:02 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •