It seems to me that about the biggest factor limiting top-end fitness as we age is simply the decline in HRmax (maybe the second biggest is increased recovery time?).
HRmax decline with age is well-known as has been for decades, and yet I’ve hardly ever seen any advice on how to minimise it. Is it basically just inevitable?
Is there any particular type of exercise, diet, or whatever that’s been shown to help slow down the rate of decline? The weird thing is that these days I always record my highest HR numbers when I’m returning to training after a week or two off. Obviously that makes sense in terms of reduced plasma volume and the corresponding need for a higher HR to compensate, but why can’t we achieve the same heart rate after plasma volume increases again? Is it something to do with the elasticity of the heart muscle wall, which perhaps isn’t pushed so much if blood volume is less?
Perhaps this is just the same sort of thing as age-related presbyopia - inevitable and unavoidable? Or is there anything that might help increase heart elasticity?
My max HR has decreased very little (over 50 now). I can’t hold that max for very long any more, though. I do a lot of sprint swimming, longish hypoxic underwater stuff. No idea if that helps, but otherwise I don’t do anything special.
I’m not sure this is the thing to worry about. Usually, HRmax decreases when you get fitter. And, anecdotally, the data top athletes share indicate that they have pretty low max heart rates.
For example, Lionel Sanders, a pro Ironman athlete, does a lot of YouTube and his HRmax is really low, somewhere around 170 IIRC. He can almost do Zone 2 efforts in the double digits, it’s nuts.
Not a clue about the biology, but I’ve never heard anyone worry about MaxHR for fitness.
Hmm, I think there are two separate things going on though. Yes, HRmax certainly decreases when you get fitter and increases again when you are less fit, but at the same time your HRmax when fit decreases with time, which does put a limit on high intensity efforts (if perhaps less on FTP and much less on endurance).
While it won’t answer your question, I suggest you read ‘The Midlife Cyclist’ by Phil Cavell, ‘The Road Map for the +40 Rider Who Wants to Train Hard, Ride Fast and Stay Healthy’.
Among giving some good advice, a major point in the book is that we are pioneers. Never before in human history have people in significant numbers actively sought to not just stay active, but perform at a high level into mid life and older age. We are essentially the test subjects in our own experiment. In other words, there may not be an answer to your question in part because there’s been such a small number of people to test that it’s been scientifically pointless.
Another point in the book is that in a group of athletes MRI scanned, containing both amateur and pro, every single male had scar tissue somewhere in/on their heart. The women didn’t. There isn’t an explanation as to why, or what it means, but it’s probably not ideal.
Those two points, and a few others, result in the conclusion that we absolutely should go out and ride etc, but maybe be careful, accept a certain amount of decline, and just enjoy being able to achieve athletic levels into older age that our ancestors would never have imagined (mostly cause most of our ancestors would have already have been dead by what we now call middle age), even if those athletic levels are lower than what you managed in your 30s.
Thinking about this a little more, perhaps @caley_fretz a chat with Phil and an exploration of the points in his book, with takes from others, would make for an interesting article and/or podcast? One for @Ronan_Mc_Laughlin and performance process maybe?