What is Exertion? Bad english please…
Exhaustion is the rate of feel of tiredness, fatigue
Effort is the rate of maximal voluntary “force” - activation
What the hell is then Exertion???
Ok, got it… but dont you think that for using RPE and the calcs you posted for preventing overtraining you should take intro consideration also a system being “hitted mostly” (cardio, resp, motor, endocrine,etc…) to say differently, a specificiy of load and fatigue??? Again you cannot just simply sum the running load with, lest say, jumping or throwing load? Again, dont mix apples and oranges…
If I get it right, yes, this would be a normal adaptation, i.e., your recovery HR decreases faster after a certain load exactly because of the parallel improvements in %VO2max -same load perceived as easier. The %VO2max won’t be the same; it will change, i.e., decrease as well after adaptations occur to the SAME load. If you keep in mind that the two have a parallel relationship, it makes sense to me, doesn’t it?
If this isn’t what you meant again, I give up! 
Not sure how that works. If you train and become more efficient and recovery HR lowers, are you not de-training afte some point? I’d think you’d expect the same recovery HR but and increased max rate during the work, reflecting an ability to do more work and recover as before. In other words, you pick the recovery HR (120 or so) and work again once you reach it. At the end of the whole session, would you expect a change?
Because there is not much point after a while in having a faster decrease in your HR (i.e., better recovery HR) on the same load long-term, constant -or per “phase”- adjustment of the load is necessary. Otherwise, you have the de-training effect that Charlie mentioned.
I wouldn’t go with any fixed HR values, say 120b.min-1, or similar; I understand that was an example.
If you do same work (for example tempo) your recovery HR will get lower and lower until some plato(in terms of weeks and months not acute response). This decrease mean that you improved your recovery abilityes, but if it platoes that mean you should increase load… overload principle. When you increase load, the recovery HR will be higher but after some time it will go down again, as a consequence of adaptation. So, yes, you should expect same recovery after larger load…
When do you ask your athlete for RPE? This could be a critical point, take an example
Athlete A
Training: max. speed (4x60m etc.)
RPE after training: 7 (1-10grade)
RPE after 4h: 9 (1-10grade)
Athlete B
Training: Tempo (10x200)
RPE after training: 8 (1-10grade)
RPE after 4h: 6 (1-10grade)
As Charlie stated, after speed session athlete does not feel fatigued, but after some time it will, vice versa for tempo…
So you cannot take RPE to consider CNS stress and fatigue… On the other hand running on 90% and 95% is not so differernt to CNS (its stress and fatigue) but to the athlete it is a lot easyer (95% - 9 RPE, 90% - 7 RPE). Charlie?
On the right track but I’d think initial RPE for Athlete A might be 6 or so, while the 9 might occur a few hrs later.
Athlete B might feel the 8 right after, but a 2 or 3 4hrs later.
Would you also need a rating system as to how the athlete feels prior to the next work out? or would the RPE be more appropriately useful prior to the next workout (the following day)?
I suppose it all comes down to monitoring everything and being careful.
For me it doesn’t really matter so much whether you obtain the athlete’s RPE straight after a session, or not: if the athlete says 5-6 after a track session and 7-8 before a tempo session the next day and 8-9 after that tempo session and 2-3 before the third day’s track session again, everything seems to be on track -you won’t get much reliable results from an RPE obtained from the athlete straight after the session most of the times; at least this has been my experience lately and therefore, I always wait the next day.
It might be the case that it works differently between endurance and power athletes…
Maybe, then it is appropriate to have a RPE right after the training session (to allow the athlete to give you instant feed back about the session, this might allow you to evaluate the experience level of an athlete and his ability to sense what just occurred), and a rating prior to the next training session (which may let you know how long an athlete may need between different types of training sessions / how well they follow the regenerative elements between training (diet, sleep, supplementation) / and how well you’ve planned the appropriate amount of work for the athlete)
I was searching for some physiological models explaining athlete performance and adaptation mechanisms and I found these, very interesting data from T. Noakes:
http://classes.hhp.ufl.edu/apk/Summer/PET6397dcc/Notes/pdf/Noakes%20review.pdf
http://www.ini.unizh.ch/~kiper/noakes5.pdf
http://www.ini.unizh.ch/~kiper/noakes8.pdf
It takes time to read them, but It is worth of the effort… I couldn remove my head from the desk until I read it, this is very good stuff and it explains relation of RPE to performance (effort to maintain homeostatics) and the Charlies attitude that for menaging training proces you should look (hear, touch) at the athletet not the HR monitor, etc…
It will change your look at the current fatigue (and physilogical factors affecting performance) theoryes…
Thanks for the links, duxx!
And on similar issues provided some time ago by “pakewi”
Nik this is great… and you are telling me for this NOW!? Why didnt you told me about this site months before? shame on you
Better late than never; basically, I would blame pakewi… 
Glad this is of some help to you!
I suppose you just missed it when first posted.
Well I made a template on excel I have been using for some weeks now.
Here is a link: http://s27.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2D8UFEO9QTFLQ2BVBVWQNP8EMW
I made it using the info aggielax posted.
One question: the standard deviation is the highest load take away the daily average load??
So if HR increases by 20% or more or any of these number rise rapidly
Daily average load =
Standard deviation =
Monotony =
Weekly Load =
Strain =
Then its usually a sign of overtraining. How would one judge monotony, strain etc and decide how much an increase is to much?
Many thanks, and tell me what you think of the template!!
http://s7.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=0AC9QRFB045CB1H4KCNNISX5HB
To monitor overtraining or overreaching, with the help of this template, how much of a weekly increase in average daily HR is to much? What about monotony, strain etc - how do I know if these numbers are going up TO much each week?
Also I got a polar heart rate monitor for my birthday. Now I know people on here have told me that is not needed for my sport, but I got given it as a present so is there a practical use for it? Maybe I could add another column on the template and measure how long it takes my HR to return to normal after exercise [I read that is a sign of overtraining]. So is there a use I can put this HR monitor too? And how can I use my template i have made effectively?
Many thanks.
I understand that the following is not on long-term monitoring, but I am posting it as a sequence to the RPE posts and for the last point of the abstract between RPE and [La].
And before Charlie corrects me again, no, it’s not about sprinters!
Green, M.J., McLester, R.J., Crews, R.T., Wickwire, J.P., Pritchett, C.R. and Lomax, G.R. (2006). RPE association with lactate and heart rate during high-intensity interval cycling. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 38, 167-172.
Purpose: Physiological and perceptual measures during interval exercise are not well understood. The current study therefore examined the correspondence between RPE, HR and blood lactate concentration ([La]) during interval cycling.
Methods: VO2peak and the 4.0 mmol.l-1 lactate threshold were determined. In session 2, subjects (N = 12) warmed up (10 min, 0 W) and completed five 2-min intervals (INT) at >4.0 mmol.l-1 workload (i.e., +20 W), each separated by 3 min of recovery (REC) (60 rpm, 0 W). HR, RPE and [La] were recorded at 10 min, at the conclusion of each INT and each REC and 5- and 10-min recovery.
Results: Repeated-measures ANOVA showed [La], HR and RPE increased significantly across time (INT and REC). At each time point, repeated-measures ANOVA was used to compare standardised data (α = 0.05). RPE (at INT) intensified concurrently with HR and [La] at INT. Correlations were significant for INT (P ≤ 0.05) (HR-RPE: r = 0.63, [La]-RPE: r = 0.43). Similarly, RPE and HR for REC systematically increased with [La]. Correlations for REC were also significant (HR-RPE: r = 0.44, [La]-RPE: r = 0.34). Correlations were also significant for INT and REC combined (HR-RPE: r = 0.70, [La]-RPE: r = 0.22).
Conclusions: INT and REC independently showed moderate correspondence for RPE-[La] and RPE-HR. However, tighter overall coupling of HR with RPE (vs. [La] with RPE) and a dissociation between RPE-[La] suggest RPE during intervals of intense cycling were more sensitive to acute metabolic demand (evidenced by HR) versus [La].
Check this out:
D A Baden, T L McLean, R Tucker, T D Noakes and A St Clair Gibson. Effect of anticipation during unknown or unexpected exercise duration on rating of perceived exertion, affect, and physiological function. Br J Sport Med 2005;39:742-746
http://bjsm.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/39/10/742
This is one of the most “ground shaking” article about RPE I have read… Also, every work from Tim Noakes is a must read (who am I talking to? Nik you allready know that… )
Tell me what you think Nik!
Cheers pal!
Nik, you returned your old avatar! That is more likely…