Maximum Heart Rate?

v1nc1 said:

Hi all,

I recently bought myself a Timex HRM (it work flawlessly 🙂 ) to
improve my running and cardio workouts. Most information on the web
emphasise greatly on a person's maximum heart rate MHR to gauge their
training and I've been using a mathematical method

220 - age = maximum heart rate
- rest pulse x 0.6 (if 60%) + rest pulse = pulse rate needed

to calculate my MHR. But when I tried to achieve my MHR of 200 (I'm
19, having a rest pulse of 60), I could only managed to push to 186
bpm. Is this normal? I know there's a slight variation from the
calculated MHR but I thought it wouldn't be that off. Should I take
186 bpm as my MHR?

How did you test your MHR? Just go out and run as fast and far as you can?
If that is the case, then you probably have not achieved your max. I've
tried various methods of testing my MHR. What gives me the highest HR is
repetitions on a hill. Warm up thoroughly. Run three high-intensity 600m
repeats up a moderate hill, jogging back down right away after each one. If
you run these 600s all out, your heart rate should be within two to three
beats of maximum by the end of the third repeat.

Phil M.

--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." ­Martin Vanbee

Ignoramus19691 said:

In article said:

v1nc1 said:

Hi all,

I recently bought myself a Timex HRM (it work flawlessly 🙂 ) to
improve my running and cardio workouts. Most information on the web
emphasise greatly on a person's maximum heart rate MHR to gauge their
training and I've been using a mathematical method

220 - age = maximum heart rate
- rest pulse x 0.6 (if 60%) + rest pulse = pulse rate needed

to calculate my MHR. But when I tried to achieve my MHR of 200 (I'm
19, having a rest pulse of 60), I could only managed to push to 186
bpm. Is this normal? I know there's a slight variation from the
calculated MHR but I thought it wouldn't be that off. Should I take
186 bpm as my MHR?

How did you test your MHR? Just go out and run as fast and far as you can?
If that is the case, then you probably have not achieved your max. I've
tried various methods of testing my MHR. What gives me the highest HR is
repetitions on a hill. Warm up thoroughly. Run three high-intensity 600m
repeats up a moderate hill, jogging back down right away after each one. If
you run these 600s all out, your heart rate should be within two to three
beats of maximum by the end of the third repeat.

The only way for me to achieve my MHR is to run up the stairs or up a
steep hill. My speed while running on flat ground is limited by
factors other than my heart rate.

You need to run for a little while to reach max -- a couple of minutes at
least. It also helps if you're warmed up (so you start with a heart rate of
about 80%)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

v1nc1 wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

Hi all,

I recently bought myself a Timex HRM (it work flawlessly 🙂 ) to improve my
running and cardio workouts. Most information on the web emphasise greatly
on a person's maximum heart rate MHR to gauge their training and I've been
using a mathematical method

220 - age = maximum heart rate
- rest pulse x 0.6 (if 60%) + rest pulse = pulse rate needed

to calculate my MHR. But when I tried to achieve my MHR of 200 (I'm 19,
having a rest pulse of 60), I could only managed to push to 186 bpm. Is

this

Quoted message said:

normal? I know there's a slight variation from the calculated MHR but I
thought it wouldn't be that off. Should I take 186 bpm as my MHR?

Thanks in advance,

WT from Malaysia

You're using the heart-rate reserve formula, which is better than the
standard % of MHR. I'm one of those who believe that LTHR (lactate
threshold area heart rate) is more important for endurance athletes. This
is the area of effort, reflected by your HR, when your body can't supply
oxygen fast enough and your exercise metabolism begins is increasingly
anaerobic.

While its difficult at first to get an idea of LTHR, and it will change
(become higher) over time, if you exercise too close to LTHR or above it too
often, your training won't be effective. Training programs based on LTHR
take into account (and I think more directly train) the energy supply
system.

I suggest at first use your heart-rate monitor as a biofeedback tool only;
learn your body's response to exercise from it. Judge your pace with other
factors, such as whether or not you can talk comfortably when running. (You
should be able to for most runs). Also see how you feel the next day after
running. If you run daily, then you will get a good idea of how fast you
can go and recover well from day to day. Most people who run less
frequently go too hard. Set up heart rate training zones later if you want,
after you get a good idea how to use it as biofeedback tool.

- Tony

You were supposed to enter your sperm count into the equation. No doubt
this will bring those numbers you seek crashing down into a more
realistic number.

<< You were supposed to enter your sperm count into the equation. No doubt
this will bring those numbers you seek crashing down into a more
realistic number.>>

what's that?

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
<A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>

Tony said:

While its difficult at first to get an idea of LTHR, and it will change
(become higher) over time, if you exercise too close to LTHR or above it too
often, your training won't be effective. Training programs based on LTHR
take into account (and I think more directly train) the energy supply
system.

I suggest at first use your heart-rate monitor as a biofeedback tool only;
learn your body's response to exercise from it. Judge your pace with other
factors, such as whether or not you can talk comfortably when running.

I agree with Tony. When starting, it's far easier to use conversational
effort as a guideline. Where your speech starts breaking up, then only
gasping words (breathing harder), you're probably approaching the (85-)
90% max hr zone or (80-) 85% Karvonen or heart rate reserve of the LT hr
zone (approximate numbers). It's using hard breathing as a surrogate for
LT. This might not be completely true, but it's a good guideline for
starters.

As Tony said, this targets the energy systems better, esp. if your max
hr emphasis might be off.

Not sure if yours is a downloadable version or not, but looking at
post-run graphs of hr can be instructive.

Another thought after you get a feel for things is to try estimating
your current hr while running at certain efforts, then look at your hrm
to check.

Good luck with your new tool.

Dot

--
"So many people get stuck in the routine of life that their dreams waste
away. This is about living the dream." - Cave Dog

Want to see my max?

Phil M. said:

v1nc1 said:

Hi all,

I recently bought myself a Timex HRM (it work flawlessly 🙂 ) to
improve my running and cardio workouts. Most information on the web
emphasise greatly on a person's maximum heart rate MHR to gauge their
training and I've been using a mathematical method

220 - age = maximum heart rate
- rest pulse x 0.6 (if 60%) + rest pulse = pulse rate needed

to calculate my MHR. But when I tried to achieve my MHR of 200 (I'm
19, having a rest pulse of 60), I could only managed to push to 186
bpm. Is this normal? I know there's a slight variation from the
calculated MHR but I thought it wouldn't be that off. Should I take
186 bpm as my MHR?

How did you test your MHR? Just go out and run as fast and far as you can?
If that is the case, then you probably have not achieved your max. I've
tried various methods of testing my MHR. What gives me the highest HR is
repetitions on a hill. Warm up thoroughly. Run three high-intensity 600m
repeats up a moderate hill, jogging back down right away after each one. If
you run these 600s all out, your heart rate should be within two to three
beats of maximum by the end of the third repeat.

Phil M.

My little bishop is awake.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:10:36 -0400, [email hidden] (Miss Anne

Thrope) said:

You were supposed to enter your sperm count into the equation. No doubt
this will bring those numbers you seek crashing down into a more
realistic number.

<< My little bishop is awake. >>

Check, mate!
Castle me.

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
<A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>

The formula is often incorrect because there is considerable variation
among people. An extreme stress test can measure it. A sports center
or cardiologist could administer it. Some people have mentioned self-tests.
There is debate whether a self-test can cause a heart attack in older people,
so some people recommend a supervised test.