heart rate

I will see if I can find a more active group. Thanks anyway.

"curt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:YU5Vd.26635$uc.25121@trnddc09...

Quoted message said:

I have been running shorter distances on and off for a few years and do
plenty of long distance bicycle and really never paid all that much
attention to my heart rate. I was on a tread mill the other day and

decided

Quoted message said:

to see what my HR was. It was ranging between 165-174. I am 39 years old
and my resting HR is probably in the mid- low 50's my best guess is. I

have

Quoted message said:

taken it a few times and that is what I came up with. I am 6'2" and about
185 in pretty good shape, but no IM.

I looked at the chart and that rate wasn't on there for my age. Is there
any problem with that? I asked a trainer in the gym and he said that is a
good thing. I don't know what my max is anymore. It was in the 190's

years

Quoted message said:

ago and I wasn't in as good as shape as I am now.

Thoughts?
Thanks,
Curt

"curt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:aXoVd.49407$W16.5928@trndny07...

Quoted message said:

I will see if I can find a more active group. Thanks anyway.

You're welcome.

Seriously Curt, if you'd bothered to do any Googling first you would have
found that this topic has turned up so frequently folk don't feel inclined
to rush and answer it every time.

If you had, you would have found that tables and formulae are only the
roughest of guides to you maximum heart rate. It's very common for active
people to have maximum HRs higher than their calculated ones. To find your
true maximum HR you have to do a stress test that will push your HR to it's
max.

Tim

curt said:

I will see if I can find a more active group. Thanks anyway.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thoughts?

First thought that springs to mind is that if you've gone 39 years
without knowing, you could easily wait a little longer than 21 hours and
40 minutes for someone on Usenet to answer you before pulling faces.

But anyway. My age 46, 5'11", 163lbs, HRmax 186 (188-189 when
de-trained) and resting HR is 45. 165-174 is the range of HR I'd expect
to see when running a half-marathon.

In your case, 50-ish sounds fine for resting HR, but I can't say for the
165-174 on the treadmill, without knowing how long you could keep
running at the pace which got you to that HR.

Try this empirical formula instead of 220-age, taken from a sample of
amateur, endurance runners (1)
HRmax = 210 - age/2

which gives, for me, 187, for you 190.

But there are enormous individual variations so YMMV applies.

(1) in french http://fsp.saliege.com/

Thanks Steve and Tim. Sorry I was so short. Your answers are enough
information I need really. I don't want to get too caught up on all that HR
stuff. I felt really comfortable while running with that HR. The table on
the machine got me thinking about it, so I wanted to know if all was okay.

Thanks again,
Curt

PS 21 hours and 40 minutes.... LOL that is funny... and you are correct, I
need to show more patience.

"steve common" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

curt said:

I will see if I can find a more active group. Thanks anyway.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thoughts?

First thought that springs to mind is that if you've gone 39 years
without knowing, you could easily wait a little longer than 21 hours and
40 minutes for someone on Usenet to answer you before pulling faces.

But anyway. My age 46, 5'11", 163lbs, HRmax 186 (188-189 when
de-trained) and resting HR is 45. 165-174 is the range of HR I'd expect
to see when running a half-marathon.

In your case, 50-ish sounds fine for resting HR, but I can't say for the
165-174 on the treadmill, without knowing how long you could keep
running at the pace which got you to that HR.

Try this empirical formula instead of 220-age, taken from a sample of
amateur, endurance runners (1)
HRmax = 210 - age/2

which gives, for me, 187, for you 190.

But there are enormous individual variations so YMMV applies.

(1) in french http://fsp.saliege.com/

"curt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:aXoVd.49407$W16.5928@trndny07...

Quoted message said:

I will see if I can find a more active group. Thanks anyway.\

don't be so curt.

Quoted message said:

"curt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:YU5Vd.26635$uc.25121@trnddc09...

Quoted message said:

I have been running shorter distances on and off for a few years and do
plenty of long distance bicycle and really never paid all that much
attention to my heart rate. I was on a tread mill the other day and

decided

Quoted message said:

to see what my HR was. It was ranging between 165-174. I am 39 years
old
and my resting HR is probably in the mid- low 50's my best guess is. I

have

Quoted message said:

taken it a few times and that is what I came up with. I am 6'2" and
about
185 in pretty good shape, but no IM.

I looked at the chart and that rate wasn't on there for my age. Is there
any problem with that? I asked a trainer in the gym and he said that is
a
good thing. I don't know what my max is anymore. It was in the 190's

years

Quoted message said:

ago and I wasn't in as good as shape as I am now.

Thoughts?
Thanks,
Curt