heartbeat cont.

willem drees said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found out
that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I am 52, so
that makes it not just a little bit higher then you would
expect from the notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22
higher. Please let me know what you think/ is applicable.

(1) Don't worry, that just is your heart rate, don't run
faster then what gives you 85% of it.
(2) Go see a (a) cardiologist/ (b) (sports) physician (c)
psychiatrist (d) notary
(3) Stick to the rule, and don't run faster then with a
heart rate of 143 (=jogging)
(4) As long as you feel your pulse, you are alive. As soon
as your heart stops beating you will notice.
(5) take a value between 192 and 168 and use that as 100%
(6) Moderator, please filter these depressing hypondriac
senor citizens from the uk.rec.running

More (or less) than one answer may apply.

(1), (4)

though an exception to (1) applies when/if you're doing
speed work or racing.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

"willem drees" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found out
that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I am 52,

so

Quoted message said:

that makes it not just a little bit higher then you would
expect from the notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22
higher. Please let me know what you think/ is applicable.

(1) Don't worry, that just is your heart rate, don't run
faster then what gives you 85% of it.
(2) Go see a (a) cardiologist/ (b) (sports) physician (c)
psychiatrist (d) notary
(3) Stick to the rule, and don't run faster then with a
heart rate of 143 (=jogging)
(4) As long as you feel your pulse, you are alive. As soon
as your heart stops beating you will notice.
(5) take a value between 192 and 168 and use that as 100%
(6) Moderator, please filter these depressing hypondriac
senor citizens

from

Quoted message said:

the uk.rec.running

More (or less) than one answer may apply. Thank you Wim

Dude, you have a slow Heart Rate.

If mine drops a beat a year for the next 5 years, I will
still be at 200 and I know people in their 60s that have
seen 200 on their HRM.

I checked into things myself. All you really have to worry
about is if it jumps 30 beats up or down over and over. If
it always goes up and down smoothly, there is nothing to
worry about.

I invested in an HRM that records the data and then can be
displayed on a computer. If I am worried about any jumps, I
can take a closer look at the data. I have never seen any,
other than ones that could be explained by the 1 polar HRM
in 30 (maybe 27) can screw yours up, just because of the way
they do the codes.

So, I'd go with number (4) above.

willem drees said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found out
that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I am 52, so
that makes it not just a little bit higher then you would
expect from the notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22
higher. Please let me know what you think/ is applicable.

you didn't say how you determined your max hr - presumably
by following some protocol. Others will have max hr much
higher than the 220-age formula, which I think has about a
30bpm variation. Other formulas tend to be closer. My est hr
(LT hr from hard effort, then divide by .9) is about 17 bpm
above the estimated from one formula, but within a couple
bpm of another formula. There's nothing magic about the
formula other than tables based on it tend to get posted on
fitness center walls.

1a (not 1b = running over 85% is ok for hard efforts) 4a
(not 4b = when your heart stops beating *you* may not
notice, but others might) If you're really concerned and you
have some health history that might warrant concern, then by
all means spend the bucks to see a doctor to put your mind
at ease, but the numbers you're presenting aren't
particularly unusual. Some will be higher, some lower.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

willem my data maxHR=200 restHR=40 70%=152 most if not all
formulas are in error. some are 10-15 pulses off. this one
female runner i know had a est. HR of 190 her
maxHR=215(running all out) . It be that way sometimes. if
you are using 'heart monitor training for the compleat
idiot' i would use the 192 as maxHR. If you are using Mark
allens formula , i would use 142 for the 70%. If you are
using your own program (192 by your own test?) then i would
use 192 just my 2 cents plodzilla

willem drees said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found out
that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I am 52, so
that makes it not just a little bit higher then you would
expect from the notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22
higher. Please let me know what you think/ is applicable.

(1) Don't worry, that just is your heart rate, don't run
faster then what gives you 85% of it.
(2) Go see a (a) cardiologist/ (b) (sports) physician (c)
psychiatrist (d) notary
(3) Stick to the rule, and don't run faster then with a
heart rate of 143 (=jogging)
(4) As long as you feel your pulse, you are alive. As soon
as your heart stops beating you will notice.
(5) take a value between 192 and 168 and use that as 100%
(6) Moderator, please filter these depressing hypondriac
senor citizens from the uk.rec.running

More (or less) than one answer may apply. Thank you Wim

It seems to me I heard somewhere that willem drees wrote in article
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found out
that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I am 52, so
that makes it not just a little bit higher then you would
expect from the notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22
higher. Please let me know what you think/ is applicable.

Ever since I was about your age the highest I could do on a
treadmill or bicycle was about 165; that was over twenty
years ago, and my HRMax is still in the same ballpark. We
humans are a very varied lot, and few of us fit statistical
models very well. Unless you have symptoms, preexisting
illnesses, or family history I wouldn't worry much about it.
It either means you have genetics that put you on the high
side, or you're more fit than the average middle-ager. :-)

Quoted message said:

(1) Don't worry, that just is your heart rate, don't run
faster then what gives you 85% of it.
(2) Go see a (a) cardiologist/ (b) (sports) physician (c)
psychiatrist (d) notary
(3) Stick to the rule, and don't run faster then with a
heart rate of 143 (=jogging)
(4) As long as you feel your pulse, you are alive. As soon
as your heart stops beating you will notice.
(5) take a value between 192 and 168 and use that as 100%
(6) Moderator, please filter these depressing hypondriac
senor citizens from the uk.rec.running

Quoted message said:

More (or less) than one answer may apply.

I'd go with (6), but that would probably get me flamed by
some of the old guys. :-)

BTW, I presume you *did* know that you posted this to
rec.running; if so I don't care what the moderator does over
in u.r.r. :-)
--
Don [email hidden]

Thanks I just went running (warm weather) and after 40
minutes my pulse hit 192. At the same time I was feeling
that I reached my maximum (after all these years of running
without pulse meter this well known feeling of exhaust
translates in a number...) that is all. Presumably not the
professional way of measuring it?! Wim

"Dot" <dot.h@#att.net> schreef in bericht news:ogPDc.37403$OB3.31736@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

Quoted message said:

willem drees said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found
out that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I
am 52,

so

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that makes it not just a little bit higher then you
would expect from

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22 higher. Please
let me know what you think/ is applicable.

you didn't say how you determined your max hr - presumably
by following some protocol. Others will have max hr much
higher than the 220-age formula, which I think has about a
30bpm variation. Other formulas tend to be closer. My est
hr (LT hr from hard effort, then divide by .9) is about 17
bpm above the estimated from one formula, but within a
couple bpm of another formula. There's nothing magic about
the formula other than tables based on it tend to get
posted on fitness center walls.

1a (not 1b = running over 85% is ok for hard efforts)
4a (not 4b = when your heart stops beating *you* may
not notice, but others might) If you're really
concerned and you have some health history that might
warrant concern, then by all means spend the bucks to
see a doctor to put your mind at ease, but the numbers
you're presenting aren't particularly unusual. Some
will be higher, some lower.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

thanks, I was hoping for this kind of answers..
"gentolm" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

willem my data maxHR=200 restHR=40 70%=152 most if not all
formulas are in error. some are 10-15 pulses off. this one
female runner i know had a est. HR of 190 her
maxHR=215(running all out) . It be that way sometimes. if
you are using 'heart monitor training for the compleat
idiot' i would use the 192 as maxHR. If you are using Mark
allens formula , i would use 142 for the 70%. If you are
using your own program (192 by your own test?) then i
would use 192 just my 2 cents plodzilla

willem drees said:

Sorry to pick up a (week-old) old thread. I just found
out that my maximum heartbeat when running is 192. I
am 52,

so

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that makes it not just a little bit higher then you
would expect from

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

notorious rule of thumb (220-age), but 22 higher. Please
let me know what you think/ is applicable.

(1) Don't worry, that just is your heart rate, don't run
faster then

what

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

gives you 85% of it.
(2) Go see a (a) cardiologist/ (b) (sports) physician
(c) psychiatrist

(d)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

notary
(3) Stick to the rule, and don't run faster then with a
heart rate of

143

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(=jogging)
(4) As long as you feel your pulse, you are alive. As
soon as your heart stops beating you will notice.
(5) take a value between 192 and 168 and use that as
100%
(6) Moderator, please filter these depressing hypondriac
senor citizens

from

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the uk.rec.running

More (or less) than one answer may apply. Thank you Wim

Quoted message said:

Ever since I was about your age the highest I could do on a treadmill or
bicycle was about 165; that was over twenty years ago, and my HRMax is
still in the same ballpark. We humans are a very varied lot, and few of
us fit statistical models very well. Unless you have symptoms,
preexisting illnesses, or family history I wouldn't worry much about it.
It either means you have genetics that put you on the high side, or
you're more fit than the average middle-ager. :-)

Quoted message said:

(1) Don't worry, that just is your heart rate, don't run
faster then what gives you 85% of it.
(2) Go see a (a) cardiologist/ (b) (sports) physician (c)
psychiatrist

(d)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

notary
(3) Stick to the rule, and don't run faster then with a
heart rate of 143 (=jogging)
(4) As long as you feel your pulse, you are alive. As
soon as your heart stops beating you will notice.
(5) take a value between 192 and 168 and use that as 100%
(6) Moderator, please filter these depressing hypondriac
senor citizens

from

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the uk.rec.running

Quoted message said:

More (or less) than one answer may apply.

I'd go with (6), but that would probably get me flamed by
some of the old guys. :-)

BTW, I presume you *did* know that you posted this to
rec.running; if so I don't care what the moderator does
over in u.r.r. :-)

Thanks + Sorry, I first posted it to uk.rec.running, then
copied it to this one. (A dangerous habit of sending the
same letter to different addressees) I'll just go running
and see if I can cross that 200 border; and when I drop dead
it will be a beatiful way to go. wim

willem drees said:

Thanks I just went running (warm weather) and after 40
minutes my pulse hit 192.

Did you try to run hard during any of that?

At

Quoted message said:

the same time I was feeling that I reached my maximum
(after all these years of running without pulse meter this
well known feeling of exhaust translates in a number...)
that is all.

Maybe you mean something different by "exhaust", but when
I'm exhausted (end of long run that I did a little too hard
to start), I can hardly budge my hr up into normal training
zone. But if I run hard and become breathless, then my hr is
elevated above LT (but not to max). I can recover and do the
same thing again.

FWIW, it wouldn't surprise me if your still underestimating
your max hr
- but please don't feel a need to prove otherwise 😉

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope