Max pulse rate

I have hit 220 myself although it was painful and I would not have remembered if it were not for the max recording feature of the HRM I was using. This was 2 years ago and I was in better shape, able to hold 190 for extended climbs.

Now I have a s720i and its recording feature lets me see how fast the pulse increases.

mmamster said:

I always thought that Max HR did not literallly mean how far you could push your heart up under high stress. Are you guys saying that if on a hill climb your HR gets to say 205 then that is your max HR? Isn't max HR a measure of max sustainable/safe HR or something like that?

Max HR means what you thought it didn't mean. It is the fastest your heart will beat at maximum stress. This doesn't mean it should be your "goal" to push yourself to this number. The Max heart rate establishes your threshold for each heart zone. Heart zones are numbered 1-5 with 5 being the hardest, decreasing in units of 10% so zone 5 is 90-100% of your Max HR. A number of books have been published providing training programs based on heart zones, Sally Edwards and Ed Burke have both written books on this topic. Typically, they contain a variety ride profiles that will have you spend a certain time in various zones depending on the intensity of the workout and desired effect.

mmamster said:

Isn't max HR a measure of max sustainable/safe HR or something like that? Also I thought that the LOWER your max HR generally the fitter you were all other things being equal, rather than higher.

No, as I said earlier, max is max. The "safe" aspect of this is the reason there are Max HR calculators which are generally recommended over going out and finding your true Max. If you're not very fit, going out and pushing your heart to its maximum is definitely not a good idea. Even if you are very fit, getting to your maximum is really stressful and really, really hurts.

mmamster said:

Also I thought that the LOWER your max HR generally the fitter you were all other things being equal, rather than higher.

No, a lower average HR (not Max) indicates you are fitter, all other things being equal. Note that this is only true as pertains to you. A frequent riding companion of mine who is the same age, height, weight and roughly equivalent condition has an average heart rate that is typically 15-20 beats higher than mine for a given workload. We'll frequently compare HR's at various points on a ride (crest of a hill, after a short recovery, pedalling at a steady pace, etc) and mine is consistently 15 or so beats lower than his. His Max HR is also 16 bpm higher than mine.

As I said elsewhere, Max HR is generally genetic and therefore pretty well fixed though it does decrease as you age.

See http://www.heartzone.com/us_resources.htm for more discussion and a Max HR calculator.

Greg

I found this on the net -

Calculation of Maximum Heart Rate

The easiest and best known method to calculate your maximum heart rate (MHR) is to use the formula 220-age. A paper by Londeree and Moeschberger from the University of Missouri-Columbia indicates that the MHR varies mostly with age, but the relationship is not a linear one. They suggest an alternative formula of 206.3 - (0.711 * age). Similarly, Miller et al from Indiana University propose the formula 217- (0.85 * age) as a suitable formula to calculate MHR.

Londeree and Moeschberger also looked at other variables to see if they had any effect on the MHR. They found that neither sex or race make any difference but they did find that the MHR was effected by the activity and levels of fitness.

Studies have shown that MHR on a treadmill is consistently 5-6 beats higher than on a bicycle ergometer and 2-3 beats higher on a rowing ergometer. Heart rates while swimming are significantly lower, around 14 bpm, than for treadmill running. Elite endurance athletes and moderately trained individuals will have a MHR 3 or 4 beats slower than a sedentary individual. It was also found that well trained over 50s are likely to have a higher MHR than that which is average for their age.

To determine your maximum heart rate you could use the following which combines the Miller formula with the research from Londeree and Moeschberger.

* Use the Miller formula of MHR = 217 - (0.85 * age) to calculate MHR
* Use this MHR value for running training
* Subtract 3 beats for rowing training
* Subtract 5 beats for bicycle training
* Subtract 3 beats for elite athletes under 30
* Add 2 beats for 50 year old elite athletes
* Add 4 beats for 55+ year old elite athletes

Also I am already a HR training convert and have used a polar 520 for training for over 6 months, so I am familiar with level training etc. What I am keen to explore and dispell is the impression given by this thread that somehow your max HR is the momentary peak you can push your heart to. A HR monitor will record that but your HR can get very high for all sorts of bad/unhealthy reasons - I am sure you have heard the Greg Welch (pro triathlete) story - he had a heart attack while doing a triathlon and didn't know it until after the race (it was a electrical impulse problem that was fixed with a pacemaker). His HR shot up to 220 and he felt faint but kept going....that doesn't mean his max HR is 220.

The site you refer to notes the max HR is the level you can sustain your HR at for a minute.

my max hr is around 198 which i frequently hit on climbs. when i TT it sits at about 188-192.

mmamster said:

I found this on the net -

Londeree and Moeschberger also looked at other variables to see if they had any effect on the MHR. They found that neither sex or race make any difference but they did find that the MHR was effected by the activity and levels of fitness.

The references I've been using (Burke and Reed) cite a number of things that can affect MHR including temperature, fluid intake, etc., and Reed does say it is "sport specific" but doesn't go on to say how. Both agree though that it is principally determined by genetics.

Some of the text you included is confusing (to me), in particular,

Quoted post said:

Elite endurance athletes and moderately trained individuals will have a MHR 3 or 4 beats slower than a sedentary individual. It was also found that well trained over 50s are likely to have a higher MHR than that which is average for their age.

This compares MHR relative to others rather than oneself but does seem to imply that MHR is a few beats lower in those that are fit.

An analog is the percentage of fast vs. slow twitch muscles one has. This is determined genetically and is (I believe) relatively fixed. To restate the above quoted text, "Elite sprinters will have more highly developed fast twitch muscles than sedentary individuals" which is comparing two different people rather than saying "a sedentary individual who became an elite sprinter developed more fast twitch muscle"

We're debating relatively small differences (3-5 bpm) but max HR being sport specific is interesting to me. I still wonder whether or not this difference is relative to specific individuals or applies to groups. In other words, whether it means that if I am a long distance runner, I might have a MHR of 182 but if I am a cyclist I might have a MHR of 185 vs. long distance runners in general have MHR's that are 3-5 beats lower than cyclists in general. I don't know the answer but will keep poking around to see if I can find out more.

It seems reasonable to me that it might be easier to hit my MHR running than cycling since running is weight bearing whereas cycling isn't but it also seems to me that if I push myself equally hard doing either the MHR I'll hit is the same.

Greg

I found this at: http://home.hia.no/~stephens/hrchngs.htm

Your Maximal heart Rate Differs in Different Activities. Cardiac hemodynamics and maximal sympathetic drive are influenced by 1) body position during exercise and 2) muscle mass involvement. So, a triathlete with a max heart rate during running of 180, may only hit 176 on the bike, and 171 during swimming. In this case we call the running heart rate "Maximal Heart Rate" and the highest heart rate observed in cycling and swimming, "Peak" heart rate, for that event. Knowing your peak heart rate for each discipline will help you to more accurately gauge the intensity of your training. If the activity is restricted to upper-body muscle mass, peak heart rate will generally be considerably lower than in whole body activities. Examples include kayaking and double poling during cross-country skiing. Highly trained athletes can achieve a higher percentage of true max heart rate when performing small muscle mass activities.

This makes sense to me. I suppose the bottom line is: Max HR for a particular individual is truly the fastest they can get their heart to go pitter-pat, peak HR is the fastest they can get it to go in a particular sport.

Greg

Borg59 said:

[font=Arial]I'm 62 and my max hr is 173, as determined by a 12 mile TT. The highest recorded value thus far this year is 178. Most formulas don't come close to giving an accurate number with the exception of a formula by Dr. [font=Times New Roman][font=Arial]Dr. Dan Heil, [font=Arial]211.415 - (0.5 * age) - (0.05 * weight in lbs) + 4.5.[/font][/font][/font][/font]
[font=Arial][font=Times New Roman][font=Arial]Borg59
[/font][/font][/font]

I just tried the Dan Heil formula and found it pretty well spot on.

For the record I'm 44 (therefore 220-age=176), my polar estimate is 179 but the other day I reached 101% of my previous max (185) on a flat sprint (186.85). The Dan Heil formula puts me at 186.5...not bad.