Question re: heart rate

[Eden]

This seems very unusual...are you sure there wasn't some sort of electrical interference? Overhead power lines can make your HR monitor put out some false readings. Also, other people's HR monitors can interfere with your readings if you get close enough to them.

It's not that unusual - some of us are bunny rabbits, and among the women that I know who race, as a group we seem to have a tendancy to be in the high max range. My max is 211 (I'm 34). Now if I see 230 or something ridiculous like that I can be pretty sure its powerline/electric fence etc. interference.

[easterbird]

older woman chimes in
this discussion is timely...I've been doing some googling about max hrt. I used the 220-age to come up with 'my' HRT max of 161(I'm 58.5 YO) and have been riding almost one year. In anticpation of my first century ride on 09 Sept, I decided to really push myself to do more hill climbing. I have now have a high one day of 166 and another day at 173. I was pretty winded at top of that portion of the climb but recovered quickly enough to continue to the real top. My RHRT is 55 or less. I'm wondering if I should change my limits on my HR monitor to use these new data for max. My thought being that I want to make the most of my workouts and calorie burn by keeping myself in the 65-85% range.Old versus new would be 109-139 or 113-147. Is this the right way to use HR data?

[Raindrop]

Heart rate measurments are guestimates and the 220-age or the woman's 226-age is one that fits only about 1/3 of the population. Also, a higher max heart rate is not a sign of fitness. The heart rate is what it is, in that it's genetically programmed. However, as one trains to get fitter you'll find the ability to work at higher heart rates without going anaerobic.

Also, it has been shown that the heart rate doesn't necessarily decline as one ages as long as you keep aerobically fit. I use a heart rate monitor when I train and I encourage my clients (I'm a personal trainer and Spinning instructor) to use one as well.

I think if you coorelate your breathing to your heart rate you get a better estimate of your possible heart rate max. That, and also going with highest number seen. You'll know when you get into the "red zone" of your heart rate max when you are thouroughly warmed up and then work increasingly harder until you reach a point that you can no longer increase your effort and at this point most people feel the need to slow down since they are close to puking.

For most of us this is an area we don't care or need to work at. I read an interesting article by Dr. Len Kravitz that illustrates how to determine if you're working at a level that will increase your cardio-respitory fitness:

http://www.drlenkravitz.com/Articles/talktest.html

[mimitabby]

My resting HR is 60 today!! (whoopiee! it used to be closer to 80)
I'm 54 years old
but I wore a HR monitor this weekend for the first time and found out
that much over 162 and I am really getting stressed. The good news
is that my HR goes back down fairly quickly.

So, if you are 40 or over I would be concerned about those numbers
but if you are just a sweet young thing, you probably aren't hurting yourself
but keep working and it will go down.

[spokewench]

i haven't hit 190's since I was 40! No way can I get it that high anymore!

I'm 46. I used to have a fast heartrate also when I was racing in my 30's. It was always kind of hard to take when my husband who is 5 years older would be 10-20 beats slower!

But, like most people say here, everyone's heart rates are different and will vary with training.

[7rider]

I think I recall reading somewhere that a woman's heart rate is generally ~10 bpm higher than a man's for any given activity (all things considered). Anyone see that same bit o' info?
DH has me by 7 years of age, but it's startling how different our HRs are on the same hill. I can't swing my leg over a bike without my HR going up to 150 or higher. Highest I've seen for me was 188 (vs. my Polar's "predicted" maxHR from me of 185). To do real training in my 70-80% zone, I could never take the bike out on the road. I'd be forever on the rollers.

[RoadRaven]

K... I'm back in this thread again... just been sussing out my max as I have been pushing myself harder these last few weeks

According to the calculation 220-age (41) my max shouls be around 179... but I have managed to get my max up to 184 in a race situation recently, sprinting... feeling fairly sick when I finsihed (but I did win the sprint! so it was worth it). I have since pushed myself a few times over 180, so I know it wasn't an annomoly.

My resting heart rate usually sits in the low 40s, but the lowest I have seen it is 39 on a few occasions.

So my range, at 41yrs (and 1 month) is 184bpm-39bpm

Its fascinating to read everyone elses and how you use/interpret this information for your training and racing.

[RoadRaven]

To do real training in my 70-80% zone, I could never take the bike out on the road. I'd be forever on the rollers.

Regina - I am interested by your words here.

Do you mean you cant get your heart rate up on the road?

See, if thats what you're saying, I find that interesting because I can't get my HR as high on the spin bike as I can when I am on the road. So I use the spin bike for specific rides - like cycling at 90 or 95 cadence for 45 minutes, or doing step up intervals.

The other training that involves pushing my LT, or hills, I do out on the road, as I cant seem to simulate it effectively indoors.

[VeloChick]

I think I recall reading somewhere that a woman's heart rate is generally ~10 bpm higher than a man's for any given activity (all things considered). Anyone see that same bit o' info? DH has me by 7 years of age, but it's startling how different our HRs are on the same hill.

Your max HR is genetic, and in the trained athlete, it generally does not go down with age. No absolute number is better, or worse than another. The only numbers that really matter are % of MHR. (or % of LT if you've done tests to show your current LT)

I can't swing my leg over a bike without my HR going up to 150 or higher. Highest I've seen for me was 188 (vs. my Polar's "predicted" maxHR from me of 185). To do real training in my 70-80% zone, I could never take the bike out on the road. I'd be forever on the rollers.

Use the highest number you've seen on your HRM for your true MHR (it may even be higher, but never lower). If you cannot train in zones of 70-80% while on the bike, you really need to do more base and aerobic work. You can start this by riding a mtb on the road, and using its much lower gearing to keep your HR down. You can also do more roller work in the low HR zones.

It takes much discipline to keep your HR down, but in the long run, it can pay off big time!

[CR400]

Ok I know this is an old thread. Don't worry about high heart rate the 194 you talked about is only about 4 beats above LT for me or so the tester claimes. I think it is 194 though. My max is set at 215 but thats only because the heart rate monitor I have won't let me set it higher. I have actually held that 215 for a minuet or slightly more on more then one occasion, doubt it's my max. Resting heart rate 67.

[Geonz]

Hmmm... this thread is so old its heart rate is falling? I'm feeling good about the treats I just dodged, thinking "I'm burning calories now... I'm losing weight..." and then I check my cute HRM watch and it's 47 bpm. Geez... not burning many calories at all... do ya think the student in the computer lab would understand if I suddenly started doing crunches on the floor?

[smilingcat]

As long as my BPM don't crash to 0 I think I'm fine.

Well its interesting that men have lower BPM than women. Something new I learned today.

Thanks,

[CR400]

Correction max is 220. Yeah it took a hard race and not dropping over dead to figure that out. Also my LT is a few beats higher then I thought too.

[Artisan]

Correction max is 220. Yeah it took a hard race and not dropping over dead to figure that out. Also my LT is a few beats higher then I thought too.

Yeah, same here. Last race I did, with lots of hills, my heart rate maxed out at 217.

[VeloChick]

Heart rate measurments are guestimates and the 220-age or the woman's 226-age is one that fits only about 1/3 of the population. Also, a higher max heart rate is not a sign of fitness. The heart rate is what it is, in that it's genetically programmed. However, as one trains to get fitter you'll find the ability to work at higher heart rates without going anaerobic.

Also, it has been shown that the heart rate doesn't necessarily decline as one ages as long as you keep aerobically fit. I use a heart rate monitor when I train and I encourage my clients (I'm a personal trainer and Spinning instructor) to use one as well.

Two excellent points. There are still so many myths about HR! The aged based calculcation is a joke. If you max HR works out with this formula, it's really just a coincidence. Your max HR is genetic. You cannot change it. It CAN, however, decline with age in the non-trained athlete.