Heart rate monitors and target BPM

unrelentingminx

Hi everyone.
I was put on a new gym programme last night and after each set of resistance exercises my trainer wants me to do 5 minutes of high intensity cardio, specifically spinning, running and rowing. He has recommended I buy a HR monitor to track my effort so have ordered one online but I need some help with working out what BPM I should be aiming for. Does anyone know of a good calculator I can use or charts to help?
I'm 31 yo female of moderate fitness, currently 85kg.
Thanks.

MeanderingMammal

unrelentingminx wrote: »

He has recommended I buy a HR monitor to track my effort...

Sounds questionable to me.

...I need some help with working out what BPM I should be aiming for. Does anyone know of a good calculator I can use or charts to help?

A very, very crude approximation is 220-age then work out 50-60%, 70-80% and work in those ranges.

That said, HR zone training is largely discredited for most casual exercisers, so personally I wouldn't bother.

fbinsc

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

That said, HR zone training is largely discredited for most casual exercisers, so personally I wouldn't bother.

I missed the memo. I've found it highly useful for running and cycling myself and would have thought it a highly useful gauge of exercise intensity for intervals. Can you get me up to speed or share the source? I could see the "fat burning zone" of low intensity exercise possibly being junk but not HR training overall. Color me surprised if this is true.

professionalHobbyist

For tracking your BPM they work fine. For extrapolating calories burned for various exercises, they get criticism for burn accuracy.

My trainer advised the same exact thing to interval train. I have been doing it with success for over 6 months. I just have a basic Polar HRM. Nothing special.

For HIIT my intense interval is 90% of max. For cardio level training it is 80%. I also do the steady state 70% max for longer periods.

The chart mentioned above is what I used for a max heart rate.

It all gives you a window to work in. If you record your numbers for a week then you see where you average out.

It did work for me to make me work harder. I did not always push hard enough to hit 90%. By the 6th interval it was very difficult.

I only do 7 of the 3 minute intervals. :45 sprint and 2:15 of jog. It is a challenge. Seems like just 21 minutes would not be that hard, right?

I don't count calories burnt off the HRM though. I just let my iPhone call it all steps and it seems to work out. But the machines that say I burn 800 calories in 40 minutes I don't believe either.

Good luck!!

coreyreichle

fbinsc wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

That said, HR zone training is largely discredited for most casual exercisers, so personally I wouldn't bother.

I missed the memo. I've found it highly useful for running and cycling myself and would have thought it a highly useful gauge of exercise intensity for intervals. Can you get me up to speed or share the source? I could see the "fat burning zone" of low intensity exercise possibly being junk but not HR training overall. Color me surprised if this is true.

If I followed the heart rate zones for exercise, I'd hardly break a sweat. 177 bpm for me is vigorous exercise, but for my age it's considered 95% Max HR. However, I can sustain that for ~45 minutes. 185 bpm is 105% Max HR, however if it was +100% max HR, my heart couldn't do it.

Far better than HR is physical feeling of exertion. Can you sing while doing the activity? Low exertion. Can you speak a sentence, but not sing? You're in moderate exertion. Barely finish a sentence? Vigorous exercise. Can't speak at all? Max exertion.

Additionally, how fast your heart rate drops is a good sign as well. If you can drop 12 bpm within 1 minute after stopping, your heart is doing good.

msf74

coreyreichle wrote: »

Far better than HR is physical feeling of exertion. Can you sing while doing the activity? Low exertion. Can you speak a sentence, but not sing? You're in moderate exertion. Barely finish a sentence? Vigorous exercise. Can't speak at all? Max exertion.

Personally I would do this - use a perceived level of exertion. Your intervals (depending on length) should be a 9 in terms of effort unless they are short (30 secs or less).

A HRM won't be useful as a gauge of high intensity for a number of reasons (the length it takes for your HR to climb for example) so if this is the only reason you are buying one it probably isn't worth the money.

MeanderingMammal

fbinsc wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

That said, HR zone training is largely discredited for most casual exercisers, so personally I wouldn't bother.

I missed the memo. I've found it highly useful for running and cycling myself and would have thought it a highly useful gauge of exercise intensity for intervals. Can you get me up to speed or share the source? I could see the "fat burning zone" of low intensity exercise possibly being junk but not HR training overall. Color me surprised if this is true.

Most people don't have access to the lab testing or conditions to properly understand VO2Max, MHR, Lactate and Aerobic thresholds. Without that lot just working on rate of perceived exertion is as accurate.

For someone like the originator, whose been given bollocks advice by a trainer,all it means is the wallet gets a bit lighter for no real benefit.

unrelentingminx

Thanks for the (mixed) responses.
My trainer did say about the 'fat burning zone' being rubbish. He also didn't tell me to do intervals, he told me to do 5 minutes at between 60% and 80% of my max HR. Perceived exertion is all well and good but can vary day to day depending on what sort of day I've had (I go to the gym straight after work). Something that will measure how hard my body is actually working surely can't be a bad idea.
Anyway, the HR monitor I ordered was on offer so it's only £35 down the tube if it's rubbish, but I'm willing to give it a try.

msf74

unrelentingminx wrote: »

Thanks for the (mixed) responses.
My trainer did say about the 'fat burning zone' being rubbish. He also didn't tell me to do intervals, he told me to do 5 minutes at between 60% and 80% of my max HR. Perceived exertion is all well and good but can vary day to day depending on what sort of day I've had (I go to the gym straight after work). Something that will measure how hard my body is actually working surely can't be a bad idea.
Anyway, the HR monitor I ordered was on offer so it's only £35 down the tube if it's rubbish, but I'm willing to give it a try.

You can use the following calculator to calculate your zones but you need to know your resting HR and max HR (which you can use your new HRM to determine

HR Zones

However be aware that HR can vary from day to day just like perceived exertion depending on how tired you are, how much caffeine you have in your system, how hot it is and so on. It's useful to some degree but don't be a slave to it.

unrelentingminx

msf74 wrote: »

unrelentingminx wrote: »

Thanks for the (mixed) responses.
My trainer did say about the 'fat burning zone' being rubbish. He also didn't tell me to do intervals, he told me to do 5 minutes at between 60% and 80% of my max HR. Perceived exertion is all well and good but can vary day to day depending on what sort of day I've had (I go to the gym straight after work). Something that will measure how hard my body is actually working surely can't be a bad idea.
Anyway, the HR monitor I ordered was on offer so it's only £35 down the tube if it's rubbish, but I'm willing to give it a try.

You can use the following calculator to calculate your zones but you need to know your resting HR and max HR (which you can use your new HRM to determine

HR Zones

However be aware that HR can vary from day to day just like perceived exertion depending on how tired you are, how much caffeine you have in your system, how hot it is and so on. It's useful to some degree but don't be a slave to it.

Thanks

lporter229

Post deleted. My apologies, I misread your original post.