Questions For Those Who Monitor Their Heart Rate while Exercising
Options
Replies
-
I'm 61, with a maximum HR of 185- 190, based on my HRM when I was on a TM recently doing one mile intervals at 5k pace. Maximum read was 185, so adding 5 to that makes it 190.
I have a Garmin with a wrist HRM, which reads higher than the chest band I use sometimes on the TM. The wrist HRM can be very erratic, and has read as high as 210 when I was just starting a run. I don't take it too seriously as a result. I also live in a hilly area, so my HR can go up quickly and will stay up, even when running quite easy. Perceived effort is a better gauge for me. I will occasionally do a run where I look at my HR instead of my pace, as a way of keeping the HR down, but the only way to keep it really low is to walk, and that's not what I'm out there for.
I don't worry about intensity minutes, since my watch says I usually do 700% of the minimum on most weeks.
1 -
I guess I will find out when they do my treadmill stress test.
I have an abnormal EKG.
My resting heart rate is around 50 with it sometimes dropping to 47 or so.
That worried my doc and she has ordered a stress test and cardiac ultrasound.
If I live through the stress test I should know my max number.
Right now I just keep my HR above 130 while exercising.
Seems to be helping because putting on my socks and boots is not an aerobic exercise anymore.
The humorless cardiac stress test technicians wouldn't let me keep going after I got to about my age-estimated max heart rate, even though I had enough breath left to argue with them about it while continuing.
I wouldn't count on learning your MHR for training purposes from a medical stress test.
It sounds like you're making progress as it is, though, given the socks and boots improvement. Good show!3 -
I guess I will find out when they do my treadmill stress test.
I have an abnormal EKG.
My resting heart rate is around 50 with it sometimes dropping to 47 or so.
That worried my doc and she has ordered a stress test and cardiac ultrasound.
If I live through the stress test I should know my max number.
Right now I just keep my HR above 130 while exercising.
Seems to be helping because putting on my socks and boots is not an aerobic exercise anymore.
The humorless cardiac stress test technicians wouldn't let me keep going after I got to about my age-estimated max heart rate, even though I had enough breath left to argue with them about it while continuing.
I wouldn't count on learning your MHR for training purposes from a medical stress test.
It sounds like you're making progress as it is, though, given the socks and boots improvement. Good show!
I did the stress test too! I needed to do the artificial one. Not fun at all.0 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »I guess I will find out when they do my treadmill stress test.
I have an abnormal EKG.
My resting heart rate is around 50 with it sometimes dropping to 47 or so.
That worried my doc and she has ordered a stress test and cardiac ultrasound.
If I live through the stress test I should know my max number.
Right now I just keep my HR above 130 while exercising.
Seems to be helping because putting on my socks and boots is not an aerobic exercise anymore.
The humorless cardiac stress test technicians wouldn't let me keep going after I got to about my age-estimated max heart rate, even though I had enough breath left to argue with them about it while continuing.
I wouldn't count on learning your MHR for training purposes from a medical stress test.
It sounds like you're making progress as it is, though, given the socks and boots improvement. Good show!
I did the stress test too! I needed to do the artificial one. Not fun at all.
I actually found the treadmill medical stress test kind of entertaining, and easier than several things my rowing coach had had me do previously. But that's easy for me to say, since (1) I turned out not to have any heart problems, and (2) I'd been quite active for quite a while before doing the treadmill test, so the amount they let me do wasn't really a huge challenge, even though it wasn't my usual exercise modality (I row, and I emphatically don't run).
I absolutely understand why others wouldn't feel the same way (I'm lucky), and if by "artificial one" you mean the version where they inject you with a drug rather than having you exercise, I can imagine that that is pretty unpleasant. My dad, at around age 85, didn't like it, and he'd found the treadmill test pretty do-able at 83 (I don't think they made him go very hard, frankly; I think they were surprised he could do it at all . . . but he'd been treadmilling daily at the assisted living place).3 -
Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask
I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
0 -
Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.0 -
OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
I'm using a Wahoo Tickr. Interesting thought - I do have a wahoo cadence device linked in, but I haven't used it for running yet, just cycling.0 -
OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
They do? What exactly do you mean by that?0 -
When I used HR, I did LT test on a treadmill -- it wasn't a super pleasant experience. I'm lazy though, and eventually switched to just pace based running (via vdot) since it's close enough for my needs. I was using an HRM-Run at the time.
0 -
OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
They do? What exactly do you mean by that?
Google Garmin cadence lock. It’s an intermittent bug that’s been around for years. I think it is only a possible occurrence when the cadence and HR data is coming from the same device (eg the Garmin HRM that has the running dynamics included), but I’m not positive. And even then-it’s a very intermittent thing.
0 -
OldAssDude wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »Although perceived effort is a fairly estimate of intensity, I prefer to monitor my heart rate during exercise in conjunction with how i feel. Sometimes i feel like i'm working harder that i actually am, and sometimes i feel like i'm not working as hard as i actually am. Using heart rate, there is no doubt, and using heart rate in conjunction with perceived exertion can tell you if you are recovering enough (or not enough).
I feel that heart rate training is a good way to improve cardio fitness level because the basic rule of thumb to get a minimum training effect is to keep your heart rate in the cardio zone for a minimum of 20 minutes non stop and a minimum of 3 times a week. You can't do that unless you know what your heart rate is during the workout.
The most important thing (and the first thing you should know) in heart rate training is your "true max heart rate". Since all your heart rate zones are based on MHR, they will all be off if your MHR is not correct. There are several ways to get your true max heart rate, from different formulas, to different tests you can do with a heart rate monitor, to having it done in a lab.
There are also different ways to setup heart rate zones: peercent of MHR, percent of HRR, percent of LT, etc...
Also, there are different zone systems: 3 zone, 5 zone, custom with sub zones, etc...
Which brings me to my questions.
what is your age and your MHR?
how did you get your MHR?
how do you have your zones setup (MHR, HRR, LT)?
what zone system do you use (3 zone, 5 zone, custom)?
my answers are as follows...
I'm 61 and currently have mine set at 174.
I used the EDWARDS formula. In addition i have got my HR up to 169 using a heart rate monitor enough times to be confident that the EDWARDS formula is probably a more accurate number for me. An ultra runner once told me to use the highest heart rate recorded and add 5 to that number. So 169 + 5 = 174.
I currently have my zones set to percent of MHR.
I currently use a standard 5 zone system.
I am interested to know how other people that do heart rate training set their numbers.
thanks in advance,
Oh, yes there is. There is plenty of doubt. Run easy on a very hot day and do the same run on a cold day. Was the run harder on the hot day? Go a few nights with little sleep and do the same run. Do it again just before you get sick. Do it when you are just getting better.
Everyone one of these will be different. You'll be doing the exact same run but get wildly different heart rates.
I know I can't talk you out of this (you know I've tried
). Just be aware the heart rate will lie to you.
What i meant by no doubt is there is no doubt what your heart rate is.
On a hot day my heart rate is going to be higher than on a cold day. I know that because i can see it as i am running. The same with not enough sleep getting sick.
but...
I have done very similar runs at similar heart rates and similar conditions and perceived them differently. So you can't just go by that either, and your heart rate is still going to be whatever it is. I would not have even noticed that if i was not monitoring my heart rate and wondering why i perceived things differently at the same heart rate under the same conditions.
My point is, if i want to improve my fitness level, and i know i have to be in at least zone 3 for at least 20 minutes at least 3 times a week to get a minimum training effect, i'm going to do at least that regardless of how i perceive it.
The CDC states...
The Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) is a way of measuring physical activity intensity level. Perceived exertion is how hard you feel like your body is working. It is based on the physical sensations a person experiences during physical activity, including increased heart rate, increased respiration or breathing rate, increased sweating, and muscle fatigue. Although this is a subjective measure, a person's exertion rating may provide a fairly good estimate of the actual heart rate during physical activity* (Borg, 1998).
You are already at an elite level of fitness so you probably don't need to worry about heart rate so much, and your easiest workout would probably be my hardest workout.
I will also add that many ultra runners on the suunto forum have all these crazy sub zones setup on their devices target not only zones, but specific bpm numbers to squeeze every drop of energy out of their hearts to be able to run for that long without fizzling out.
I'm not saying anyone has to monitor their heart rate, but it's a good way to know if your getting a training effect or not. And my intent for this thread was simple to find out how other people that do use heart rate training do it.
Serious question, why not use pace? Or grade normalized pace if you're running in hilly terrain?2 -
Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
No that's not a problem. Everything you describe is perfectly normal (within the normal realm of human variation). The max heart rate formulas are predictions that hope to be correct on average across a population, they can't possibly get it right for everybody, and can be off by quite a bit in individual terms.3 -
OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
They do? What exactly do you mean by that?
Optical heart monitors use something like a camera to look for a rhythmic change in the color of your skin, from your heart beating and blood rushing through your wrist. Apparently these devices can be fooled by being shaken around your wrist in a rhythmic way - DCR complains about it sometimes in his reviews. Most people run somewhere in the ballpark of 140-190 bpm and 150-180 spm, it must be hard to distinguish.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
They do? What exactly do you mean by that?
Optical heart monitors use something like a camera to look for a rhythmic change in the color of your skin, from your heart beating and blood rushing through your wrist. Apparently these devices can be fooled by being shaken around your wrist in a rhythmic way - DCR complains about it sometimes in his reviews. Most people run somewhere in the ballpark of 140-190 bpm and 150-180 spm, it must be hard to distinguish.
It seems that the occurrence of it varies hugely from person to person. Wrist-based OHR works fine for me at rest/low exertion levels, but goes completely nuts when exercising. I experience cadence lock and all kinds of wonky readings, which is why I use a Scosche Rhythm+ for any type of cardio workout.
I track my strength workouts with my watch (mostly just to show them in my Garmin exercise diary), and OHR is totally useless - it usually shows about half of what my HR is according to manual palpation. If I hang my arms at my sides and shake my wrists, my HR reading completely disappears and shows "--".0 -
Duck_Puddle wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
They do? What exactly do you mean by that?
Google Garmin cadence lock. It’s an intermittent bug that’s been around for years. I think it is only a possible occurrence when the cadence and HR data is coming from the same device (eg the Garmin HRM that has the running dynamics included), but I’m not positive. And even then-it’s a very intermittent thing.
Sounds like just another "it ain't perfect, but not really something to worry about" item to me.2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
No that's not a problem. Everything you describe is perfectly normal (within the normal realm of human variation). The max heart rate formulas are predictions that hope to be correct on average across a population, they can't possibly get it right for everybody, and can be off by quite a bit in individual terms.
Cool, thanks for the information! Immediate stress relief 1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »Although perceived effort is a fairly estimate of intensity, I prefer to monitor my heart rate during exercise in conjunction with how i feel. Sometimes i feel like i'm working harder that i actually am, and sometimes i feel like i'm not working as hard as i actually am. Using heart rate, there is no doubt, and using heart rate in conjunction with perceived exertion can tell you if you are recovering enough (or not enough).
I feel that heart rate training is a good way to improve cardio fitness level because the basic rule of thumb to get a minimum training effect is to keep your heart rate in the cardio zone for a minimum of 20 minutes non stop and a minimum of 3 times a week. You can't do that unless you know what your heart rate is during the workout.
The most important thing (and the first thing you should know) in heart rate training is your "true max heart rate". Since all your heart rate zones are based on MHR, they will all be off if your MHR is not correct. There are several ways to get your true max heart rate, from different formulas, to different tests you can do with a heart rate monitor, to having it done in a lab.
There are also different ways to setup heart rate zones: peercent of MHR, percent of HRR, percent of LT, etc...
Also, there are different zone systems: 3 zone, 5 zone, custom with sub zones, etc...
Which brings me to my questions.
what is your age and your MHR?
how did you get your MHR?
how do you have your zones setup (MHR, HRR, LT)?
what zone system do you use (3 zone, 5 zone, custom)?
my answers are as follows...
I'm 61 and currently have mine set at 174.
I used the EDWARDS formula. In addition i have got my HR up to 169 using a heart rate monitor enough times to be confident that the EDWARDS formula is probably a more accurate number for me. An ultra runner once told me to use the highest heart rate recorded and add 5 to that number. So 169 + 5 = 174.
I currently have my zones set to percent of MHR.
I currently use a standard 5 zone system.
I am interested to know how other people that do heart rate training set their numbers.
thanks in advance,
Oh, yes there is. There is plenty of doubt. Run easy on a very hot day and do the same run on a cold day. Was the run harder on the hot day? Go a few nights with little sleep and do the same run. Do it again just before you get sick. Do it when you are just getting better.
Everyone one of these will be different. You'll be doing the exact same run but get wildly different heart rates.
I know I can't talk you out of this (you know I've tried ). Just be aware the heart rate will lie to you.
What i meant by no doubt is there is no doubt what your heart rate is.
On a hot day my heart rate is going to be higher than on a cold day. I know that because i can see it as i am running. The same with not enough sleep getting sick.
but...
I have done very similar runs at similar heart rates and similar conditions and perceived them differently. So you can't just go by that either, and your heart rate is still going to be whatever it is. I would not have even noticed that if i was not monitoring my heart rate and wondering why i perceived things differently at the same heart rate under the same conditions.
My point is, if i want to improve my fitness level, and i know i have to be in at least zone 3 for at least 20 minutes at least 3 times a week to get a minimum training effect, i'm going to do at least that regardless of how i perceive it.
The CDC states...
The Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) is a way of measuring physical activity intensity level. Perceived exertion is how hard you feel like your body is working. It is based on the physical sensations a person experiences during physical activity, including increased heart rate, increased respiration or breathing rate, increased sweating, and muscle fatigue. Although this is a subjective measure, a person's exertion rating may provide a fairly good estimate of the actual heart rate during physical activity* (Borg, 1998).
You are already at an elite level of fitness so you probably don't need to worry about heart rate so much, and your easiest workout would probably be my hardest workout.
I will also add that many ultra runners on the suunto forum have all these crazy sub zones setup on their devices target not only zones, but specific bpm numbers to squeeze every drop of energy out of their hearts to be able to run for that long without fizzling out.
I'm not saying anyone has to monitor their heart rate, but it's a good way to know if your getting a training effect or not. And my intent for this thread was simple to find out how other people that do use heart rate training do it.
Serious question, why not use pace? Or grade normalized pace if you're running in hilly terrain?
Well for 1, GPS pace usually sucks on most devices (jumps all over the place). I suppose i could use lap pace or average pace, but it's just so much easier to just glance at my HR every once in a while and adjust if needed. My garmin has the HR zones laid out so i can see what zone i'm in with just a quick glance.
Knowing that keeping HR in a certain zone for a certain time will give me a training effect, why not just use HR instead of trying to guess by feel or pace?
Running power seems to be interesting, but i think it still has a long way to go before they even know what the standards are going to be.0 -
OldAssDude wrote: »Reading along here and finding out answers to questions I was afraid to ask I've been concerned because even though my resting heartrate is 62 (it used to be over 90), it will shoot up 20 points or so just getting up and walking. Sounds like that's perfectly normal. I also see my heartrate going up into the mid 170's when I'm running, even though I'm only slightly breathless and don't feel any where near my max. I'm 67 and the formulas indicate my maximum heartrate should only be around 153. Should this be a problem?
What type of heart rate monitor do you use?
I ask because sometimes they lock onto your cadence instead of your actual heart rate.
They do? What exactly do you mean by that?
Sometimes the sensor gets fooled by running cadence for some reason. Either by the device jiggling a little to arm movement, or some think it my be from the impact of your feet hitting the ground. I have been on runs where i was wondering why my HR shot up so high later to find out when looking at the data that it was the same as my cadence for that short time.
You can google it.0 -
I found this in a drawer today and for some reason thought of this thread.
My Polar HRM watch from 2002.
2 -
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 404 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 986 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions