Do I try and use heart rate numbers or not?

SModa61

Trying to understand heart rate numbers and how to best use them to get the most out of exercise.

So, data to be used:
Age: 59
Sex: Female
Resting heart rate: 60 BPM according to apple watch

Today, I did a 5.1 mile walk at 14’42” with some elevation changes with an average BPM of 144. Also, using a RPE chart I would assess myself as a 6. But due to the fact I can almost always chat up a storm, that makes evaluating more challenging. I think I’d still be talking at a 10. :P The walk felt like a good push, not drop dead, but not lazy either.

From traditional methods:
Tanaka: 206.9 – (.67 * 59) = 167
My 144 BPM would equal 86% MHR

Fox: 220 – 59 = 161
My 144 BPM would equal 89% MHR

Gulati (women only): 206 – (.88*59) = 154
My 144 BPM would equal 93.5% MHR

Karvenon: (Max HR – Resting HR)*%Intensity + Resting HR = target HR
65% intensity target BPM = 126
85% intensity target BPM = 146

Then from an article on what target HR’s for exercise should be, I got the following:

• Healthy Heart Zone: 50% to 60% of your maximum heart rate. This is an easy and comfortable zone to exercise in. You will be able to carry on a full conversation, although you may be breathing a little heavier than usual. This is the lower end of the moderate-intensity zone.
• Fitness Zone: 64% to 76% of your maximum heart rate. In this zone, you are attaining moderate-intensity exercise. You are breathing heavier but can still speak in short sentences. You can talk, but you can't sing. This zone should be your goal for most of your walking workouts for fitness or weight loss.
• Aerobic Zone: 77% to 93% of your maximum heart rate. At this intensity, you are breathing very hard and only able to speak in short phrases. Workouts at this heart rate are vigorous-intensity exercise.

Looking at all that, the Tanaka, Fox and Gulati would all place me into some level of “aerobic zone”, yet how I felt does not match that description other than the BPM. On the other hand, how it felt IMO matched the Fitness range, but my BPM does not match.

If I use the Karvenon numbers, I am in its range but on the max end.

Lastly, before I seek input, my “average” BPM of 144 is my average but of course not my high. I think the high BPM numbers that I saw were 160+ (might have seen 168). I'll pay more attention next time.

So, do I care about these numbers at all or go off of how I feel? Like just using the RPE scale.

Thanks

heybales

Age 52.

HRmax tested several years ago - 194.

None of the formulas, and therefore none of the zones, would be correct.

The talking test is great way to do it. From your description that is the Active Recovery (aka mis-named Fat Burning) zone.

Need to go higher for the aerobic zone.

This matters if you have goals where it matters.
You can be below it if goals are merely some fitness.

What is your goal for the cardio?

SModa61

@heybales At this point in time, my primary goal is to re-establish exercise as part of my daily life and due to family, I cannot be using a public gym until COVID is more squared away (boot camp classes were my favorite). Anyhow, walking is an option I had dropped years ago, but it certainly something I can do, at least for a while (I live in Massachusetts). Anyhow, still defining my goals beyond daily consistency. I welcome suggestions.

heybales

Some want cardio improvements to do a 5K, 10K, or longer.

Some want something interesting while they do what they know is good for them, but not totally in to it.

Some just want to burn max calories so they can eat at somewhat normal level and still be in a diet to lose fat.

That Aerobic Zone description and range in your OP I find a tad high, that would normally be broken into Tempo zone right under Anaerobic which starts about 90-92% for people that have trained it.
The Tempo zone is usually not useful, stress, but not on any 1 system for improvement.

My favorite article on it are behind a firewall now, but I think this article is using the same coaches info.

https://www.coached.fitness/blogs/training-intensity-zones-for-runners/

SModa61

heybales wrote: »

Some want cardio improvements to do a 5K, 10K, or longer.

Some want something interesting while they do what they know is good for them, but not totally in to it.

Some just want to burn max calories so they can eat at somewhat normal level and still be in a diet to lose fat.

That Aerobic Zone description and range in your OP I find a tad high, that would normally be broken into Tempo zone right under Anaerobic which starts about 90-92% for people that have trained it.
The Tempo zone is usually not useful, stress, but not on any 1 system for improvement.

My favorite article on it are behind a firewall now, but I think this article is using the same coaches info.

https://www.coached.fitness/blogs/training-intensity-zones-for-runners/

Good read and I am going to go through it again later this evening. Two things I did not see is how one would determine their MaxHR outside of a laboratory, and, at least at this point in time, I am not heading into a lab. Also, while it talked about the various zones and avoidance of this "grey zone", it did not discuss established a training schedule and use of zones. I did find this "grey zone" concept interesting, and I wonder if I am guilty of this and should be looking at how I am approaching things.

AnnPT77

SModa61 wrote: »

heybales wrote: »

Some want cardio improvements to do a 5K, 10K, or longer.

Some want something interesting while they do what they know is good for them, but not totally in to it.

Some just want to burn max calories so they can eat at somewhat normal level and still be in a diet to lose fat.

That Aerobic Zone description and range in your OP I find a tad high, that would normally be broken into Tempo zone right under Anaerobic which starts about 90-92% for people that have trained it.
The Tempo zone is usually not useful, stress, but not on any 1 system for improvement.

My favorite article on it are behind a firewall now, but I think this article is using the same coaches info.

https://www.coached.fitness/blogs/training-intensity-zones-for-runners/

Good read and I am going to go through it again later this evening. Two things I did not see is how one would determine their MaxHR outside of a laboratory, and, at least at this point in time, I am not heading into a lab. Also, while it talked about the various zones and avoidance of this "grey zone", it did not discuss established a training schedule and use of zones. I did find this "grey zone" concept interesting, and I wonder if I am guilty of this and should be looking at how I am approaching things.

I don't have links at hand, but there are various self-tests one can use to get a better estimate of HRmax. Most of them are not a great idea to do before a decent base level of cardiovascular fitness is in place. Some are ways to test by reaching actual max, some are submaximal tests that help estimate HRmax. There are also some fitness trackers that offer HRmax estimating tests, I believe. It doesn't necessarily require a lab (though that might be more precise). Some tests do require a helper and most require a heart rate monitor.

I did a rowing machine test run by my first rowing coach to get a personalized estimate HRmax. I'd have to find the old documentation to remember details, but it pretty much required increasing pace at defined time intervals until it became impossible to sustain the pace for X number of strokes, then looking at a graph of HRs that a 2nd person had been logging as one went through the test. Other than the HRM and some cardio mode, no special equipment was involved.

SModa61

I appreciate your comment that cardiovascular fitness should be established first. I am a long way from that. Between Feb and mid-sept I had not exercised once. I am now first just trying to get exercise as part of my daily routine again. I am not fully picky about the what, as long as I am doing something "formal" every day. I joined a number of challenges to help me not say "I'll do it tomorrow".

Sounds like I have a ways to go before HRMax would have any real pertinence to me. I think it mainly came to my attention because it is part of the data provided by my apple watch and I began wondering and looking around to see what value it might bring.

Live determination of actual HRMax does not sound like a fun experience. :P For the time being, as I try and learn about this, I'll look around for estimating trackers/tests.

AnnPT77

SModa61 wrote: »

I appreciate your comment that cardiovascular fitness should be established first. I am a long way from that. Between Feb and mid-sept I had not exercised once. I am now first just trying to get exercise as part of my daily routine again. I am not fully picky about the what, as long as I am doing something "formal" every day. I joined a number of challenges to help me not say "I'll do it tomorrow".

Sounds like I have a ways to go before HRMax would have any real pertinence to me. I think it mainly came to my attention because it is part of the data provided by my apple watch and I began wondering and looking around to see what value it might bring.

Live determination of actual HRMax does not sound like a fun experience. :P For the time being, as I try and learn about this, I'll look around for estimating trackers/tests.

From that description, it sounds like you're doing fine, for where you are. If you're building good habits, mostly staying in the "full sentences" and lower "few words" zones, you're fine for quite a while. You're building not just habits, but stamina, and cardiovascular base.

Keep trying new challenges, and you may stumble on some activity you really love: That's kind of magical. For me, it was on-water rowing, and it pulled me into doing other things to stay in shape over Winter for rowing next season, to develop the hamstring flexibility to get a long reach in rowing, to be a better swimmer to save myself if my boat flipped, to get stronger so I could row harder . . . the virtuous cycle.

I bless my first coach: She literally transformed my life. I'm not sure I'd even be alive today - as a cancer survivor of a type for whom research suggests regular exercise increases survival odds. Now, many of my closest friends are other rowers, and their athleticism - at age 73- 74 - 80+ - give me buoyancy about the future.

As far as reaching for actual HRmax: It's a really interesting combination of miserable, exhausting, and oddly exhilarating. There's a definite high IME from pushing intensity, when you have the base to do it. I think it's partly psychological ("didn't know I could do *that*!") and partly hormonal (endorphins or whatever).

It sounds like you're on the on-ramp to increased activity, which is a great place to be: Many adventures await, so many things to try. Keep having fun! 😊

SModa61

@annPT77 thanks for the words. I had been in a really good place at the point of my daughter's wedding in 2017 - good weight, 4 bootcamps/week and I was thinking about next steps with the wedding over. Wedding was a saturday, I was back in the gym on Monday. Wednesday, they fired my trainer. The boot camps were gone. The time slots were gone, and no staff taught a comparable class. Was an excuse for struggle. Then other excuses, medical, family, then COVID. Now to get back.

Your story is quite inspiring. I am 59 shortly, and I love hearing about living healthy lives even as we age. Congratulations on beating your cancer and using it to drive your fitness. That is the healthy approach, but not the one everyone takes.

I do plan to expand my exercise. Step one is incorporating the time for regular exercise into my day. With it, I am hoping to shed the weight creep that was encouraged further by COVID and yes, build my aerobic capacity as a foundation. I'm mentally sorting out Step two for after my October challenges. The combo I chose is threatening to trip me up, but I've made it to day 9. Almost 1/3 done and hubby will be gone for 10 days, so those will be easy.

Happy for you that you found that first rowing coach!

heybales

Yes, base fitness first using talking test.

Unless you have goals that make the zones useful, training to them isn't really useful either.

The HRmax test isn't too bad in that it has to be fast ramping, so it's over pretty quick.
Need Dr's clearance that you have no heart issues.

If curious on how one running protocol looks, take a read through.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/466973/i-want-to-test-for-my-max-heart-rate-vo2-max/p1

A sub-maximal protocol still with some validity in tests.
Here is submax test if desired, at various levels of intensity, and therefore various levels of potential accuracy.

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/Rockport.html

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/MinuteRun.html

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/OneAndHalf.html

sijomial

"Unless you have goals that make the zones useful, training to them isn't really useful either."

QFT!!

SModa61

@heybales Thanks for the additional reads and tests. This morning was rather humbling. I headed out before breakfast and with that "grey zone" in mind, I decided to insert some sort jogs into my 4 mph walk. First one was fine. I could feel that jogging is a definite push for me unlike fast walking. Second one, seemed fine at the time, but then right after I started with left check pain. damn that ruined the rest of my walk. At the time it kicked in, I was less than 2 miles into my walk. Dropped my walking speed some as it would not go away, nada. dropped further, seemed to improve. At this point I concluded I was not trying for 5 miles and would cut down to 4. Then at 3.5 miles, I was getting some vertigo, so changed route towards home with my shortened walk ending up 3.8 miles.

So, my conclusion is that I have a long way to go regarding fitness, aerobic capacity, and such. I also am guessing that I need to be eating something before exercise. That may change down the road, but not now.

I've marked this thread and will likely print out for reference at a more suitable time that is more than just a few weeks in. But the good part of this morning is that it showed me how really far that I have to go.

@sijomial

AnnPT77

SModa61 wrote: »

@heybales Thanks for the additional reads and tests. This morning was rather humbling. I headed out before breakfast and with that "grey zone" in mind, I decided to insert some sort jogs into my 4 mph walk. First one was fine. I could feel that jogging is a definite push for me unlike fast walking. Second one, seemed fine at the time, but then right after I started with left check pain. damn that ruined the rest of my walk. At the time it kicked in, I was less than 2 miles into my walk. Dropped my walking speed some as it would not go away, nada. dropped further, seemed to improve. At this point I concluded I was not trying for 5 miles and would cut down to 4. Then at 3.5 miles, I was getting some vertigo, so changed route towards home with my shortened walk ending up 3.8 miles.

So, my conclusion is that I have a long way to go regarding fitness, aerobic capacity, and such. I also am guessing that I need to be eating something before exercise. That may change down the road, but not now.

I've marked this thread and will likely print out for reference at a more suitable time that is more than just a few weeks in. But the good part of this morning is that it showed me how really far that I have to go.

@sijomial

Take a close look at where the gray zone is, in that article: It's near the cusp of the difference between full sentences, and only a few words - it's actually highish steady to lowish moderately hard. It's not "too easy".

So, you're trying add some jogging . . . where does that put you, in terms of talk? Where does your 4mph walk put you?

I hope you're not making the mistake of thinking going easy is the gray zone. Easy-ish is fine. Intense is fine The thing sort of in between is what the article is describing as the gray zone.

SModa61

AnnPT77 wrote: »

SModa61 wrote: »

@heybales Thanks for the additional reads and tests. This morning was rather humbling. I headed out before breakfast and with that "grey zone" in mind, I decided to insert some sort jogs into my 4 mph walk. First one was fine. I could feel that jogging is a definite push for me unlike fast walking. Second one, seemed fine at the time, but then right after I started with left check pain. damn that ruined the rest of my walk. At the time it kicked in, I was less than 2 miles into my walk. Dropped my walking speed some as it would not go away, nada. dropped further, seemed to improve. At this point I concluded I was not trying for 5 miles and would cut down to 4. Then at 3.5 miles, I was getting some vertigo, so changed route towards home with my shortened walk ending up 3.8 miles.

So, my conclusion is that I have a long way to go regarding fitness, aerobic capacity, and such. I also am guessing that I need to be eating something before exercise. That may change down the road, but not now.

I've marked this thread and will likely print out for reference at a more suitable time that is more than just a few weeks in. But the good part of this morning is that it showed me how really far that I have to go.

@sijomial

Take a close look at where the gray zone is, in that article: It's near the cusp of the difference between full sentences, and only a few words - it's actually highish steady to lowish moderately hard. It's not "too easy".

So, you're trying add some jogging . . . where does that put you, in terms of talk? Where does your 4mph walk put you?

I hope you're not making the mistake of thinking going easy is the gray zone. Easy-ish is fine. Intense is fine The thing sort of in between is what the article is describing as the gray zone.

Hey, For starters, I am a talker. so I don't know how that impacts the talk test. :P So my understanding of the grey is I believe what you are describing. Adding those bits of jogging, at my level, had me somewhat uncomfortable. I could only do it for far and for so long. Hense why I inserted two short ones and had planned to insert one or two more. 4 mph walking, I can talk. I can do sentences. I take phone calls. During the jogging bits, not sure I would be able to say much. Yup, I have a long way to go.

IYO which of the above fits the grey zone, if any.

AnnPT77

SModa61 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

SModa61 wrote: »

@heybales Thanks for the additional reads and tests. This morning was rather humbling. I headed out before breakfast and with that "grey zone" in mind, I decided to insert some sort jogs into my 4 mph walk. First one was fine. I could feel that jogging is a definite push for me unlike fast walking. Second one, seemed fine at the time, but then right after I started with left check pain. damn that ruined the rest of my walk. At the time it kicked in, I was less than 2 miles into my walk. Dropped my walking speed some as it would not go away, nada. dropped further, seemed to improve. At this point I concluded I was not trying for 5 miles and would cut down to 4. Then at 3.5 miles, I was getting some vertigo, so changed route towards home with my shortened walk ending up 3.8 miles.

So, my conclusion is that I have a long way to go regarding fitness, aerobic capacity, and such. I also am guessing that I need to be eating something before exercise. That may change down the road, but not now.

I've marked this thread and will likely print out for reference at a more suitable time that is more than just a few weeks in. But the good part of this morning is that it showed me how really far that I have to go.

@sijomial

Take a close look at where the gray zone is, in that article: It's near the cusp of the difference between full sentences, and only a few words - it's actually highish steady to lowish moderately hard. It's not "too easy".

So, you're trying add some jogging . . . where does that put you, in terms of talk? Where does your 4mph walk put you?

I hope you're not making the mistake of thinking going easy is the gray zone. Easy-ish is fine. Intense is fine The thing sort of in between is what the article is describing as the gray zone.

Hey, For starters, I am a talker. so I don't know how that impacts the talk test. :P So my understanding of the grey is I believe what you are describing. Adding those bits of jogging, at my level, had me somewhat uncomfortable. I could only do it for far and for so long. Hense why I inserted two short ones and had planned to insert one or two more. 4 mph walking, I can talk. I can do sentences. I take phone calls. During the jogging bits, not sure I would be able to say much. Yup, I have a long way to go.

IYO which of the above fits the grey zone, if any.

The walking, where you can talk in full sentences (phone calls, etc.) does not sound like it's in the gray zone as described. It sounds like it's below the gray zone, and that's fine - it's a good way to build base cardiovascular fitness. From your description, I can't tell whether your jogging is in the gray zone, or above it.

As far as talking: I feel you. It's partly a matter of practice. I can talk in at least short sentences with gaps between, all the way into anaerobic, and up to pretty close to (tested) HR max. It's a matter of timing the talk to exhales. I got practice doing this while steering multi-person rowing shells at race pace. I have to be able to shout instructions to the rowers sometimes, while still rowing as hard as possible myself. Practice makes this somewhat achievable. So, I use my imagination about what talking would be like for a normal person without that kind of practice. Try that. 😉

SModa61

AnnPT77 wrote: »

SModa61 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

SModa61 wrote: »

@heybales Thanks for the additional reads and tests. This morning was rather humbling. I headed out before breakfast and with that "grey zone" in mind, I decided to insert some sort jogs into my 4 mph walk. First one was fine. I could feel that jogging is a definite push for me unlike fast walking. Second one, seemed fine at the time, but then right after I started with left check pain. damn that ruined the rest of my walk. At the time it kicked in, I was less than 2 miles into my walk. Dropped my walking speed some as it would not go away, nada. dropped further, seemed to improve. At this point I concluded I was not trying for 5 miles and would cut down to 4. Then at 3.5 miles, I was getting some vertigo, so changed route towards home with my shortened walk ending up 3.8 miles.

So, my conclusion is that I have a long way to go regarding fitness, aerobic capacity, and such. I also am guessing that I need to be eating something before exercise. That may change down the road, but not now.

I've marked this thread and will likely print out for reference at a more suitable time that is more than just a few weeks in. But the good part of this morning is that it showed me how really far that I have to go.

@sijomial

Take a close look at where the gray zone is, in that article: It's near the cusp of the difference between full sentences, and only a few words - it's actually highish steady to lowish moderately hard. It's not "too easy".

So, you're trying add some jogging . . . where does that put you, in terms of talk? Where does your 4mph walk put you?

I hope you're not making the mistake of thinking going easy is the gray zone. Easy-ish is fine. Intense is fine The thing sort of in between is what the article is describing as the gray zone.

Hey, For starters, I am a talker. so I don't know how that impacts the talk test. :P So my understanding of the grey is I believe what you are describing. Adding those bits of jogging, at my level, had me somewhat uncomfortable. I could only do it for far and for so long. Hense why I inserted two short ones and had planned to insert one or two more. 4 mph walking, I can talk. I can do sentences. I take phone calls. During the jogging bits, not sure I would be able to say much. Yup, I have a long way to go.

IYO which of the above fits the grey zone, if any.

The walking, where you can talk in full sentences (phone calls, etc.) does not sound like it's in the gray zone as described. It sounds like it's below the gray zone, and that's fine - it's a good way to build base cardiovascular fitness. From your description, I can't tell whether your jogging is in the gray zone, or above it.

As far as talking: I feel you. It's partly a matter of practice. I can talk in at least short sentences with gaps between, all the way into anaerobic, and up to pretty close to (tested) HR max. It's a matter of timing the talk to exhales. I got practice doing this while steering multi-person rowing shells at race pace. I have to be able to shout instructions to the rowers sometimes, while still rowing as hard as possible myself. Practice makes this somewhat achievable. So, I use my imagination about what talking would be like for a normal person without that kind of practice. Try that. 😉

Would be nice if the walking is below grey zone, because it is something I can steadily achieve and would be "legal". Other than adding incline though, I am not sure how much further I can advance walking as I think there is going to be a certain swing rate that my legs cannot exceed. But will be curious to see. I plan to get out tomorrow morning again, as the afternoon and the following day are likely rain. I'll try and pay more attention to my ability to speak and see what I can learn.

One of these days, maybe I will pretend I am you and use the beautiful rower I made my husband buy me that I have used like 5 times.

heybales

The gray zone, others call it Tempo zone, other names too, is merely a HR zone that matters if trying to train to HR zones.

Again, you aren't.

Building the aerobic base is a good idea. Actually really a good idea, before attempting harder work.
So the speaking method is great to confirm that. And as fitness goes up, pace will go up.
I think your walking is right where you want it for now - pretty soon it likely won't be, and you'll have to introduce some jogging in there.

I'm in my 3rd week of knocking my running speed down to stay in the aerobic zone, because I might want goals of going farther and know I need the training, I've been doing a pace prior that always feels good for form, but was not sustainable for longer.
At this point I've knocked 1 min/mile off the pace required to stay in that zone, pretty soon I'll be back close to original pace, and can continue the distance longer at that point.

Now biking on the other hand, would probably make that process faster. But I really can't go that slow. For 1 thing, don't have the gears for the hills around here. 2nd, enjoy going hard on the bike.

70% of a 3 hr ride on Sat was in Tempo zone. That is terrible for training to something specific, and I know it.
I'm not helping myself go longer by staying in the aerobic zone, but I really don't have the time too anyway and no group rides coming up where it's needed.
I'm not helping myself to build power on the hills best with interval sessions going above tempo, but I only have 2 rides a week possible and don't feel like giving one over to intervals, which is difficult on the road in a city anyway.
But I'm doing it for fun, so I know the result I'm getting just pushing hard.

ETA:
The 1 zone I do usually use outside of what I'm doing running right now - is the Active Recovery zone, aka called Fat Burning zone now. All kinds of bad info about it under the new term.
But it is useful the day after a hard training day, lifting or cardio, shoot working on the house even - to do a nice easy cardio something to get blood flowing through muscles to aid repair - that's it's purpose and usefulness.
Through many years of specific training to zones, or just having fun and don't care - that is 1 zone purposely used often.

SModa61

@heybales thanks again I definitely have a lot of learning ahead of me. Even reading your response is challenging since the whole topic is so unfamiliar. I should probably find some good reading on theories behind building fitness and meanwhile continuing to push my walking in speed and distance/time, and then start inserting some jog segments. I realize that is likely only working on aerobic conditioning and building the habit of including exercise as part of my day/week/life. So frustrated that I let those years slip.

lorrpb

Since you’re trying to get back into a basic routine and establish basic fitness, you don’t need sophisticated metrics. Find activities you enjoy, do them regularly, and gradually increase what you’re doing over several months. You’ll likely know when you’re working “hard enough” and when you should put forth more effort. Keep an eye on your HR so you don’t push “too hard” at the upper end, given your age (which is less than mine🤗). But I can tell when that happens.
At some point if you wish to set endurance goals or other metrics to shoot for, you can begin to calculate more machinations. Of course, if you have health issues including respiratory or heart issues, ignore all internet advice Have fun!

SModa61

@lorrpb I'm younger than you as well?! I know I am younger than Ann, but no idea about HeyBales. You guys are great inspiration for me. Thank you for that! In a way, I think you have summarized the answer to my question and the answer is that for now, I should not pay heavy attention to my heart rate numbers on my watch. I am fine with that plan. I would have just hated to ignore this new data that is so readily available on my watch, if it was an appropriate tool for this point in my journey. Thanks.

lorrpb

SModa61 wrote: »

@lorrpb I'm younger than you as well?! I know I am younger than Ann, but no idea about HeyBales. You guys are great inspiration for me. Thank you for that! In a way, I think you have summarized the answer to my question and the answer is that for now, I should not pay heavy attention to my heart rate numbers on my watch. I am fine with that plan. I would have just hated to ignore this new data that is so readily available on my watch, if it was an appropriate tool for this point in my journey. Thanks.

It’s fun to keep an eye on your HR since it’s easily available, but nothing to stress over. You’ll likely see your resting HR decrease over a period of time after being consistent with exercise.