Heart rate zones? Which is best?

samanthagreen3

Hellooo! I am 23 and over weight by quite a lot. I have found my resting heart rate to be about 85 so I think (if i have done it correctly) that my zones are 144 - 167 and 167 - 180. Above average i hear . Im working out on my treadmill at the moment and average about 160-170. So im wondering where should i be to loose weight? I know that the higher the HR the more calories you burn but if I'll loose weight quicker at a lower zone then should I do that? Any one with any experience?

IronSmasher

At the doctors first, and ask a professional

gregavila

I spent the first month of getting back into this working in Zone 1 (107-125) and Zone 2 (125-141). My HRM setup a workout that was about 2 hours in Zone 1 and 3 hours in Zone 2. This was mainly about fat burning and starting to build some form of an aerobic base.

Even when I was working out in these zones, I wasn't just spending all of my time in one, but doing "intervals" of going from the bottom of Zone 1 to the top of Zone 2, and then letting my HR come back down - which aids in recovery time.

In the last two weeks, I've shifted to start including time in Zone 3 (142-163) so that I can start building an aerobic base and continue to use the interval method even if I am working within a single zone - rather than "steady state" of just working out at say 139 bpm.

And btw, I am using a Polar FT60 for my HRM as well and using it's training zone program.

gregavila

And if your information you gave, age and resting HR is accurate, your zones would be something like:

Resting Heart Rate(RHR): 85
Maximum Heart Rate(MHR): 197

Fat Burning (Zone 1): 141 to 152
Aerobic (Zone 2): 152 to 163
Steady State (Zone 3): 163 to 175
Anaerobic (Zone 4): 175 to 186

SteveHunt113

Exercise alone is not going to get you to lose weight. Also, fast weight loss is not the best way to go. Having said that, the best way to promote burning fat is to including weight training into your routine. Since you stated your goal was losing weight, I bring this up.

I'm curious, are you exercising for the exclusive purpose of burning calories, or is there a health factor you are also trying to achieve. gregavila's post has good information in that he's doing intervals. Intervals really help build up endurance, recovery and play a huge role in good health.

To get back to your direct question, I've never heard anyone with any kind of knowledge on the subject suggest the lower heart rate's for working out. Though the percentage of fat burned in a session is higher, the calories burned is lower meaning you will also burn less fat overall.

AZKristi

Your max heart rate is not just related to your fitness level, but also your age. There are lots of calculators online, but most say max HR = 220 - age

50% = 0.5 * max HR - warm up

60% = 0.6 * max HR
70% = 0.7 * max HR
80% = 0.8 * max HR

90% = 0.9 * max HR - very brief intervals (when you are ready to push to the max - definitely not your first cardio workout)

Spend most of your time between 60-80% in intervals. Try a ladder.

1 min at 60
1 min at 70, 1 min at 80, 1 min at 85 (3 min total)

1 min at 60
1.5 min at 70, 80, 85 (4.5 min total)

1 min at 60
2 min at 70, 80, 85 (6 min total)

1 min at 60
3 min at 70, 80, 85 (9 min total)

i min at 60
2 min at 70, 80, 85 (6 min total)

1 min at 60
1 min at 70, 1 min at 80, 1 min at 85 (3 min total)

agthorn

I have a Polar FT60 and it sets up 3 zones: 60-70%, 70-80%, and 80-90%. None of them are "best" - my Polar training program has me working all three zones. So for example, it's currently telling me that I should aim for 115 minutes in zone 1, 110 minutes in zone 2, and 50 minutes in zone 3 over the course of a week. This way I get a mix of "fat burning", "cardio endurance" and "anaerobic improvement" (yes, I know the zones are arbitrarily named). My interval training will get me zones 2 and 3, my yoga classes knock out zone 1, and most of my running falls into zone 2 (or zone 3 if I'm huffing up a hill).

The 220-age doesn't work for everyone. I've done an actual treadmill test and mine peaked at 201, even though the formula would put me at 190.