HRM/PolarFT4 question...

Options
tressatnt
tressatnt Posts: 77
in Fitness and Exercise
Please help me figure this out. I've had my HRM for 2 weeks now so I'm still learning. I can't figure out how the "in zone" works. For example: I biked (stationary) for 69 minutes and it said that I was in the zone for 57 of those minute. Max HR was 143 and Avg was 128. Biking is not my exercise of choice, it doesn't "do much" for me, I'm a runner. So as I eased back into running last week (was taking a week off for injury), one run was for 34 minutes and it said I was in the zone for only 41 seconds! My Max HR was 192 and avg was 184. How could I hardly be in the zone if I was working harder than when I was biking?! Same goes for other workouts that produced a higher HR than the biking. I don't get it... Do I have to set the "zone" setting to something different?

Replies

  • juldga
    juldga Posts: 119
    Options
    I hate my polar ft4 I am never in the zone and it says I burn hardly any calories. JUNK
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Options
    I totally ignore that zone option because it really means nothing. I turned off all the annoying beeps that alert you as well. The HRM has set "zones" based on the info you gave it but as far as I've been able to determine there is no "fat burning zone" to be in.

    I just use it to monitor my HR and track my calorie burn because it has my "zone" as between 109 and 142 bpm which rarely happens when I run.
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Options
    I hate my polar ft4 I am never in the zone and it says I burn hardly any calories. JUNK

    Then you need to pick it up a bit because the zones are pretty low set. It doesn't take much effort to hit the low end of the first zone. If your HR is out the top end of the zone you should be burning a significant amount.
  • tressatnt
    tressatnt Posts: 77
    Options
    I think my zone is 140-160 so basically I am over the zone when I run and therefore it doesn't count it? But I'm still burning calories and fat aren't I? I don't get it. I'm pretty sure the calorie count is accurate because it's within about 20 cals of what my Garmin says when I run. This zone thing is just driving me nuts LOL
  • tressatnt
    tressatnt Posts: 77
    Options
    I hate my polar ft4 I am never in the zone and it says I burn hardly any calories. JUNK

    That's too bad...but how do you know it's incorrect with the calorie counts? I find it to be pretty accurate as far as I can tell.
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Options
    You're still burning what it says you burned. The zone thing isn't unique to Polar, it's just something someone dreamed up that if you're in "this" zone it's the fat burning zone and then the next one is an aerobic zone and then anaerobic. If your HR is elevated you're burning calories regardless of what zone it says you're in. Nobody burns just fat when they exercise, that's nonsense.

    This article helps explain the thought process and why it isn't true.
    http://www.active.com/triathlon/Articles/The-Myth-of-the-Fat-burning-Zone.htm
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    Is there a particular reason you need the "zone" function? I completely ignore mine as the whole "fat burning zone" "aerobic zone" makes little difference considering i am still burning calories. O_o

    You burn more calories overall while being out of the so-called "fat burning zone" as it is lower-intensity. This is why I just go at a comfortable/challenging pace and completely ignore the "zone function".
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    I hate my polar ft4 I am never in the zone and it says I burn hardly any calories. JUNK

    That's too bad...but how do you know it's incorrect with the calorie counts? I find it to be pretty accurate as far as I can tell.

    Mine have been accurate as well. Maybe you are just over-estimating how hard you are working/how many cals you should be burning? I work my BUTT off for 35 minutes and barely burn 250 calories if that puts it in perspective.
  • tressatnt
    tressatnt Posts: 77
    Options
    Is there a particular reason you need the "zone" function? I completely ignore mine as the whole "fat burning zone" "aerobic zone" makes little difference considering i am still burning calories. O_o

    You burn more calories overall while being out of the so-called "fat burning zone" as it is lower-intensity. This is why I just go at a comfortable/challenging pace and completely ignore the "zone function".

    No, I don't need it. I'm just trying to figure out how this HRM works, that's all. I guess the whole "in zone" thing is deceiving because if you go above it, it doesn't count you as being in it even though you're still burning away. I am usually above 160 for most of my workouts, except biking, so I have to believe the calorie count is accurate and that the watch is "confused" with the HR zone LOL
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    Is there a particular reason you need the "zone" function? I completely ignore mine as the whole "fat burning zone" "aerobic zone" makes little difference considering i am still burning calories. O_o

    You burn more calories overall while being out of the so-called "fat burning zone" as it is lower-intensity. This is why I just go at a comfortable/challenging pace and completely ignore the "zone function".

    No, I don't need it. I'm just trying to figure out how this HRM works, that's all. I guess the whole "in zone" thing is deceiving because if you go above it, it doesn't count you as being in it even though you're still burning away. I am usually above 160 for most of my workouts, except biking, so I have to believe the calorie count is accurate and that the watch is "confused" with the HR zone LOL

    Ooooh, oh oh oh oh. Okay. Yes the calorie count is accurate regardless of the "zone" it puts you in. It should tell you "fat burning" and "fitness" when you finish your workout.

    That is just a generic "zone" of 60% of your max heart rate (fat burning) and higher than 60% (fitness). It assumes that when you are under the 60% intensity the fuel you are burning comes from fat, and when you are above the 60% the fuel you are burning is from sugar (in the form of glycogen).

    This in no way means that burning fuel in the "fat burning zone" is more effective as you burn less calories overall than when exercising at a higher intensity.

    Also, you should also have the option to turn it off if it beeps and says "hey you're out of the fat burning zone". Atleast I can on mine anyway (i have an ft7 though).
  • MinnieInMaine
    MinnieInMaine Posts: 6,400 Member
    Options
    Yup, I ignore it too and have also turned off the beeps. Some folks use the zones for HIIT training or if they believe the fat burning zone hype. Me personally, I'd rather just put my all in and not worry too much about where I am in the zone... The only time I get worried is when my heart rate goes above 180. :)

    Also, OP, for stationary bike - do you have one that has programs? I agree, it's not the best burn but when I use the ones in my gym, I try to up the resistance level and/or do hills so that I have to put more effort in and therefore tend to get a better burn. I know some are more plain jane but I wanted to share that in case it's an option for you.
  • tressatnt
    tressatnt Posts: 77
    Options
    Yup, I ignore it too and have also turned off the beeps. Some folks use the zones for HIIT training or if they believe the fat burning zone hype. Me personally, I'd rather just put my all in and not worry too much about where I am in the zone... The only time I get worried is when my heart rate goes above 180. :)

    Also, OP, for stationary bike - do you have one that has programs? I agree, it's not the best burn but when I use the ones in my gym, I try to up the resistance level and/or do hills so that I have to put more effort in and therefore tend to get a better burn. I know some are more plain jane but I wanted to share that in case it's an option for you.

    I've also turned off the beeps because I just didn't even know what they meant LOL. I also give it my all assuming that's the best anyway. I actually don't know when to "worry" if my HR gets "too high". I don't know what is "too high" for me. I've been up at 192 when running... I suppose I should look that up.

    Regarding the bike. I was only doing it for that one week because I'm in a "lazy man's duathlon" for work and had to bike 112 miles, it worked out well that I needed a break from running at the same week. I was just trying to put miles in as fast as I could so I didn't up the resistance too much. I don't plan to use the bike like ever again. In fact, I hope to not sit on a bike seat for at least a year...my *kitten* was sore man! LOL

Categories