HRM and strength training

Options
13»

Replies

  • jdavis193
    jdavis193 Posts: 972 Member
    Options
    My polar FT60 does calculate strength training read below.

    http://www.heartratewatchcompany.com/bodybuilding-watches-s/150.htm
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    Ok, since we're talking about HRM's let me ask this question....I just recently bought one but just the cheapest one they had at Walmart...like $28 or something, just for the time being. I wanted to see what that was vs. what the treadmill was saying. This one asks age and M/F but I didn't have to enter my height or weight....anyone have an opinion on whether I'm really getting an accurate reading? I know I can get a better one...that does ask that, and I do plan to, but just working with what I have for now. Thanks!

    I doubt it will have algorithms for an accurate readout of calorie burn. Especially if it doesn't take into account your V02max, RHR, MHR or general activity level. It'll probably give you a reliable current Heart Rate reading, but at $28, i doubt anything more significant than that I'm afraid...unless was massively mispriced!
  • Smuterella
    Smuterella Posts: 1,623 Member
    Options
    OK, I'm going just shy of middle ground. HRM says 250, I'm going to log it as 100.
  • wareagle8706
    wareagle8706 Posts: 1,090 Member
    Options
    I would call up the manufacturer and see what they say about whether the particular HRM you have is accurate for that type of caloric reading or not. Because Polar has HRMs that are meant for strength trainers.
  • bco1158
    bco1158 Posts: 38
    Options
    bump
  • Cyclink
    Cyclink Posts: 517 Member
    Options
    Krissypea79's articles covered a lot of good information . Adding to that:
    i have been reading today that HRMs aren't accurate for strength training calorie burn.

    That is correct. Most heart monitors are calibrated for running at a moderate intensity (trying to get rid of the intensity/efficiency factors).

    Lifting, which generally includes an anaerobic workout (if you are lifting heavily enough to build muscle, or not quite as intense if you are lifting to lose weight) and a rest period. The work period is too short for the heart rate to catch up, and the rest period is not burning many calories, even though the heart rate is raised.

    That's what circuit training (and many of the exercise DVDs) try to improve upon. They get you doing something that is hard but sustainable, therefore burning calories at a consistent rate.
    I always go by my HRM bc it has all of personal information my Vo2 levels height weight etc.

    HRMs that actually have VO2max setting in them are the most accurate (within about 5%). Lower end models get within 25%.
    However strength training can cause your body to burn more calories for a longer period after completing the workout, I've heard as long as 48-72 hours.

    The afterglow calories burned from a workout top out at around 10% of the calories burned in the workout (if you burned 500 calories, your body will burn up to 50 more afterwards), all burned in the first few hours afterwards as your body refuels and repairs the muscle (which is why carbs and protein are important shortly after a workout).
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    This is one of the reasons why Jillian Michaels likes to use compound movements during strenght training, in order to get things burning and counting more like a cardio workout to get the actual calorie burn.

    I love compound movements, so I like to clean and press kettlebells with deep squats, do raises and lunges together, bicep curls with a squat etc... and do what I call "blood shunts" when I'm strength training. Jillian Michaels does similiar in 30DS with the cardio circuit in between. This is where I'll either hop on a cross trainer/treadmill/bike/rower for a couple of minutes and smash out some interval stylee sprint.

    Very dynamic strength training such as plyometrics and some calisthenics will probably read relatively accurately on your HRM as they are pretty much cardio using your own body weight as resistance, as opposed to air or magnets on the fly wheel of the bike, or incline / wind when running etc.

    I particularly like walkaways with a press-up/push-up, burpees, squat thrusts, sprinters to name a few for this... I always get knackered, sweaty, panting ... especially when done very quickly....

    However I appreciate some people see strength training as moving steadily from on exercise to the next, number of repsx number of sets with rest breaks. But I like relatively, short, sharp, explosive circuit routines.

    On Initial Officer Training, they showed us a workout to "get fit and stay fit" that we could do anywhere where we had about 7 foot of length space and about 4ft wide... and they were right...

    Consisted of 20 burpees, 15 squats, 10 pushups, 10 situps - repeat for about 20 minutes... You can add in other stuff too between the squats, pushups and situps like squat thrusts, jumping jacks, skipping, kettlebells/small free weight exercises, to really get your HR up and you in a sweat, And even add a shoulder press in to the squats. Also, things like gun drills (jumping lunges).

    The only problem is with this it's quite heavy impact on your joints so doing it for more than about 30 minutes every day would probably end up with some nasty RSI or impact related injuries. But this kind of strength training will give you a great booty, toned arms, burn calories and work you heart and musculuar endurance and should give a HRM read out that is accurate. :)

    Val

    The HRM calorie burn will be more accurate than, say, for heavy squats, but will will not be nearly as accurate as when doing steady-state cardio.

    There is what I call a "resistive component" and a "cardio component" to every exercise movement. As a general rule, they are inversely proportional--meaning the higher the resistive component, the lower the cardio effect and vice versa. The higher the resistive component, and the more you get away from steady-state cardio intensity, the less accurate the HRM calorie count will be.

    Circuit training kind of lives in the middle. Not as "cardio" as full cardio, not as "strengthy" as traditional weight lifting. In most cases, circuit training calories on an HRM will be overestimated to a varying degree. That is due to factors such as resistance level of movements and amount of overhead and upper body work. For example, a studied reviewed by Len Kravitz examined a circuit class and noted that the actual VO2 (and thus calorie burn) was 25%-38% less than predicted based on heart rate. Another study that looked at 12 min of continuous kettlebell swings found that the avg HR was 87% of HR max, but avg VO2 was about 62% (at that HR, you would expect VO2 to be around 75%).

    And obviously, there are infinite combinations of movements that can be combined to make up a circuit.

    It's important to remember that these are mostly fun, hypothetical discussions. All of these exercises burn calories, can be excellent for overall conditioning, etc. We are just discussing the arcane details about whether HRMs are adequate tools for estimating these calories. None of this is meant as commentary in any way on the actual QUALITY of the exercise, or class, etc.

Categories