heart rate zones...real or BS?

Options
seena511
seena511 Posts: 685 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
i got a Polar FT4 the other day and i've been reading about the different heart rate zones to target. i've also seen on here people stating that you can exercise in your fat burning, aerobic, and anaerobic zones to change the distribution of your calories burned - say, whether you burn calories from carbs or calories from fat.

what i want to know is, is this a real thing i should be paying attention to, or should i just be striving to burn as many calories as possible? also, if i do exercise within a certain range in order to target burning fat or carb calories, can i (or should i) adjust my macros for the day based on that burn?

Replies

  • seena511
    seena511 Posts: 685 Member
    Options
    bump!
  • tnqnt
    tnqnt Posts: 397 Member
    Options
    FWIW, from my personal experience with a Polar FT-60, I wholeheartedly believe in the training zones.

    I spent years over-exercising and had not much success, but since I started training in zones (I do all 3 zones), mostly zone 1, I have lost over 40 lbs in 7 months. I am almost at my goal and I have kept it off and am still losing (albeit slower than at the beginning). The key, I have found, is to mix it up: have some weeks where you do mostly lower zones and then throw some HIIT into the program to mix it up. Also, most of my zone 1 is done in weight lifting and resistance training, where most of my zone 2 and 3 is cardio (some zone 3 is also resistance training)....

    Good luck :)
  • HoneyRiot
    HoneyRiot Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    First, I don't have a Polar HRM yet. I will be getting one in month or so. I currently use the HRM on my elliptical machine as a guide.

    However, from my personal experience, I do notice that when I stay in my fat-burning zone I tend to lose more weight. So, unbelievably, when I go slower on the elliptical and lower my heart rate back into that fat-buring zone I lose more weight than going full-speed on the elliptical. Strange, but true. So, I do believe in the zones. I think they have merit.
  • melaniecheeks
    melaniecheeks Posts: 6,349 Member
    Options
    Nah, I dont think it's worth worrying about. You're burning fat in all the zones - go as hard as you can for the length of time you wish to exercise.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    Substrate utilization (fat vs. carbohydrates) during exercise is irrelevant for weight loss purposes. Given equal duration of low and high-intensity exercise, you will burn a larger number of calories during high-intensity exercise. Calorie deficit is what determines weight loss.

    Here's a study which explains it thoroughly:

    http://www.sportsscientists.com/2010/01/exercise-and-weight-loss-part-3-fat.html
  • likemeinvisible
    likemeinvisible Posts: 309
    Options
    If all you want is the burn as much as possible then zones don't matter. If you want to build your endurance so you can swim/bike/run faster/longer/easier then zones are very important. Here's an excellent article on how to find your zone for your goals:
    http://www.endurancefactor.com/Articles/article-heartintro.html
  • seena511
    seena511 Posts: 685 Member
    Options
    this is great guys thank you all so much!
  • 1Fizzle
    1Fizzle Posts: 241 Member
    Options
    Not saying whether it is or is not BS, but I feel you should just workout and push yourself during each workout. In my opinion, focusing on a "zone" takes your focus off working as hard as you can. Push through, work on improving your running time, or the amount of weight you can lift, and focus on diet.
  • tnqnt
    tnqnt Posts: 397 Member
    Options
    Substrate utilization (fat vs. carbohydrates) during exercise is irrelevant for weight loss purposes. Given equal duration of low and high-intensity exercise, you will burn a larger number of calories during high-intensity exercise. Calorie deficit is what determines weight loss.

    Here's a study which explains it thoroughly:

    http://www.sportsscientists.com/2010/01/exercise-and-weight-loss-part-3-fat.html

    This makes a lot of sense - thanks for the link. :)

    This is what I have found to be true from my personal experience. Most of my exercise is zone 1 (60% - 69% of max HR ) and 2 (70% - 79% of max) and I have really been successful. In the past, most of my exercise was zone 3 (greater than 80% of max) and I saw poor results and injury, as well as immunity issues. :)
  • PrincessNikkiBoo
    PrincessNikkiBoo Posts: 330 Member
    Options
    Bump for when I get my heart rate monitor.
  • hamonk
    hamonk Posts: 42 Member
    Options
    Bump for later
  • elaine_des
    elaine_des Posts: 189 Member
    Options
    Substrate utilization (fat vs. carbohydrates) during exercise is irrelevant for weight loss purposes. Given equal duration of low and high-intensity exercise, you will burn a larger number of calories during high-intensity exercise. Calorie deficit is what determines weight loss.

    Here's a study which explains it thoroughly:

    http://www.sportsscientists.com/2010/01/exercise-and-weight-loss-part-3-fat.html

    this +++++ heart rate zone is important
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    Not saying whether it is or is not BS, but I feel you should just workout and push yourself during each workout. In my opinion, focusing on a "zone" takes your focus off working as hard as you can. Push through, work on improving your running time, or the amount of weight you can lift, and focus on diet.

    This times a million
  • Cat_Lifts
    Cat_Lifts Posts: 174 Member
    Options
    edit: i'm dumb.

Categories