Heart Rate Question

ibleedunionblue
ibleedunionblue Posts: 324 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Question about heart rate / training / calories burned.

A little about me: Lost over 80 pounds through diet & distance running. Averaging 300 miles a month the last 4 months. My resting heart rate (tested during sleep) is 39 bpm. My resting heart rate while awake but laying still in bed is 42 bpm. I ran a half marathon in October in which my heart rate climbed to about 182, and that is the highest I've been able to get it.

OK, so I ice skated today for 105 minutes, and the average was 63 bpm. The garmin said I burned 177 calories during that time. Yesterday I went for a 10 mile jog. The jog was 90 minutes long, at an 8:50 pace and my heart rate average was 126 bpm and the calories burned was 520.

I guess my question: have I trained my heart to such a degree that it is that efficient? The bpm doesnt bother me as much as the lack of calories burned. About 52 calories for a 9 minute mile?

Before I get the "you need to run faster," yes, I get that. I do tempo runs, long runs, intervals, hills, and recovery pace runs. A 9 minute mile is a regular jog. My last half marathon was a 7:57 per mile pace, and my last 10K was a 7:35 pace. I am still working on speed.

But the question is more directed at the heart rate and calories... it just seems disappointing that my heart doesnt work harder, and thus, I will have to exercise longer and twice as hard to burn the same number of calories.

Replies

  • janupshaw
    janupshaw Posts: 205 Member
    Hmm, don't know what to tell you, except that may be a question for your doctor. I've been sitting here doing nothing for the last 30 minutes & my heart rate is 70.
  • xxnellie146xx
    xxnellie146xx Posts: 996 Member
    What's your resting heart rate?
  • Sphyk1
    Sphyk1 Posts: 85 Member
    bump, cuz I have a low heart rate and I know I am not in super aerobic shape. It is 48 just sitting around relaxing. So this may be interesting.
  • meankeen
    meankeen Posts: 49 Member
    The highest I got my heart rate was around 205 during a HIIT workout on a stationary bike. I burned 550 calories in 30 minutes.

    The point about peaking your heartrate is not about a 90 ****ing minute run. You can run all day long and burn 5000 calories, but your heart rate will not be high because you're not demanding enough. If you'd like to have a stronger heart, burn more calories in less time (because that's what its all about), have a larger vo2 max (lung capacity, and thus larger muscle tissue, which ultimately also burn more calories), and **** loads of other advantages you'd have to drop your steady state cardio and switch to high intensity cardio.

    **** your 90 minute session, and make it a 30 minute high intensity one.

    ""I will have to exercise longer and twice as hard to burn the same number of calories." <- NO.

    "I will have to exercise shorter and twice as hard to burn even more calories than my ridiculous 90 minute 'jog'" <- YES
  • dmpizza
    dmpizza Posts: 3,321 Member
    Not a dr or anything, but 48 seems awfully low. Are you measuring correctly?
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Unless you have the type of HRM where you enter your VO2 max, I think it's going to mis-estimate for you because it's basing it all on population averages and your HR values are not average. Why not use those Runners World estimates that are so often seen here? It's .63 times weight in pounds times miles ran for a 'net calorie burn' estimate (excluding BMR).

    http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    10 miles for a 160 pound human is going to be around 1000 calories. Sounds like your fitness level has outstripped the burn guesstimation calculator in the HRM.

    Which is a very good thing! :drinker:
  • ibleedunionblue
    ibleedunionblue Posts: 324 Member
    What's your resting heart rate?

    Its in my post - upper 30's while sleeping. Low 40's at true rest.
  • ibleedunionblue
    ibleedunionblue Posts: 324 Member
    Not a dr or anything, but 48 seems awfully low. Are you measuring correctly?

    Yes. And it was measured by a nurse at Dr. Office as confirmation and it was measured 44 there.
  • ibleedunionblue
    ibleedunionblue Posts: 324 Member
    Unless you have the type of HRM where you enter your VO2 max, I think it's going to mis-estimate for you because it's basing it all on population averages and your HR values are not average. Why not use those Runners World estimates that are so often seen here? It's .63 times weight in pounds times miles ran for a 'net calorie burn' estimate (excluding BMR).

    http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single

    I've used those, but I guess the heart (pun intended) of my question is that I am trying to get a better more concise read on calorie expenditure. With the garmin connect, you can set VO2, and set up zones on the garmin. At .63 and 142 pounds, yeah it was estimating around 90 calories per mile.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    But the question is more directed at the heart rate and calories... it just seems disappointing that my heart doesnt work harder, and thus, I will have to exercise longer and twice as hard to burn the same number of calories.
    If it keeps you motivated, use the 90 calories per mile estimate. Whatever you use is just an estimate. Pick one that keeps you motivated. If you're 'eating back' and find yourself gaining, you might need to ratchet it down but if not, I don't see why you can't use whatever estimate motivates you most. I understand how you feel. I have to ignore the measly 50-some net calories per mile I burn walking and just keep up with my walking goals for non-calorie reasons.

    I'm not so sure your low HR necessarily means you burn half as many calories. I have a genetically high HR and I sure don't burn twice as many as the average. I think our calorie burn is more a function of our weight. Yours is very low. How tall are you?

Categories