running advice needed

Hi all,
I'm a bit of a novice runner and I could do with some advice. For the last 3 months or so my running has improved quite a lot and I have lost weight and got fitter, using a combination of MFP, a heart rate monitor and Runtastic.com.
Now, I can run about 2.5 miles using interval training and I've reduced my walking and increased my running until I walk very little and run most of the way. However, when I look at my suggested heart rates on Runtastic, I'm way over for most of the time. When I'm running my heart rate varies between 150 and 185 bpm depending on the incline.
Runtastic tells me that my fat burning range is 129-137 bpm, 138-146 aerobic, 147-155 anaerobic and above that is a red zone for athletes only.
So today I changed my routine so that I run until my heart rate is 165 then walk until it drops to 129 and then run again. My overall time was only a little longer and I felt better (Spanish summer is just beginning!) but I (apparently) burned less fat and calories than usual.
Is it really bad to have such a high heart rate - average for the run usually about 155 - or is this inaccurate? If I carry on with my new routine, surely my fitness will still improve, but is this really better than pushing myself as I was before?
I'm 46, female and I'm only a little overweight.
Any advice please?

You are actually doing interval training there and interval training is absolutely excellent.

There is sound evidence that suggests that you let your heartrate go back down to 120bpm before attempting the next interval, you are almost doing this anyway.

Apparently letting it drop to 120bpm before doing the next run, is optimum for gaining fitness.

Regarding your HR going into the 150s and above, mine does this all the time, during a half marathon the other week, I was running for 125 minutes with my HR at an average of 164bpm for the whole distance, providing you do not get chestpains, there is no problem.

Follow RPE (Rate of percieved exertion) instead of heart rate. Heart rate formula was not developed based on general population.


Please forgive the wikipedia quote It was the easiest one to find...


"Although attributed to various sources, it is widely thought to have been devised in 1970 by Dr. William Haskell and Dr. Samuel Fox.[11] Inquiry into the history of this formula reveals that it was not developed from original research, but resulted from observation based on data from approximately 11 references consisting of published research or unpublished scientific compilations.[12] It gained widespread use through being used by Polar Electro in its heart rate monitors,[11] which Dr. Haskell has "laughed about",[11] as the formula "was never supposed to be an absolute guide to rule people's training."[11]

While it is the most common (and easy to remember and calculate), this particular formula is not considered by reputable health and fitness professionals to be a good predictor of HRmax. Despite the widespread publication of this formula, research spanning two decades reveals its large inherent error, Sxy = 7–11 bpm. Consequently, the estimation calculated by HRmax = 220 − age has neither the accuracy nor the scientific merit for use in exercise physiology and related fields.[12]
"


the whole text is here. they suggest alternative formulas. : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate

I wouldn't worry about "zones". When I first got back into running, my HR was always around 165-175 during my runs. Now, after about 3 months of running, my HR is around 135-145 (and I'm running at a faster pace!)

As your fitness improves, your HR will come down and you'll (unfortunately) burn less calories. However, doing intervals to get your HR up again is the best way to go to improve your fitness, burnt he most calories, and improve your endurance.

I would go by how you feel. If the higher heart rate is making you feel exhausted then it is too much. I'm a 48yo female. My resting heart rate is a little below 60. When I run I don't feel like I've worked if my heart rate is below 165. 175-180 isn't uncommon for me. At 160 I'm not breathing hard and can carry on a conversation no different than if I were walking. My heart rate drops to 80 in about 2 minutes of slow walking after a 10 mile run. I don't feel my high heart rate is detrimental for me. But, if you feel crappy and tired after your run then you are probably pushing it too hard and should slow down.

I'm not a doctor and I don't play one on TV either; perhaps a medical professional would like to weigh in on this. I don't worry about such things really. As long as I am not getting dizzy or faint, I don't worry about bringing my heart rate down. If I start feeling a bit light headed, of course I would back off a bit (my legs usually give out before this happens and it usually only happens if I had not eaten anything substantial for a few hours prior to the run and I suspect it to be more of a sugar dip than anything-- especially since when I eat a granola bar, I perk right back up)...

Somebody here has said that the intervals - when your heart slows down - cause you to burn more calories - can somebody explain this to me please?

There is a lot of misunderstanding of interval training, according to bro-science it's magic and the effects last for days and days.

There are three main modes of training, steady state, tempo and interval, each of which do different things.

Steady state training, or your long, slow run, is about building aerobic endurance. for me that's around 15-20 km at about 150bpm. That burns a lot of calories, because you're running for a while.

Tempo runs train your heart to perform at higher intensities, so pushing your capacity to perform up. Again for me that can be anything up to 40 minutes at 160-170.

Intervals push you into the anaerobic range and really push the heart to perform, you need the recovery pace intervals just to recover. The effect on calorie consumption is higher, by virtue of just how hard you're working your system. For me I'll go up to 200bpm in my sprint intervals and then down to 140-150 in the recovery intervals.

For the first two you can reasonably estimate your calorie utilisation but for the latter it's very difficult to assess. Although the increase isn't as high as some would have you believe.

The three modes work together to improve performance, without the aerobic base the intervals aren't going to be as intense as they could be. Lots of advocates of High Intensity Intervals as the only CV one does on these boards, but that misses the point that HIIT can be improved by the steady state and the tempo sessions.

If your goal is to increase cardiovascular fitness then your heart rate is perfectly fine. Mine ranges from 140-185 when I'm running, depending how many sprint intervals I'm doing. Sounds like you're doing an awesome job with the running programme in any event. Keep it up!

ETA: You should seek medical attention ASAP if you: have chest pains, feel shortness of breath, or if your heart rate stays high once you stop exercising. If you feel dizzy or nauseous you should ease up a bit because it means you're pushing your body too hard.