Another Heart Rate Question

Options
Ok. Someone please help me with this. My HRM just came in today and I'm super excited about it.. but I'm a bit confused. Before it came in, I was just going by the machine. I used the "karvonen formula" i found on google to calculate my target heart rate zone to be between 149 and 173. (Which I still thought was low - I go over that easily while doing cardio - but what do I know?)

Now my calculations by the HRM are telling me that my target is between 129 and 168??!

Just this morning while I was doing steady cardio, it told me my heart rate was well over 190. I wasn't really winded, I was comfortable but still working up a sweat.. Is there a point where going over your target zone is bad?

Forgive me if I sound so stupid about this - I am just now learning. Thanks in advance.

Replies

  • SJT75
    SJT75 Posts: 134
    Options
    Bump. I'm interested to hear the answer to this too xxx
  • NanBar
    NanBar Posts: 283 Member
    Options
    Those target zones are set by the formula in the watch- not really your personal fitness level. Some gyms will test you to see what goal zone is.your . Mine is much higher than what the "Own Zone" is on my Polar says it should be.
  • aliciamille
    Options
    if I want to be in the fat burning/endurance zone, my target is about 150- thats the aerobic zone and where most of the fat burning takes place. You're usually in that zone when you do mid level cardio or go for a nice run or bike ride. Most people who do endurance training are in this zone a lot.

    when you go over your target, in my case, I'd be in the 170s, and 180s, thats anaerobic threshold. That's like if youre running a 5k at race pace (trying hard to beat your best time) or in a spinning class and doing one of the really tough intervals. This is the zone where you start to build muscle and ehance performance. not a bad zone to be in! you will be able to tell when you cross over into this zone...your muscles will be tired and you will be breathing hard

    so the easiest answer is no, it's not bad to go over your target....just dont go under it if you want to experience the best results. and you're right, yours seems a little low. I'd do a bit more experimenting to find out where your aerobic zone actually is (when it comes to YOUR hr)
  • agartin
    agartin Posts: 274 Member
    Options
    Bump. I'm interested to hear the answer to this too xxx

    Lol. I'm soo confuuuuused.
  • agartin
    agartin Posts: 274 Member
    Options
    Ugh, double post
  • agartin
    agartin Posts: 274 Member
    Options
    if I want to be in the fat burning/endurance zone, my target is about 150- thats the aerobic zone and where most of the fat burning takes place. You're usually in that zone when you do mid level cardio or go for a nice run or bike ride. Most people who do endurance training are in this zone a lot.

    when you go over your target, in my case, I'd be in the 170s, and 180s, thats anaerobic threshold. That's like if youre running a 5k at race pace (trying hard to beat your best time) or in a spinning class and doing one of the really tough intervals. This is the zone where you start to build muscle and ehance performance. not a bad zone to be in! you will be able to tell when you cross over into this zone...your muscles will be tired and you will be breathing hard

    so the easiest answer is no, it's not bad to go over your target....just dont go under it if you want to experience the best results. and you're right, yours seems a little low. I'd do a bit more experimenting to find out where your aerobic zone actually is (when it comes to YOUR hr)

    Thanks
  • bizco
    bizco Posts: 1,949 Member
    Options
    To find your target heart rate subtract your age from 220. Take that number x .70 to find the low end of the range and x .85 to find the high end of the range. For example, if you're 30 years old your target heart rate is between 133-162 and your maximum heart rate is 190.
    1. 220 - age = maximum heart rate (220 - 30 = 190)
    2. 190 x .70 = low end of target range (190 x .70 = 133)
    3. 190 x .85 = high end of target range (190 x .85 = 162)

    Google "target heart rate" for more information.

    Side note: "bump" just moves the discussion to the top of "recent posts" so it's easier to find.
  • Larry7995
    Options
    When I go over 170 I am sucking air pretty hard and have to back off after a few minutes.
  • skinnyack
    skinnyack Posts: 683
    Options
    Apparently (I'm learning this also) from what I've read, if you go into anaerobic exercise (which would be over the 170 for you) as opposed to aerobic (the 128-170 it told you to stay in) your body cannot pump oxygen into your muscle as quickly as it needs to. What this creates is a large build up of lactic acid, which causes your muscles to be sore among probably other things, and you shift out of burning fat and will burn more muscle. In general it is not bad for you to go anaerobic, as long as it is for short periods of time. I've heard ballpark about 20% of your exercise time. So say you are jogging- it would be okay to do 1 min sprint, 4 min recovery... repeat. or something along those lines. If you are like me (which you are-exactly- same numbers and everything) this probably means at best a really slow jog/walk with maybe a couple quicker paced 1/4 miles in there. I know it's really frustrating- I too feel like I am not breathing hard and not really exerting myself- but according to the HRM I'm working my butt off at a snails crawl. Eventually my body will adapt and I will be able to go faster with less heart effort but for right now. this is where it's at. BTW the way I found all this out is I was trying to run and increase my pace. Worked up to doing 8 miles at a good paced jog, but my legs weren't healing after (calves specifically). I would be above 170 (anaerobic) pretty much the whole time. I've taken about three weeks off now (well backed off at least). And just this last week decided I was going to try to stay under 180 as I run, but mostly under 170. It's hard, and it takes longer, but it doesn't hurt.

    Ok someone tell me if I'm wrong :wink:
  • andythorn1969
    Options
    This is a really tricky subject. I have a high resting heart rate, booze, *kitten*, class-A drugs (only joking) have all had an effect on my fitness. This means that my zones are, by the various equations you can find on the net, high for my age.

    Personally I find that as a 41 year old not-very-fit bloke that 145 is "easy-medium" , 155 is "medium-hard" and when I get to over 165 I'm thinking of booking the ambulance for the cardiac arrest I'm soon going to have.

    Bear in mind that I've only been running for about 3 months using the C25K programme and run for about half an hour and cover about 5k.

    Your fitness levels (and just about everyone else's) are probably far higher than mine.

    My advice would be that when he flashing spots in your vision and heart palpitations kick in - slow down!

    Ta

    Andy
  • skinnyack
    skinnyack Posts: 683
    Options
    Oh- and like above poster said- HRMs can be wrong, as they are generalized. The only true way to know is to get a professional to measure your VO2 levels and do a fitness test. But I think probably in general, if you aren't a super athlete and are just starting out, the heart rate zones are a good guess.
  • andythorn1969
    Options
    So I guess that just hitting 170 for the last couple of minutes of my run is beefing up the old leg muscles. That's good as I have a sparrows-legs but a "cuddly" tummy.