Heart Rate: Can't stay "In Zone"-- Am I pushing too hard?

NekoneMeowMixx
NekoneMeowMixx Posts: 410 Member
edited November 11 in Fitness and Exercise
When I purchased my Polar FT4, one of my favorite features was the ability to watch my calorie burn in real time. The other thing that had drawn me to it was the "In Zone" option, which allows you to see if your current heart rate is within "prime fat burning zone" (128 - 167bpm).

The problem is, I seem to always be overshooting into the high 170 - 180's. (I think the highest I've hit was approx. 191) I typically see this when I do C25K on the treadmill, but it happens when I do the Tough Mudder boot camp as well. I'm fairly average in size-- 5 foot 6, approx. 135 pounds, not in the best shape but working on it. Am I simply pushing myself too hard? It seems without even trying I hit the 167+ within the first few minutes of my workout (even when I'm half-assing it)...

Is this safe? Would I be burning more calories if I was "In Zone"? A friend of mine said the other day that you burn more calories during prolonged low intensity work (i.e-- walking for a few miles) than short bursts of high intensity work... I'm still fairly new to the fitness thing, so I just want to make sure that I'm doing things right and not making it harder on my body than it needs to be! :P

Replies

  • DvlDwnInGA
    DvlDwnInGA Posts: 368 Member
    I wouldn't worry to much about "fat burning zone." At the end of the day it is going to come down to calories in vs calories out. I would rather burn more calories in same time than try to stay in the fat burning zone.
  • NekoneMeowMixx
    NekoneMeowMixx Posts: 410 Member
    Yeah, that's what I figured. I've been at it for a good two weeks now, and while I haven't noticed much weight loss (haven't expected to quite yet) I do feel my endurance slowly getting better, and my heart rate doesn't spike as much as it did when I first started. :)
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    they should really just do away with the term "fat burning" zone...some already have and just call it the recovery zone. You're better off just burning more calories than worrying about where that energy is coming from...in the end it all nets out. You burn fat when you are in an energy deficit plain and simple...working in the "fat burning zone" doesn't change the bottom line one bit.

    there are reasons why you would want to train in a particular zone, but worrying about being in the "fat burning" zone isn't one of them.
  • NekoneMeowMixx
    NekoneMeowMixx Posts: 410 Member
    Cwolfman: Yeah, that makes sense. I just didn't know if going above 85% was just wasting energy. Good to know, though! realized it's customizeable, too. So you could set it to 50% to 85%, or 75% to 100%, etc. I guess it's helpful if you're looking to stay within a particular zone, like you said.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    edited January 2015
    If you're doing advanced training for some form of endurance event, zones are a real thing. If we're talking about something for "fat burning", we may as well be speaking of tooth fairies riding unicorns
  • lhippen
    lhippen Posts: 16 Member
    Another thing to consider is that you may have a naturally higher-than-average maximum heart rate. I started using a HR monitor eleven years ago when I was relatively fit, and for the first month I could not seem to go slow enough to stay in the training zone I was aiming for. I finally did what amounted to a stress test and found that my maximum HR was over 10% higher than the 220 minus your age fomula. After adjusting my zones accordingly it made it much easier to stay below my target threshhold on my easy days and made it more challenging to get into my target zone on my hard days.

    Good luck in your fitness journey!
  • RedArizona5
    RedArizona5 Posts: 465 Member
    edited January 2015
    I agree calories in calories out. HIIT or interval running or just all out beast mode getting the burn in is awesome for not having to walk 3 hours just to be "in zone" I too can see it for its own purposes as others have stated but to simply shed fat. Its not rocket science. When I was younger all i did was play* outside and ate when i had too and ate a lot and went back outside. I was a stick. My brother was not and he wasn't as active either but ate what he wanted too. So if I could be skinny as a kid there is simply no reason no one on earth who has* no health problems should be over weight. Unless you have health problems-not much can be done about that. so just keep up the great work.
  • jasonschaef
    jasonschaef Posts: 8 Member
    Here's a link to an article that talks about the "fat burning zone" and where the myth comes from. You're burning a higher percentage of fat at a lower intensity, but you're still burning actual grams of fat faster at a higher intensity: http://www.builtlean.com/2013/04/01/fat-burning-zone-myth/
  • loratliff
    loratliff Posts: 283 Member
    I agree with what's been said, but I would recommend trying to keep your HR in that "Zone 2" during C25K—anything higher means you're running faster than what's called "conversational pace" and most of your miles, especially when you're first starting out, should be at that speed.
  • LKArgh
    LKArgh Posts: 5,178 Member
    If you are getting a heart rate of 190 at the first weeks of c25k, it means you are running too fast. I would be concerned about an injury in the next weeks from not giving your body time to adjust, since you say you are not in great shape. Slow down.
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    DavPul wrote: »
    If you're doing advanced training for some form of endurance event, zones are a real thing. If we're talking about something for "fat burning", we may as well be speaking of tooth fairies riding unicorns

    cosign.

  • Springfield1970
    Springfield1970 Posts: 1,945 Member
    mm, but there is a point in high intensity exercise where if you've run out of glycogen and aren't replacing it (after approx 1 hour depending on many things-with a drink or some other fast release food) you will be relying on fat, and that can only burn so fast then other things get used...ie muscle. I will look up the numbers when I get home from work...

    This bit is anecdotal, I swear my body would rather catabolize muscle than fat.
  • NekoneMeowMixx
    NekoneMeowMixx Posts: 410 Member
    Oh wow, thanks for all the great advice, guys! I'm actually training to do Tough Mudder this fall, which is why I'm so focused on endurance.

    @DavPul-- Do you know what kind of zone I'd want to be staying within in this case? I guess I should look into that stress test too, to see what my max HR really is. :)
  • cheshirecatastrophe
    cheshirecatastrophe Posts: 1,395 Member
    edited February 2015
    NekoneMeowMixx wrote: »
    Oh wow, thanks for all the great advice, guys! I'm actually training to do Tough Mudder this fall, which is why I'm so focused on endurance.

    @DavPul-- Do you know what kind of zone I'd want to be staying within in this case? I guess I should look into that stress test too, to see what my max HR really is. :)

    Tough Mudders are AWESOME, but that's not what is usually meant by endurance event. Think running a marathon, biking a century, etc. A long, long period of sustained effort. Tough Mudders take awhile, but it's more like shorter bursts of running in between superheroic obstacle tackling.

    (And let me be clear here--I run marathons and ride centuries, but I would fail miserably at OCR. "You want me to what? With my arms?")
  • NekoneMeowMixx
    NekoneMeowMixx Posts: 410 Member
    Heh, I feel like I'm more built for the shorter bursts of energy. I'm a big fan of weightlifting, but I generally despise cardio. I enjoy biking and all, but I just... don't jog... But the boyfriend wants to do Tough Mudder again, and it really does sound like an exciting experience, so I figured it's a great motivator to help me reach my fitness goals! :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories