Orange Theory Heart Monitor.
Options
fstrickl
Posts: 883 Member
Hi!
I’ve been going to Orange Theory for the past two weeks and I really like it. I like that you can use the heart monitor outside of the studio. I’ve done a few home workouts with it and I’m just wondering how accurate it is. It’s grossly higher than what my Fitbit Alta HR tells me, but I’ve always felt the Alta HR is a little low. Anyone heard anything or have any thoughts?
I’ve been going to Orange Theory for the past two weeks and I really like it. I like that you can use the heart monitor outside of the studio. I’ve done a few home workouts with it and I’m just wondering how accurate it is. It’s grossly higher than what my Fitbit Alta HR tells me, but I’ve always felt the Alta HR is a little low. Anyone heard anything or have any thoughts?
1
Replies
-
Do you have the chest strap or the arm band?0
-
NextRightThing714 wrote: »Do you have the chest strap or the arm band?
Good question. I have the chest strap.
0 -
The chest strap is more accurate. Fitbits are terrible for heart rate monitoring at higher heart rate levels (like workout levels).0
-
Some find the Fitbit to lose accuracy either over a certain line that may not be that high, or while at higher levels it'll just drop out for chunks of time.
Some find it works just fine, or movement of wrist unit can improve things.
But good comparison method with better chest strap. Now you know.
Curious what the avgHR and maxHR said for the workout in both cases?0 -
Hi!
I’ve been going to Orange Theory for the past two weeks and I really like it. I like that you can use the heart monitor outside of the studio. I’ve done a few home workouts with it and I’m just wondering how accurate it is. It’s grossly higher than what my Fitbit Alta HR tells me, but I’ve always felt the Alta HR is a little low. Anyone heard anything or have any thoughts?
Depends on what type of session you're doing, but in general in an OTF context you might as well throw a couple of dice. I suspect it's significantly overestimating.0 -
Higher HR or higher in terms of calorie guestimates?
You can just manually count your heartbeats to check HR accuracy, I find my neck easier than my wrist to pick up my pulse.0 -
ExistingFish wrote: »The chest strap is more accurate. Fitbits are terrible for heart rate monitoring at higher heart rate levels (like workout levels).
The issue with chest strap is more accurate statements is that the impact is negligible. Your talking about being within the margin for error.
The issue is more about whether the activity is one where HR data has a meaningful relationship with energy expenditure. In OTF there isn't a strong correlation.
A micrometer is more accurate than a steel rule, but that doesn't help you to determine the colour of the thing that you're touching.2 -
Hi!
I’ve been going to Orange Theory for the past two weeks and I really like it. I like that you can use the heart monitor outside of the studio. I’ve done a few home workouts with it and I’m just wondering how accurate it is. It’s grossly higher than what my Fitbit Alta HR tells me, but I’ve always felt the Alta HR is a little low. Anyone heard anything or have any thoughts?
Are you asking about heart rate measurement, or calorie estimation?
If heart rate measurement accuracy is the question, I agree with the "check against your manually taken pulse" and "chest belt likely better than wrist" answers.
If calorie estimation accuracy is the question, my answer is that neither would be accurate, and I'd probably use the lower of the two (or the most convenient) as a guess unless I had a better idea from elsewhere (comparing the MFP database estimate for circuit training would maybe give you a 3rd data point to consider, as possibly lower yet (who knows)). For calorie estimation purposes, just pick one, be consistent about how much you eat back (zero is usually a bad plan), track for 4-6 weeks, then adjust as necessary to get a healthy rate of weight loss (if loss is your goal).
It would be a good plan to answer heybales' questions above, too, and see how he responds.1 -
What she said. ^
Also, I would make sure your stats (height, weight) are accurate in both the OTBeat app and Fitbit app.2 -
Some find the Fitbit to lose accuracy either over a certain line that may not be that high, or while at higher levels it'll just drop out for chunks of time.
Some find it works just fine, or movement of wrist unit can improve things.
But good comparison method with better chest strap. Now you know.
Curious what the avgHR and maxHR said for the workout in both cases?
I’m heading to OT this evening, I’ll remember to take a look at both and let you know. I’ve noticed, as you mentioned, that sometimes both heart rates are very similar, but then Fitbit will drop to like 99 when the chest strap says something way higher.
For those wondering, I’m primarily concerned about calories burned. I’m trying to lose weight. And while I don’t plan to eat back all the calories, there’s no way I can’t eat back any. I’ll be a grouch-a-saurous if I don’t!
1 -
Some find the Fitbit to lose accuracy either over a certain line that may not be that high, or while at higher levels it'll just drop out for chunks of time.
Some find it works just fine, or movement of wrist unit can improve things.
But good comparison method with better chest strap. Now you know.
Curious what the avgHR and maxHR said for the workout in both cases?
I’m heading to OT this evening, I’ll remember to take a look at both and let you know. I’ve noticed, as you mentioned, that sometimes both heart rates are very similar, but then Fitbit will drop to like 99 when the chest strap says something way higher.
For those wondering, I’m primarily concerned about calories burned. I’m trying to lose weight. And while I don’t plan to eat back all the calories, there’s no way I can’t eat back any. I’ll be a grouch-a-saurous if I don’t!
Despite what OTF site says their calorie claims are led by their marketing department and not led by science.
"Afterburn" and interval training effects are massively over-hyped and exaggerated.
Take their calorie claims with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Might be worth validating what you are actually able to do in an hour on a more reliable/believable piece of equipment (rower or power meter equipped bike) or running for example.4 -
Despite what OTF site says their calorie claims are led by their marketing department and not led by science.
"Afterburn" and interval training effects are massively over-hyped and exaggerated.
Take their calorie claims with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Might be worth validating what you are actually able to do in an hour on a more reliable/believable piece of equipment (rower or power meter equipped bike) or running for example .
They have largely dropped claims about after burn. The calorie burn report after a workout are strictly for the workout itself, not any extra. Their formula for calorie burn is pretty standard. An hour combined of treadmill, rowing machine, and weights is burning about 450 calories on average for me, which is not high for my stats.0 -
Some find the Fitbit to lose accuracy either over a certain line that may not be that high, or while at higher levels it'll just drop out for chunks of time.
Some find it works just fine, or movement of wrist unit can improve things.
But good comparison method with better chest strap. Now you know.
Curious what the avgHR and maxHR said for the workout in both cases?
I’m heading to OT this evening, I’ll remember to take a look at both and let you know. I’ve noticed, as you mentioned, that sometimes both heart rates are very similar, but then Fitbit will drop to like 99 when the chest strap says something way higher.
For those wondering, I’m primarily concerned about calories burned. I’m trying to lose weight. And while I don’t plan to eat back all the calories, there’s no way I can’t eat back any. I’ll be a grouch-a-saurous if I don’t!
Just saw the reference to the fact they are doing interval type things (hence the prior marketing of after-burn).
HR-based calorie burn formula are at best only valid for steady-state aerobic exercise with HR the same for 2-4 min at a time.
The farther removed you get from that the more inflated the calorie burn math is.
So like lifting is anaerobic and HR all over the place (if doing it right) - exact opposite.
Intervals of cardio exercise - rowing, running, biking - that's moved away too and inflated.
If a rowing machine has watts given for your total workout - you can get accurate calorie burn there.
If treadmill gives time and distance - you can get accurate there.
Weights - you can log circuit or traditional and get an idea there.
Do that once and now you have decent calorie burn formula you wouldn't need to start at 50% for eat-back.3 -
FireOpalCO wrote: »
Despite what OTF site says their calorie claims are led by their marketing department and not led by science.
"Afterburn" and interval training effects are massively over-hyped and exaggerated.
Take their calorie claims with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Might be worth validating what you are actually able to do in an hour on a more reliable/believable piece of equipment (rower or power meter equipped bike) or running for example .
They have largely dropped claims about after burn. The calorie burn report after a workout are strictly for the workout itself, not any extra. Their formula for calorie burn is pretty standard. An hour combined of treadmill, rowing machine, and weights is burning about 450 calories on average for me, which is not high for my stats.
I agree, I don't think the calories I burn during the actual workout to be way off base. I am normally between 500-600. One day when their system was down I just tracked with my watch and it was around the same amount. I don't put too much into the "after burn", but people do use the amount of time spent in certain zones to obtain that "after burn" as motivation to push harder and in my opinion, that isn't a bad thing.
Now, on another note. They just updated the formula used to max HR and I am now spending a lot of time in the red zone, so I now how to ignore the color and just look at my actual HR so that I don't get scared and pull back. I don't like the new formula but I know it has helped others get out of the green zone more often.0 -
FireOpalCO wrote: »
Despite what OTF site says their calorie claims are led by their marketing department and not led by science.
"Afterburn" and interval training effects are massively over-hyped and exaggerated.
Take their calorie claims with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Might be worth validating what you are actually able to do in an hour on a more reliable/believable piece of equipment (rower or power meter equipped bike) or running for example .
They have largely dropped claims about after burn. The calorie burn report after a workout are strictly for the workout itself, not any extra. Their formula for calorie burn is pretty standard. An hour combined of treadmill, rowing machine, and weights is burning about 450 calories on average for me, which is not high for my stats.
Have they? Was it even worse before then?
This is still on their site....
"HEART RATE BASED INTERVAL TRAINING
Backed by the science of Excess Post-Exercise Oxygen Consumption (or EPOC), Orangetheory’s heart rate monitored training is designed to maintain a target zone that stimulates metabolism and increases energy. We call it the afterburn. Our members burn an estimated 500 to 1,000 calories in 60 minutes.* And keep burning calories for up to 36 hours."2 -
I got to OTF. I use their HRM on my arm but I have a Polar HRM with a chest strap that I've been using for years. They are usually pretty close calorie wise with the Polar HRM giving me maybe 10-15 more calories than the OTF one. I average around 450 calories per workout depending on what type of workout it is that day.0
-
FireOpalCO wrote: »
Despite what OTF site says their calorie claims are led by their marketing department and not led by science.
"Afterburn" and interval training effects are massively over-hyped and exaggerated.
Take their calorie claims with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Might be worth validating what you are actually able to do in an hour on a more reliable/believable piece of equipment (rower or power meter equipped bike) or running for example .
They have largely dropped claims about after burn. The calorie burn report after a workout are strictly for the workout itself, not any extra. Their formula for calorie burn is pretty standard. An hour combined of treadmill, rowing machine, and weights is burning about 450 calories on average for me, which is not high for my stats.
Have they? Was it even worse before then?
This is still on their site....
"HEART RATE BASED INTERVAL TRAINING
Backed by the science of Excess Post-Exercise Oxygen Consumption (or EPOC), Orangetheory’s heart rate monitored training is designed to maintain a target zone that stimulates metabolism and increases energy. We call it the afterburn. Our members burn an estimated 500 to 1,000 calories in 60 minutes.* And keep burning calories for up to 36 hours."
Maybe the bolded just means "most people don't actually die immediately after their first class"?7 -
CricketClover wrote: »FireOpalCO wrote: »
Despite what OTF site says their calorie claims are led by their marketing department and not led by science.
"Afterburn" and interval training effects are massively over-hyped and exaggerated.
Take their calorie claims with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Might be worth validating what you are actually able to do in an hour on a more reliable/believable piece of equipment (rower or power meter equipped bike) or running for example .
They have largely dropped claims about after burn. The calorie burn report after a workout are strictly for the workout itself, not any extra. Their formula for calorie burn is pretty standard. An hour combined of treadmill, rowing machine, and weights is burning about 450 calories on average for me, which is not high for my stats.
I agree, I don't think the calories I burn during the actual workout to be way off base. I am normally between 500-600. One day when their system was down I just tracked with my watch and it was around the same amount. I don't put too much into the "after burn", but people do use the amount of time spent in certain zones to obtain that "after burn" as motivation to push harder and in my opinion, that isn't a bad thing.
Now, on another note. They just updated the formula used to max HR and I am now spending a lot of time in the red zone, so I now how to ignore the color and just look at my actual HR so that I don't get scared and pull back. I don't like the new formula but I know it has helped others get out of the green zone more often.
Have they done something to estimate your actual HRmax, or are they using age-estimated numbers?
If age-estimated, odds are high that the colored zones are inaccurate for quite a few people. If age-estimated, comparing to the "talk test" may give you some idea if it's close for you, or not. (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8vRWNb0suE - video starts with talking head, but quickly goes to demo example).
If I used age-estimated ranges, I'd never get a decent workout: Age-estimated max is 20-some bpm below actual max. (It's just genetics, so this is not a self-congratulatory thing. ). 0 -
I use the chest strap. I find it's very similar in terms of read out (of both HR and calories) to my Garmin, which I also wear. Usually the total read out is within 10-15 calories (ie OTF will say I burned 485 and my Garmin will say 470).
OTF is a GREAT workout. The "after burn" thing is probably just marketing hype, but the actual workout is phenomenal and if you give it your all, you'll definitely see increases in speed, endurance and strength.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions