I'd nominally set Max HR on my Edge 305 to 220-age. However, I was out for a spin today and achieved well over that. Should I just reset Max HR to my new recorded high?
I would.
Yes.
Hmmm - but that makes me a "virtual" 35 - i.e. 15 years younger
Try it again to see if it's normal for you. I certainly have a far higher heart rate than normal (212 max, used to train comfortably at 185 when I was in my mid-twenties - don't know what it is now though!!)
It [i]was[/i] a pretty steep wee hill.
The 220-age thing is about as useful as BMI. It's bollocks. Your actual measured max heart rate is your max heart rate. Simple as that.
220-age is a starting point for untrained people.Anyone with an ounce of fitness should find a hill & just gun it up there,that will be their max h/rate........
Variability around the 220 - age prediction is around 20 beats per minute so it's perfectly normal to record a maximum heart rate 15 beats per minute above your predicted value. If you've recorded it, and it's not just a blip in your technology then it is your true maximum.
I'm 17, and highest recorded so far is 211. And that was on my edge 305. However, it once said I got up to 260 something, but I'm guessing I just went under some telegraph cables or whatever.
220 - age is just a guideline.
Cool. 195 it is then. (just realised that should be 25 years younger, not 15)
Thanks for the advice.
When I was 27 and fit I saw 212 on my cardiosport 😯 , mind you it felt like my heart was about to burst through my chest so I slowed down a bit.
Rona, has got it spot on, I'm 43 and mine is 198 which I suppose is right at the upper limit of the +/- 20bpm
What is worth recording on a daily basis is your resting heart rate. Do it before you get out of bed in the morning (excluding nightshift workers) that way you will have a good idea what it should be and if it's elevated from your average, then maybe you have not recovered from the previous days exercise or you are coming down with a bug.
Yeah, the 220 thing is bollocks. I was worried for a bit when I was hitting 200+ fairly regularly running up big hills (i'm 28) but since i've not died, I've decided to ignore it. Presumably if it was a problem you'd stop vomit or pass out or something before you died. And if you don't you won't know about it anyhow.
Man up I say.
Glen More - you can get a good idea if the maximum value you are seeing on your HRM is a true value by watching the response over time. As you are climbing the hill, does your HR increase fairly steadily up to 195 beats per minute - if so, it is likely to be real. If your HR suddenly shoots up to 195 beats per minute, an increase of more than a few beats per minute in the time it takes your HRM to update, then I would be a bit more suspicious - more likely to be some kind of interference to the signal. Depends on the hill though - the above would be true for a fairly steady climb - HR can increase in bigger jumps with a sharp increase in gradient.
HR indicates the amount of power you generate. So that's why the "average" drops year by year. The fitter you are the higher it will go. Try testing it after a week off with flu, or on the last lap of a 24hr race. It will be a lot lower.
the karvonen method (iirc) is useless to train to.
much better to train to percentages/zones taken from a race heart rate
The only way to find out your absolute HRmax is to maximally exercise. With regard to prediction, studies have shown the Tanaka equation (208 - 0.7 x age) is more reliable than 220 - age for the normal population.
"HR indicates the amount of power you generate" - absolute rubbish!
Ignore guidelines.
Warm up and ride absolutely flat out, preferably up a hill or a route where your effort is consistent, for several minutes x 3. The highest recording will give you a good estimate of your max. Your eyes need to be popping during your effort!
Then you can generate training sessions based on zones and percentages of your "actual" max not a "guessed" one.
People follow "guidelines" because to find the accurate reading hurts like hell!
When I was at my fittest my max was 175, with a resting of 40.
Yeah,just ignore it and find out yourself. I think I've had 212 just after the end of a 10km running race before, which is outside the 220 minus age thing. Resting, Maximum and training HRs are largely determined by your genes, with training changing things.
If you're going to do anything with a HRM it's worth doing it properly or not at all, ignore all the rules of thumb and record all your rides etc with it, analyse them and work out what your heart does when you're out riding for yourself and it'll prove to be fairly useful. My experience is mostly running, but now I know what my heart does I can gauge my fitness fairly well by my heart rate during training and races - if I hit 200+ in a race it means I'm not fit, when I'm fit I usually find I only need 196-197 before my legs can't deal with the oxygen supply.
It's very useful for spotting illness before it becomes symptomatic - elevated HR at rest and when training - or for telling you when you need a day or twos rest - elevated HR at rest.
For your resting heart rate, it's very difficult to take accurately without influencing the result. I take mine by sleeping with it on; I can upload the trace to my PC and see what my HR drops to during the night, it's pretty clear where resting HR is and you can also see when you were dreaming too. Bit geeky, but you're looking for variations of a few BPM, so you can't really do it any other way reliably.
OK, so if I go out and try to find my max, isn't there a chance of me dropping dead?
OK, so if I go out and try to find my max, isn't there a chance of me dropping dead?
No. Thats called a V02 max test! Now they are fun!!!
When working at your max the risk of dropping dead is always greater than if you work at submaximal level.
Big John, you could not be more wrong. I can not believe the rubbish you are spouting.
HR is simply a proxy for the amount of effort your body is undertaking. It isn NOT a proxy for power output, never, never, never!!!!!
So many things affect your HR, from oxygen concentrations in atmos to the amount of coffee you have drunk.
And your 'assumption' that the fitter you are the higher your HR will go is even more stupid. Where do you get this guff from.
Please check you facts before contributing to a public forum, you are making a tit of yourself!!!
And your qualifications are?
I'm not talking about your propensity for shocking rudeness, I'm talking about your scientific ones.
I did not mention "output". In my book, generating can equate to undertaking.
Johnny Met - love you too.
BigJohn - Member
HR indicates the amount of power you generate. So that's why the "average" drops year by year. The fitter you are the higher it will go.
[i]or[/i] do you actually mean that all other things being constant your heart rate is indicating the amount of work (power) being done?
In which case that would be loosly correct, however saying
with all other things being constant this is not true, i don't really understand what you are getting at with this, do you mean power output or HR?The fitter you are the higher it will go.
Your maximum HR does not really have a huge amount to do with how fit you are, how it gets to it max is thou. It has a lot lot more to do with genetics and muscle elasticity.
Where/how did you develop your theory John?
I am 34 so 220-34 is 186 and my Max HR I have measured is 185 so I think its pretty accurate for the "average" person 🙁 The HR MAx is set - it wont go higher with training IIRC 🙂 @ alexathome +1
Just through observation. When I've been training a lot, and my fitness is good I acheive a higher HR (and speed) up some of the hills on my regular rides than I can when I'm unfit. And I'm not as fast as I used to be.
@ BigJohn - Member - I think this is because you can achieve a higher heart rate (before your leg fatigue) because you are fitter - this will plateau and you will reach you Max HR which is inverse corelation to you age - I am afraid thats a fact :0 - yo'll find it on many fitness websites, journals etc you might want to look at 😉