Home Chat General Chat

HR 104% ?!

I get that sometimes, using the 220 - age method my Max HR comes in at 186, however on a ride on Sunday I managed to "acheive" 194



  • Wonder if anyone has had this problem.

    I've got a Polar RS200SD heartrate monitor with footpod.

    I normally just run with the footpod to get times but I set it up at the weekend before taking part in the Bushy Park 5K time trial.

    The HR monitor has a setting were, while you rest for 5 minutes, it calculates your HR zones. So I did - didn't really show any difference from the '220 - age' method.

    My HR must be on the blink 'cos it was showing a rate of over 104% at times during the run![&:]

    Anyone else experienced this? Or am I just due a heart attack?![8D]
  • BoycieBoycie Posts: 189
    Very simply, the 220-age is an inaccurate method of measuring MHR. The very fact that you have surpassed it proves this. I don't know how the Polar HRM's measure zones so I can't comment on this, but I doubt it is very accurate.

  • BopomofoBopomofo Posts: 980
    For finding my Max HR I use the tried and trusted method of utterly flogging myself on a 100% effort interval set, then take my pulse just as I feel I'm going to die/puke/cry/all of the above.

    According to the 220-age method I am 23 years old, not 38 [:D] - at least for cycling, I'm a bit older for running, older still for swimming.

    Like Boycie says, we're just proving that 220-age is inaccurate - although it is a starting point if you can't do a max HR test, maybe because of injury or because you are so unfit it would be dangerous.

    Nice boasting point, though.... Yeah, my heart rate goes up to 11!!!

  • timtim Posts: 43
    When 10s just not enough eh bopo!

    I use the RS200. I've had my HR go above 100% too, put down to inaccuracies like everyone above is saying, mine has also gone to 187% just the once, i think something was interfering with my HRM for that one though, otherwise maybe i should have booked myself into the hospital.


  • Jack HughesJack Hughes Posts: 1,262
    I don't have the manual for my polar to hand - but it isn't a "problem", it's a known issue - the manual says it can vary by plus/minus 20 (or 30?) beats per minute.

    I hope so. As I _averaged_ 102% of maximum for an entire 5K the other week.

    Really, the only way of finding your maximum is to do a really nasty test: try to make your heart pop! The value of doing an approximation is that you don't really want the test to be a destructive one - and if you are a chronically unfit, or have a heart condition, that could well be the case. Imagine the adverse publicity for Polar if that kept happening whenever anyone got an HRM!
  • johnnyjohnny Posts: 4
    I regularly hit 220 on mine....which concerned me greatly at first but not so much now.
  • treefrogtreefrog Posts: 1,242
    check your HRM out or maybe you are getting fitter and its time to readjust your limits
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    My max number comes up when I sit in the car on the way home from a class or event & leave my HRM running, effortlessly 230+ & not due to the driving I might add, before Lady Britspin beats me with her car keys, must be electronic inteference.
  • Cheers. Might be that I'm just fit![:D]

    Looks like my max is something like 195 - 200.

    Which would make about 25 years old (I'm 35).

    Think I just need to reprogram the watch....
  • JohnYJohnY Posts: 6
    Probably regret asking but, what is a good session to work out actual MHR?

    I regularly go over my theoretical MRH of 181 when I run (got 185 on a fairly gentle slope on last night's run-going up), so would like to get the correct one, so that I can work out my correct training zones.

    I'm reasonably fit, so don't expect my heart to go pop with a bit of a strenuous session.[:)]

  • BopomofoBopomofo Posts: 980
    JohnY.... (disclaimer) Do not follow my advice. I am not qualified.

    Now... to get your MHR you'll need to do a test for each discipline, since your MHR will vary from one to another because of different muscles in use, different techniques etc... at least this is what people in the know have told me.

    Basically, you'll need to do a hard interval session then take your pulse for 30s. For running, if you already know a hill that gets your heart rate up then use that: make sure you are nicely warmed up, maybe 20-30 mins of jogging and running, then attack your hill. I mean sprint, max effort. At the top, run back down and do it again. And again. Take your pulse just as you think you are going to die at the top of the hill.

    Same principle applies to swim: try doing 10 x 50m max effort off 50s after a 4 x 200m warm up.

    And for bike: max effort sprints, preferably up a hill and roll back down, again after warming up.

    If you are used to training you should know what the feeling is that you are aiming for. That "I'm going to die, my chest is exploding, I cannot breathe fast/deep enough to get the air in" feeling that we all love.

    Anyway, ignore my entire post. You will hurt yourself. [8D]

  • JohnYJohnY Posts: 6
    Thanks for that information, which I will completely disregard.[:)]

    Hypothetically, can I assume someone who might attempt this can just rely on his/her heart-rate monitor to give a max?

  • BopomofoBopomofo Posts: 980
    Yes, that would do it. In that case you'd probably peak somewhere towards the end of the interval before you collapse.
  • bennybenny Posts: 1,314
    We do a test like this at the beginning of a new training season with the tri-club.

    Really great (ifyou'rea masochist that is).[8D]

    Seriously , it's a fairly accurate way to get the right numbers.
Sign In or Register to comment.