HR 104% ?!
gunforhire
Posts: 457
in General Chat
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
;-)
;-)
0
gunforhire
Posts: 457
gunforhire
Posts: 457
Comments
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]
David.
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!!!
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.
Tim
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!
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....
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.[:)]
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]
Hypothetically, can I assume someone who might attempt this can just rely on his/her heart-rate monitor to give a max?
Really great (ifyou'rea masochist that is).[8D]
Seriously , it's a fairly accurate way to get the right numbers.