Posts: 86
9/30/12 2:18 P

Love this message, Ladylights! I've been working on a 5k for a bit now and am finding that I'm much more likely to progress if I adjust my intervals by heart rate and less by time. My body seems to appreciate it, and I leave workouts feeling accomplished not beaten. It's a totally different experience!

current weight: 182.2

184 173.5 163 152.5

142

Posts: 62
9/24/12 10:04 A

When I first started to walk/run interval training, my heart rate would get up to 181 during the run and then come down to 155 during the walk. At first a was very frightened by this. I eased up on the pace and was able to get my rate down to 161 during the run and 131 during the walk. As I have continued training, I have found that my heart as gotten stronger and I can actually run at a quicker pace and have a shorter recovery.

I think there are two important things to pay attention to: 1) LISTEN TO YOUR BODY!! 2) remember this takes time. I have nearly completed my second year of running, and still have not run a 5K all the way, I still walk. But I keep up with it, I keep trying and I keep improving.

Posts: 158
7/6/12 3:35 P

Thanks for all the insight! I've been doing intervals and probably been letting my HR get up into the 170's for too long of periods (because I want to work on my endurance), but then letting myself take extra time to recover. It seems to be working for me because I can now run/jog for longer periods of time without my HR getting too crazy and my recover time has decreased significantly.

I honestly have no idea if my method is actually safe, but it has been working for me!

Posts: 11
7/1/12 1:57 A

I have the same issue. I was running on a treadmill and trying to keep up with the time on my training schedule. My heart rate was 190+. I talked to the trainers at the gym about it because I was concerned. They said it wasn't good for my heart. It FELT GOOD though!
I have looked around on the internet though and found sites that say heart rate can vary for people and it is pretty normal for hard training. I am trying to slow it down a bit but keep pushing hard sometimes for fun. Working on the "perceived rate of exertion" scale.
I searched "heart rate over 190 when running". Interesting stuff.

SparkPoints: (986)
Fitness Minutes: (660)
Posts: 20
6/25/12 11:32 P

Maybe this will be of some use:
Typically in health care Heart Rate Max and percentage of Heart Rate Max are utilized to recondition and exercise patients with known cardiovascular disorders such as Hypertension CHF, COPD, etc. They are used as targets and guild-lines for when to stop exercising a patient because they are going into a higher risk area. However what is more telling of dysfunction is often one's ability to recover after exercise. What this means is that if your heart rate goes up to with exercise 170 and then doesn't return to its resting rate (or below 100bpm) within 5-10 minutes of terminating activity. I guess what I'm saying is is that it is ok to go over your % heart rate max now and then during your workout (this should not be a steady state or a goal heart rate) if 1) you don't have any cardiovascular problems or other known disorders that can affect your endurance, heart, lungs, or vascular system. 2) you recover/ can return to a resting heart rate 3) you don't have symptoms such as dizziness, pain, or blacking out. A good range to stay in is between 50%-85% Heart Rate Max depending on your goals and your health status. Another good rule of thumb is to exercise at a level where you are still able to talk in short sentences. If you can quote Shakespeare you can work harder, if you can't respond to questions slow down. Last for a quick disclaimer, definitely talk to a doctor before implementing a new program or intensity if you are not used to working out, or working out at higher levels, I'm not trying to give anyone false confidence, and I would hate if someone got injured.

Edited by: MOONSPELL7 at: 7/1/2012 (21:08)

330 Days since:  mindless snacking after 8:00pm

0 87 175 262

350

Posts: 760
6/25/12 11:07 P

Just for giggles I used my heart monitor the other day for Week 1 Day 1. I couldn't keep up the 3 min jog because my heart rate kept going up toward the 170's...going by the 220-age would put me near 100%. The monitor had the target range between 116 and 132. I'm not sure where that came from but works out to 70-80%. Just briskly walking I can keep it in that target range. I'm more than open for suggestions... I wonder which cardiologist at work would let me pick his/her brain...

current weight: 168.0

185 176.25 167.5 158.75

150

SparkPoints: (6,676)
Fitness Minutes: (18,020)
Posts: 293
6/25/12 9:24 A

This is an interesting discussion - we really need an exercise physiologist or cardiac rehab specialist to answer these questions. I have a friend who had a pre-heart attack and a stint put in - he knows he needs to lose weight and exercise, but like you he doesn't know what range his numbers should fit in.

In my opinion, the problem with these stats is that they are devised from a population, and are averages of people, whereas you are an individual whose personal stats may be different. Yeah, someone with better training can probably run longer in a higher range than the average person, and most certainly more than a "newbie." I have no medical training, but I would say you probably should use your new device to start charting your own levels. Basically if you can talk, you're in a low range, but if you can't seem to breathe and/or your head is pounding, you're in too high a range and should slow down. If you could run your program without feeling like your chest will explode, then it's probably okay to continue running your program even if the device says your heart rate is too high. And if all else fails, talk to your doctor. Best of luck to you!!!

Posts: 184
6/25/12 3:42 A

To be honest.. I believe the below ranges are useful reference for someone who has been training for 10 years plus and knows exactly what formula those ranges are linked to (or at least knows that the below refers to whatever calculations are performed by a particular HRM. I'm not sure Polaris, Sigma and Garmin uses the same calculations to determine target zones). But I'm not entirely sure how useful those ranges are for someone who is trying to start out at both running AND using heart rate monitor to, well, monitor their fitness.

First of all - there are at least 2 wildly different methods used to calculate heart rate zones, and I suspect each of the methods come with their own target zones. You can either calculate % of (220-age) or you can calculate (%(220-age-restingRate))+resting Rate. (That is before going into formulas that factor weight and gender in - but those things mostly just affect max rate calculations and can then be plugged into either one of the above formulas).

Second.. We are not exactly trained athletes here. We're learning to run. Running brings heart rate up very quickly and unlike with cycling or aerobics, there isn't much you can do to get the rate back down while continuing to run. With running even the minimum effort required to propel yourself forward pushes heartrate up noticeably. If we were so good at running at a pace that does not bring a heart rate up, we wouldn't need a walk-run programm to get to 5k, we would just, well, run.

So yeah, if someone with knowlege and advice for beginner runners might advise on the target heart rates (and if there's any trick to maintain them) - now that would be very useful.

Especially if someone could link to some reliable material on whether or not it's bad to run for those 3-4 minutes at high heartrates - and if it is bad, whether or not there's something we can do to lower the risk.

For statistics - In last weeks when I'm doing my running-walkings, the max number I see on screen is 176. Comfortable range of running is 148-166 or maybe 145-171 or so. Anyhow if I could stay in that range I guess I could run for longer. It's not 'if HR stays above 172 for a long while I get exhausted'. It is 'when I get tired, my heart rate goes up into 172+'. I average 157-158 over a session.

With %(220-age) formula 148 becomes 77%, the rest of numbers being spot in 80-90% high intensity zone... what does not precisely make much sense. I'm not a fit person.

With %(200-age-65)+65 numbers become a saner 65-80%, what would probably pretty much suit my goals.

So far so good, that would seem to indicate Karvonen formula appears to suit me pretty well.

Except Karvonen requires 'resting heart rate' - I'm just putting a random 65 in there without much real reasoning. Is resting heart rate 'lowest number I've seen when I have been sleeping prone for a while and meditating/browsing internet' or is it 'sat down for few minutes'?

Also... Ok, could be my resting rate has dropped considerably in last few months (doesn't seem like that but I don't exactly walk around with HRM strapped on all the time), but if I go by how I feel at certain pulse zones - that certainly has changed a lot during past few months. I remember being exhausted-can't-do-no-more when doing stationary cycling and letting heart rate go past 150 for more than 30 seconds. Then I remember 'half-dead-gonna-faint-or-puke-right-now' feeling doing xbox aerobics pushing heart rate over 162 for 30 seconds or more. Now 171 is kind-of-sustainable for a minute or two if I hit a pace that keeps HRM at exactly that number. 176 does not feel good, but it does not feel quite as bad as I've felt before - it's more the fear of 'if you keep running at high HRM you're damaging your heart and will one day fall dead on spot' rumor that I'm fearing. I don't know if it's true, but it is enough to scare me.


So, um.. anyone has some, dunno, qualified insight into this? Is there a good safe formula we could be pointed to and told 'when you do couch-to-5k, make sure your heart rate stays between these numbers, and unless you have prior heart problems, you should be good' ?

SparkPoints: (17,367)
Fitness Minutes: (19,534)
Posts: 11
6/24/12 7:42 A

I'm not a certified expert but a hrm user for cycling and running for over 10 years. The general answer to your question is : It depends on what your trying to accomplish : 1. Start a fitness routine. 2. Improve your fitness. 3. Maximize your performance.

More specifically :

Training in the 60 - 70% HRmax will be low intensity and will burn fat, improve endurance and aerobic fitness. If your just starting out the majority of your workout should be in this zone.

Training in the 70 - 80% HRmax will be moderate intensity and will improve endurance and aerobic fitness, help control weight, and will raise the intensity at which you can exercise without building lactic acid.

Training in the 80 - 90% HRmax will be high intensity and you won't be able to exercise long in this zone and is recommended for very fit people and should only be for short periods. It will improve your tolerance to lactic acid and your ability to perform short, extreme efforts.

Polar has a great website. You can read all about it at: www.polar.fi/en/training_with_polar/training_articles.

SparkPoints: (120,783)
Fitness Minutes: (70,144)
Posts: 24,214
6/23/12 7:13 A

That is a great question. I'm hoping someone explains it here cuz I'd also like to know.

Posts: 760
6/22/12 6:25 P

Wow... I'm surprised no feedback on here yet! I've got the same question. At what percentage of your maximum heart rate do you slow it down?

current weight: 168.0

185 176.25 167.5 158.75

150

Posts: 158
2/25/12 9:17 A

Hi Everyone! I recently purchased a Polar HRM which I LOVE! However, it made me realize that my heart rate is getting way to high when I try to follow the training plan. According to the chart, my max HR is 193, with 85% being at 164. Today when I did my own modified version of a training plan with my HR in mind, I feel like I just took 5 steps backwards. Should I continue to work around my HR or go back to following the plan?