This is an interesting way of writing 185 - your age ;)

This is not a new formula, but one I've been using for 10 years now as a coach. I believe I learned it from Mark Allen.//

No kidding it is not new. You may have heard it from Mark, but he got it from Phil Maffetone, probably over 20 years ago. It is as old and outdated as 220 minus your age is, and I believe even Phil has updated this, you should also. It is comon knowledge among coaches and athletes in the know that you cannot use a static mathmatical formula for all athletes. You have to find out at which end of the spectrum your athlete is on before you tailor any plan for them. It is true that any formula will work for a lot of folks, this one actually worked for Mark back in the day. He fell into the heart of it, but a lot of people will not, and you will be hurting them, not helpong them. Just keep in mind that HR's for individuals can vary +/- 50+ beats, or over 30%. That is a huge gap to try and piegon hole a static formula into. If it was just 5 or 10 beats, then it would have been ok, but it is not....

LOL, I was thinking the same thing! Glad I wasn't the only one. :-D

Fair enough - the reason is for females it is 180-your age +10

Just curious, but have you ever had this conversation with Mark Allen? Curious to know why he would still use "outdated" coaching principles.

Just curious, but have you ever had this conversation with Mark Allen? Curious to know why he would still use "outdated" coaching principles.
-----------------------------------------------------

Have you read some of the stuff Mark has written about coaching, physiology and the application of in context of coaching. It's more of a he gets results, in spite of what he puts out there in writing in the past. Don't confuse success with knowledge.

While I haven't bothered to read anything he has written in the past few years, he communicated quite eloquently his lack of knowledge about the basics of physiology quite well.