I’m bowing to the experts on this forum to help an old guy determine his MaxHR.
I am 47 and am pretty good shape. Been riding seriously since November with over 3000 miles since then. Used to run competitively (AGer) up until 3 years ago when I had to have hip surgery. I’ve had to switch to cycling as the running just isn’t coming back to easily. I have never really trained using a HRM before and jsut picked one up this month. I’ve programmed it and set my MAX HR using the 220-age formula. That being said…
Is Max HR a variable depending on condition? Can it be higher than the 220-age or lower? I went out this morning and cranked it up and was up to 175 for a brief time. Should this be avoided or am I to conclude that my Max HR could/is higher than the 173 that the 220 formula says it is?
You don’t need to know your MaxHR. Toss the manual/book you’ve been reading, it is dated, and get a more up-to-date one.
Wow… asscoach posted something that makes sense
Of course no advise (which is what you were looking for) regarding maybe a VO2Max test or discussion regarding ventilatory threshold, anaerobic threshold or lactate threshold and/or the common misconceptions.
Some may disagree with me here, and I may not get the explanation quite right, so feel free to chime in and correct me if you feel the need, but here goes…
Max hr is not determinable by any formula. It is largely genetic, and although it has been shown to decrease by about a beat per year in SEDENTARY individuals, that decrease can be offset with regular exercise.
One of the most important things to keep in mind is that heart rate is driven by the muscles. If the working muscles are not that strong, odds are they will not be able to push the heart rate to its true max. I perform Vo2max/Anaerobic Threshold testing as part of my biz, and I’ve tested incredibly fit 60+ year old men who can hit the 170’s no problem, and I’ve tested a few sedentary 30somethings who can’t get over 160, because they’re muscular strength and endurance is not yet capable of pushing the heart any further.
Max heart rate is also NOT a performance indicator. I’ve seen people with high max’s be quite slow, and I’ve seen others with lower max’s be quite fast.
For my training programs, I don’t use max as the basis for structuring training zones. I use Anaerobic/Lactate Threshold as my starting point, and base the training zones on %'s of AT/LT. AT is a trainable paramater, not only can you increase your AT heart rate, you can also increase the amount of power/speed you can put out at your AT. This is why I use that as my zone basis for my athletes. Others use Maximal Aerobic Power(MAP) and other non heart rate performance indicators. these are also quite good, but require equipment to monitor your power or running pace. In an ideal world you monitor both power/pace and heart rate together to form a great overall picture of your training.
There are all kinds of field tests you can use to determine your MAP and or your AT. Use google and you will come up with a bunch. The only problem with field tests is they are not controlled enough environmentally to be truly accurate from test to test, but if you aren’t a crazy serious athlete, they will be way better than 220-age.
Great question by the way. This comes up on here every now and then. Good luck with your training, and have fun!
I said this last year and have yet to get a reply from one of our “data runners” here, which is that, your maximum heart rate is that heart rate you have right before you have some cardiac arrest/or shutdown event in the heart, or body, as a result of subjecting it to abnormally dangerous physical stress, whether it be the duration or the intensity or both. If an athlete thinks his is 187 because he went out and ran 19 steep hills, he might think its 187, however, if he were running from a detonating bomb, I’d bet we might see 205.
I simply do not see why this would not be the case as it would for car engines or other machine parts. The maximum load on the machine part is going to be that load applied to it right before the freaking thing blows up.
I’ve worn a HR monitor for about 7 years for just about every workout I’ve done plus most races. Not only does my max change with the status of my conditioning, I have different ranges and maxes depending on what activity I am doing. The outside temperature or my hydration level can change my ranges by 10 BPM. The one thing that does not seem to have any effect on my max is my age.
I ditched the % of max ranges pretty early on since they did not work for me. I now just operate on loose corrolations between BPM and how long I can sustain that effort - which is kind of a lazy man’s lactate threshold based training system. I’ve never bothered to do an accurate lactate threshold test but I am sure that is a much more significant number to use in structuring a training program than your max HR.
I used to wear a HRM all the time, and stopped when I realized it wasn’t giving me really useful info. I could tell about where my HR was from PE (Perceived Exertion), and it was more of an annoyance with falsing and/or lack of HR signal from the bands. My max is around 210 (which throws the whole stupid 220-age thing out the window), and I normally run at a sustained 160ish. The 220-age would indicate 188 max, and I can hold 185-190 for 10+ minutes. I’ve found that HR isn’t a reliable method of judging effort, as I have done the same 7 mile course at an 8:00 pace near my house at HR rates ranging from 145 to 185…depending on prior sleep, nutrition, etc.
one other thing, if you are on any medication ask your pharmacist or doctor if these affect your HR. I was wondering what was going on when I could hardly get my HR over 145 during hard workouts after years of normal readings.
My wife is a Pharm. D. and she said - the epilepsy medication you’re now on definitely affects your HR.
Things are normal now, but after years of HR training I use it for reference only and rarely look at it during training or racing.
