Heart Rate & Interval Max

[SteppingFool]

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Dec-23-01 AT 03:32PM (Est)[/font][p]To all the educated crowd,

I did Interval Max for the 2nd time, wearing my new toy - a heart rate monitor. During the intense period, my heart rate would go over 85%, but it recovered nicely during the recovery period. My question - should I worry about my heart rate being higher than 85%? Or interval training is designed to push the heart rates past 85% since there is a recovery phase; therefore, I should ignore the beeping?

FYI, I use the equation 220-age to get my maximum heart rate. I set my low limit to 70% and high limit at 85%. I also understand that the heart rate is not the only measure of intensity - so I do take the result with a grain of salt. During the intense period, I would say my perceived exertion is at 9. Also, during the time perceived exertion was measured (after recovery phase), I was well within my target range.

Thank you for your input.

Haslina

p/s
With Intense Moves, my heart rate goes below 70% during recovery phase...

 

[Aquajock]

Hi, Haslina! I personally would not worry too much about your heart rate monitor showing you are over 85%; I'd worry more if you FELT dizzy, nauseous, gasping unproductively, etc. Those internal perceptions are more important.

In order to get a better feel for what your true target heart rate is, try the following formula (you need to get a good measurement of your resting heart rate for this):

KARVONEN FORMULA

220
(minus your age)
(minus your resting heart rate)

EQUALS X beats per minute (this is your absolute max HR)

Multiply X times 70%
Then add your resting heart rate to that

This product is the lower end of your target heart rate

Multiply X times 85%
Then add your resting heart rate to that.,

This second product is the higher end of your target heart rate.

Using 220-age formula alone isn't really accurate, because age in and of itself does not denote the condition of the heart. If you're a consistent and intelligent exerciser {which of course you are, or you wouldn't be part of the Cathe Crowd }, your heart's probably in much better shape than a lot of your contemporaries.

How's that for a long-winded answer? I'm ready for a nap now!

Annette

 

[cherylnb]

I just had to chime in with my two cents. When I got a heart rate monitor I was freaking out because my heart rate got so much higher than the ranges you normally see. But since then I have read many articles (including one from the NYT that I saw posted on this site) that say that that old 220-minus-age formula is way off for many - perhaps most - people! It was based on one small study years ago but because of its simplicity and the fact that there wasn't much information generally available at the time, it became widely dispersed among aerobics instructors, etc. I have read that the better indicator of cardiovascular fitness is how quickly your heart rate recovers from exertion.

Once I accepted this, I felt much better about the fact that at 140 beats per minute I barely feel like I'm exercising! Go with the formula Annette describes. It will be a much more accurate predictor of your true training zone.