Target heart rate?

[LauraMax]

I posted this in Ask Cathe, but I'd like everyone else's thoughts on this as well.

Last night a trainer told me that, based on my age, height & weight, my HR should stay in the 140s for me to lose weight. Cathe, my HR is in the 140s during your WARMUPS!!!!! I usually average 160-170 w/most of my cardio. Sometimes, esp. w/intervals, my HR rises to 190. According to the program in my HRM, my zone is 140-170.

So, is my HRM wrong, is the trainer wrong, or is there something wrong w/me? I'd really appreciate your thoughts!

On a side note, this is the fitness manager who oversees all the trainers. Yesterday I'd called the PT I was supposed to train with & told him I was very nervous about spending that kind of money, that what I really needed was nutrition info, & that my schedule didn't seem to work w/his. So, the whole discussion re. the HR started was when the fitness mgr came up to me & told me that if I wanted to hire a trainer I'd have to work w/his/her schedule. WTH? If a client is gonna spend that kind of money, should the trainer work w/the CLIENT'S schedule, not vice versa?

Kind of a moot point now, but it irritated me.

 

[pixiesis]

I think those numbers are for the average person, and your fitness level is definitely well above average. If you feel good at those heart rates, I can't see why it would be bad for you.

Amy

 

[eraslan]

Of course everyone's target heart rate is different, but what you describe seems consistent with my experience and a Vo2Max test I had done recently. I posted about it here:
http://www.thecathenation.com/forum/showthread.php?t=255720&highlight=vo2max

 

[Stebby]

Sounds like that trainer is stuck in the old "fat burning zone vs. carb burning zone" paradigm. At lower exertion levels (lower heart rates), you're burning a higher percentage of fat but lower total calories, thus lower fat loss. At higher exertion levels where you might be going anaerobic occasionally (higher heart rates), you're burning a higher percentage of glycogen and higher total calories, leading to higher fat loss. I'd say that for your goals, your HRM and you are right, and the trainer is not quite so right. As a fit person, you have the capacity to push yourself harder, and as someone who is in tune with her body, you also know how hard you can go! (Right?)

And yes, absolutely, the trainer should work with the client's schedule. If the fitness manager there is so out of touch with current research, and so out of touch with the economy (they should be delighted when someone wants to spend money with them in these troubled times, and they should be trying to delight you in turn), I think you should take your business elsewhere.

Stebby

 

[Shadowpup]

Your experience matches mine. My workout heart range has climbed, while my resting pulse has dropped. When I started, I used both the talk test and the average target ranges - and the talk test told me that I was really pushing my personal limits at even 120 (resting pulse was about 80 then), which is lower than predicted. That was a little over two years ago. My resting pulse dropped first, to 60 and then down to today's 54. My max HR (estimating based on the talk test) rose to 140 or so, and hovered there til I discovered interval training this summer. It's now probably up to more like 190, based on a cardio coach workout I did recently . I'm 47, and these changing numbers match what I know about my body - started out less fit than average, and improved to more fit than average, plateaued for awhile until I pushed the envelope harder, and then rapidly improved again.


By "estimated using the talk test" I mean that I used the talk test self-assessments to figure out when I was working out at 60, 70, 80, 90 percent of max, and used my HRM to get my heart rate in those intervals. I took measurements over a period of a few days and averaged them - and then multiplied to get the "real" max And then I used the HRM setting during workouts, and double-checked by asking myself the talk-test questions to make sure I was really at 60, 70, 80, 90.

 

[LauraMax]

Thank goodness! Thanks so much for your input, I was starting to wonder if I had a heart condition or something!

 

[NancyAZ]

I had my MaxHR tested by an exercise physiologist about a year and a half ago now at a renowned health resort. It was not a "hooked up to a cardiac machine test" but a supervised treadmill test.

He told me that the 220-age formula is incorrect for just about everyone. I was so relieved when he told me that because I had been complaining that if I bothered to stick with those zones I would never even breathe hard. Fortunately, I had never paid attention to the zones and had a pretty good intuitive idea of how hard I was working.

The end result was that he told me to either set the zones in my HRM manually based on the information we had documented in my test, or to set my age as 32 depending on the capability of my HRM. I was 50 at that time. I now set my zones manually using percentages of my MaxHR.

So, that's my experience with the "zones" and their effectiveness based on age.

 

[Linda428]

You may want to check out the website: heartzones.com

As an AFAA Personal Trainer and Heart Zones Cycling® - Green Jersey Master Trainer and Heart Zones Personal Training® -Blue Shirt Trainer, I use "The Foster Sub-Max Heart Rate Test" with my clients. Check out this link: http://www.heartzones.com/resources/

You'll find the "The Foster Sub-Max Heart Rate Test" criteria as well as an excellent article on "How to Enlarge Your Fat Burning Range with Heart Zone
Training".

Linda

 

[LauraMax]

Awesome! Great link Linda!

Methinks Mr. PT Manager needs some continuing ed.

 

[Linda428]

I think you should have Mr. PT Manager check out the Heart Zones website!

Too bad he doesn't realize that the fitness industry is in perpetual motion -- he needs to stay ahead of his game!

 

[kellymom]

Another note on fat burning % and heart rate--

Working out where you already burn a high % of fat does not make you a leaner, meaner, fat burning machine. Working out at higher heart rates, where you currently burn a lower fat %, forces your body to get more efficient at those heart rates, which raises the amount of fat you burn at those heart rates after training there for a while. Who doesn't want that??!