1

strange heart rate reading (Read 107 times)

hectortrojan


    I have tried 2 minutes interval test few times to check my max heart rate. In that I run as hard as I can for 2 min, cool down for 2 minutes and so on. I did 5-6 intervals like that and I repeated that process few times and got 196 bpm as my max heart rate.

     

    I have had issues with heart rate monitor before. It used to spike a lot initially because of poor conductivity. Licking electrodes solved that problem. I ran a race yesterday. I didn't pay attention to heart rate during the race, but when I saw the heart rate graph after the race, it did not make any sense to me. 

     

    It showed 190 bpm as average heart rate with 210 bpm as max. I am not reading anything into this, but finding it strange! If we ignore the numbers, apart from a spike at mile 2, graph makes sense. Heart rate increased gradually as I was maintaining constant pace. It showed a little bump before mile 6 as there was around 100 feet climb and I ran it hard to maintain the pace.

    very strange!


    Master of Inconsistency

      Well I would reason that 210 is your Max , or maybe higher , don"t sweat it

      Ain't  Wastin' Time No More !

      zonykel


        IIRC, when I did a self test somewhat similar to yours, I got 180 bpm. However, when I did the vo2max test administered by someone else, I got 190 bpm for my HRmax. The only thing I can conclude is that it's hard to push yourself to get you to maximum heart rate.

          I'm suspicious that doing 2 minute intervals is possibly not enough time to reach your true maximum heart rate, even with repeats. If it IS enough time for you to reach max heart rate, then you might have a technology problem, because a standard heart rate monitor has some lag time in it's readings, and if you don't hold long enough at your max heart rate, the heart rate monitor might not average it 's way up to your max number. I've never done a max heart rate test on myself that took less than 15 minutes of non-stop running  starting off slow and gradually speeding up, and then finishing all out until I was at the point of collapsing. I've only done this on a treadmill at a steep incline.

            I'm suspicious that doing 2 minute intervals is possibly not enough time to reach your true maximum heart rate, even with repeats. 

             

            Yes, I think this is right.  I think you have to do something like at least 2000 meters, maybe more like 3000 meters, all out hard-core race effort to be sure to register your max heart rate, and that is hard to do under non-race conditions.  Like zonykel, I got 183 with a VO2-max test administered by someone else (with me running on a treadmill with ever increasing incline), but I never ever see that in my own training, even when I think I'm running hard intervals.  I wore a HRM in a race this weekend for the first time ever in my life (I hate those things, but I "get" to wear one for work purposes at times  Smile) and I hit 180 at the end of a half marathon.  I'm fairly certain that in a shorter, more intense race such as a 2-mile or 5k it would have gone higher, but I don't think I've ever seen more than about 177 in training.

            - Joe

            all running goals are under review by the executive committee.

              HRmax is really hard to do on your own. You really need a bear chasing you or something like a race. I'd go with 210 as your HRmax  But I'd also look at what that would do to your zones. if using 196 works for your zones, then use it. Or use LT HR or whatever.

               

              When I estimated my reference point (before I'd heard of Joe Friel's stuff), I too my HR when I started breathing really hard / couldn't talk, and divided by 0.9 (made the assumption that that point was about 90% HRmax). Most of my zones worked out, esp. after getting more volume so that Recovery and Easy were different. They ended up matching Joe Friel's stuff after I saw his work. I treat the zones as being fuzzy and don't get hung up about a bpm here or there, except near 156bpm where 155 and 157 are fairly different - but my body recognizes those.

              "So many people get stuck in the routine of life that their dreams waste away. This is about living the dream." - Cave Dog

                5k at race pace, make sure you give it everything you've got in the last 400m and you'll get close to max hr.

                hectortrojan


                  Accepting new max HR would screw up my existing zones - is the reason I wanted to ignore anything higher than the max HR (196 bpm) that I am training with. I don't have much experience in running and training, but for last six months I have been training with HR. I keep adjusting my zones and at this point I feel like I have a system going on and I feel good about types of runs I do in different HR ranges. I have already stopped looking at common advised zones and I keep adjusting my HR ranges based on experiences by doing different workouts in different ranges. I like what you said here, existing system works for me and I will keep using it and I wont care much about other things.

                   

                  HRmax is really hard to do on your own. You really need a bear chasing you or something like a race. I'd go with 210 as your HRmax  But I'd also look at what that would do to your zones. if using 196 works for your zones, then use it. Or use LT HR or whatever.

                   

                  When I estimated my reference point (before I'd heard of Joe Friel's stuff), I too my HR when I started breathing really hard / couldn't talk, and divided by 0.9 (made the assumption that that point was about 90% HRmax). Most of my zones worked out, esp. after getting more volume so that Recovery and Easy were different. They ended up matching Joe Friel's stuff after I saw his work. I treat the zones as being fuzzy and don't get hung up about a bpm here or there, except near 156bpm where 155 and 157 are fairly different - but my body recognizes those.