maximum heart rate

F

firedudecndn

0
My question involves heart rate training zones.
I'm 39 and want to train in the proper heart rate training zones, but I'm not sure how to figure out my maximum heart rate. According to the simple method of 220 minus your age, which would make 181. In a mountain bike race this past weekend, I tracked my heart rate for 40 mins. My numbers were:
Average 181
Maximum 192
Minimum 161
My question is this: Can I use 192 as my maximum or is this just a spike?
Is 192 an accurate maximum heart rate or do heart rate moniters average in short bursts and this is from a hard hill climb?
By the way, if this is relevant at all, my blood pressure is 107/64 and my resting heart rate low 50's.
 
i have never uses a heart rate monitor, but when i do use the ones like on treadmills and such I never get that high.

I'm also 39, and in decent shape. my initial response is that is a very high heart rate. i play HIIT and rarely even break 180.

you have others that will reply.

FF
 
Although the general 220 minus age test is worthwhile as a general test, it is obviously not completely accurate. Physical condition and health conditions factor into it, but so do genetics.
In fact, whether your MHR is high or low is not a really good indicator of overall health.

That said. You should never actually hit your MHR, so if you are doing HIIT and consistently hitting a certain number (say 192), then that is probably 95% your MHR.

However, HRM's sometimes have "blips" I've had mine tell me my high HR during an exercise session was 225. I know that ain't right.

The best way to determine your MHR is to keep a record of your HRM in combination with your perceived rate of exertion. ()

This should gt you closer to your actual heart rate zones. from your Zones you can determine your MHR
(let me know if this doesn't make any sense).
 
Hey, thanks for the feedback...
I've noticed my heart rate moniter sometimes gives ridiculous numbers as well,(over 300 sometimes) but I managed to figure out that it was recieving feedback from overhead power lines or sometimes two way radios. Regarding that, the race was held in the boonies with no electrical interference and I was riding solo at the time it peaked, so no other moniters were around. I think what happened was that my heart rate briefly peaked during the averaging session of the moniter and it extrapolated that into 192, I can reach 186 easily and repeatedly so 192 is not entirely out of the question...I will add it to the previous numbers for averaging. I just want a fairly accurate MHR to calculate my proper training zones.
 
When I use a hrm, a Polar unit, I get some erroneous numbers but not consistently erroneous. Some cyclists hit 200+ bpm, but they are in their 20s, maybe early 30s. At 39, those numbers are very high but attainable if you are a superb athlete like Flyinfree. Otherwise, I would suspect that the hrm was not correct. If you think the hrm is working correctly (try running on a treadmill with a built-in hrm), I would talk to a cardiologist first. But, here is an article that might be of interest to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top