Heart Rate Question

[Guest guest]

I have been cycling about 2 years, for fun and exercise. I am 49.

Last night I wore my HR monitor on an 18 mile ride on rather hilly

terrain. It took me almost 1 1/2 hours, so you can see I am not very

fast.

However, I noticed my HR stayed between 155 and 165 for most of the

ride, dropping to about 140 on the few downhill stretches where I

coasted a bit.

I figure that to be about 80 - 90% of my MHR.

Is it safe to keep the HR that high for that long?

I wasn't particularly tired after the ride - I do this sort of thing

at least 2 times a week.

Thanks,

Doss

Boerne, TX

USA

[Guest guest]

How did you determine your Max heart rate- the ae related tables are often

wrong. There is a lot of individual variation. I have no proof and no

references but I in my experience I have found that there are people with

high heart rates and low heart rates. You could be a high heart rate person

like my self- at age 21 I did a vo2max test on a treadmill with a max heart

rate of 221 twelve minutes into the test (scared the people in the lab). I

ride with mountain bikers and triathletes, we all glance down at our HRMs

and my HR is typically about 10-20 bpm higher than my buddy's HR. I've done

time trial/MTB/ski races with average HRs well above 180 BPM. Interestingly

my resting HR is about 45 bpm. If you are A high ACTIVE HR person I

wouldn't worry.

However I have one friend who was diagnosed with Wolfgang ???? syndrom. A

condition where an extra electrical node was found in her heart. But The

heart rates she was getting were excessive. 120 resting and 200+ after only

seconds of activity. If you suffer similar number you might want to see a

medical professional.

Thorarinson, CK

Waterloo, Quebec

>From: dxsdoss@...

>Reply-Supertraining

>Supertraining

>Subject: Heart Rate Question

>Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:25:12 -0000

>

>I have been cycling about 2 years, for fun and exercise. I am 49.

>

>Last night I wore my HR monitor on an 18 mile ride on rather hilly

>terrain. It took me almost 1 1/2 hours, so you can see I am not very

>fast.

>

>However, I noticed my HR stayed between 155 and 165 for most of the

>ride, dropping to about 140 on the few downhill stretches where I

>coasted a bit.

>

>I figure that to be about 80 - 90% of my MHR.

>

>Is it safe to keep the HR that high for that long?

>

>I wasn't particularly tired after the ride - I do this sort of thing

>at least 2 times a week.

>

>Thanks,

> Doss

>Boerne, TX

>USA

>

>

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " keith thorarinson " >

> However I have one friend who was diagnosed with Wolfgang ???? syndrom. A

> condition where an extra electrical node was found in her heart. But The

> heart rates she was getting were excessive. 120 resting and 200+ after

only

> seconds of activity

Wolf-Parkinson-White Syndrome.

Not an extra node - an accessory pathway.

Look it up in a medical text.

Harvey Maron, M.D.

Steamboat Springs, CO

[Guest guest]

,

I surely would not stress over the numbers on your HRM.  If you felt good there, there is nothing wrong w/ exercising in that zone.  I would just make sure and vary it up as well.  Don't always have your heart rate there.  Make sure and do some lighter days as well.

D

 

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

 

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an " ownzone " setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

 

Thanks for help!

 

[Guest guest]

,

I surely would not stress over the numbers on your HRM.  If you felt good there, there is nothing wrong w/ exercising in that zone.  I would just make sure and vary it up as well.  Don't always have your heart rate there.  Make sure and do some lighter days as well.

D

 

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

 

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an " ownzone " setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

 

Thanks for help!

 

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I am pretty sure that the age calculation is not accurate for someone who is pretty fit. I think there is a calculation that is based on resting heart rate which is more accurate for someone who is fit - b/c your resting heart rate will, in theory, be lower if you are fit. Trouble is, I'm not sure what the calculation is. If I get some time later today I'll see if i can google it!

Oh - I'm dropping a package in the mail to you today or tomorrow!!

Donna

Subject: heart rate questionTo: exercisevideos Date: Wednesday, August 4, 2010, 11:06 PM

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an "ownzone" setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've

never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

Thanks for help!

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I am pretty sure that the age calculation is not accurate for someone who is pretty fit. I think there is a calculation that is based on resting heart rate which is more accurate for someone who is fit - b/c your resting heart rate will, in theory, be lower if you are fit. Trouble is, I'm not sure what the calculation is. If I get some time later today I'll see if i can google it!

Oh - I'm dropping a package in the mail to you today or tomorrow!!

Donna

Subject: heart rate questionTo: exercisevideos Date: Wednesday, August 4, 2010, 11:06 PM

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an "ownzone" setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've

never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

Thanks for help!

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I am pretty sure that the age calculation is not accurate for someone who is pretty fit. I think there is a calculation that is based on resting heart rate which is more accurate for someone who is fit - b/c your resting heart rate will, in theory, be lower if you are fit. Trouble is, I'm not sure what the calculation is. If I get some time later today I'll see if i can google it!

Oh - I'm dropping a package in the mail to you today or tomorrow!!

Donna

Subject: heart rate questionTo: exercisevideos Date: Wednesday, August 4, 2010, 11:06 PM

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an "ownzone" setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've

never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

Thanks for help!

[Guest guest]



Hi Darcy,

This definitely makes sense. I'm still wondering though, since I'm a measurement kind of gal, what would be considered lighter, in terms of heart rate? I can, of course, figure it based on a talk test and how I feel and I know that is good enough but I like numbers for these kinds of things too! ;-)

Re: heart rate question

,

I surely would not stress over the numbers on your HRM. If you felt good there, there is nothing wrong w/ exercising in that zone. I would just make sure and vary it up as well. Don't always have your heart rate there. Make sure and do some lighter days as well.

D

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:06 PM, <nancydewolfsbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote:

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an "ownzone" setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

Thanks for help!

[Guest guest]



Hi Darcy,

This definitely makes sense. I'm still wondering though, since I'm a measurement kind of gal, what would be considered lighter, in terms of heart rate? I can, of course, figure it based on a talk test and how I feel and I know that is good enough but I like numbers for these kinds of things too! ;-)

Re: heart rate question

,

I surely would not stress over the numbers on your HRM. If you felt good there, there is nothing wrong w/ exercising in that zone. I would just make sure and vary it up as well. Don't always have your heart rate there. Make sure and do some lighter days as well.

D

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:06 PM, <nancydewolfsbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote:

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an "ownzone" setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

Thanks for help!

[Guest guest]



Hi Darcy,

This definitely makes sense. I'm still wondering though, since I'm a measurement kind of gal, what would be considered lighter, in terms of heart rate? I can, of course, figure it based on a talk test and how I feel and I know that is good enough but I like numbers for these kinds of things too! ;-)

Re: heart rate question

,

I surely would not stress over the numbers on your HRM. If you felt good there, there is nothing wrong w/ exercising in that zone. I would just make sure and vary it up as well. Don't always have your heart rate there. Make sure and do some lighter days as well.

D

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:06 PM, <nancydewolfsbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote:

I know I've asked questions like this before but I'm back again, please continue to be patient with me! ;-)

I'm thinking the standard age-based heart rate range isn't working for me anymore but you all can tell me if I'm wrong about that too. I'm 43 and I think, according to that I should be working out at 133-150 (that's what I was given a year or 2 ago anyway by a trainer). In the workout I did today, my heart rate was pretty consistently in the mid 150s and lower 160s for a lot of the cardio portions of about 8 minutes each in a 30 minute workout (there were 2 minute strength training intervals between each 8 minutes of cardio). I felt really good in the mid to high 150s. I was definitely workiing hard but wasn't dying. I'd put it about a 7 or 8 on a scale of 1-10. I could probably talk briefly but not carry on a regular conversation (I didn't think to experiment during the workout though) and was not sucking wind. My Polar F6 has an "ownzone" setting that supposedly will help me determine my appropriate fitness zone but I've never been able to get it to work right for some reason (user error, not the HRM's problem). Should I try that again or is there some other simple way I can figure out what I should set it at? I want to improve my overall fitness and endurance, if that matters.

Thanks for help!