Maximum heart rate

david 142

This isnt a question about BPM - I cant remember offhand what my max should be, but when I go to the gym I do use the handy wallchart and exercise at 80%.
No, what I need to know is what max heart rate actually means - is it a ceiling for effective exercise or is it something critical to health, to be exceeded at your peril?
I've been using a singlespeed bike since Christmas and I have noticed a distinct improvement in my hill climbing ability, but there is this hill on my way home...
I couldnt get up it when I started this route, and now I can ride it and keep going at the top, but I'm pretty confident that the old ticker is running "in the red" to do it. Is it ok for that to happen when dealing with real world matters or should I get off and erm, walk?

Tom Butcher

It's not something you shouldn't exceed so no need to worry on that score. I don't even think it's the absolute maximum speed your heart will beat - because it is specific to the exercise you are doing - it's just the fastest you can get it to beat through whatever activity you are doing, nothing more. If someone knows differently they can correct me.

Basically though no - if you are healthy have no worries about your heart rate shooting up under effort.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Max HR is just that, the max rate your heart will beat at. So by definition you can't exceed it.

It is one indicator of cardio vascular strain during exercise but not the only indicator. However since it is pretty easy to measure (compared to say, total cardiac output), lots of people use HR as a percentage of max HR as a way to indicate the intensity of training effort.

As long as you are not susceptible to cardio vascular disease, then your heart will pretty much take what ever you throw at it. So ride up that hill at whatever pace you can manage. After training for a while it'll get easier, or you'll just go faster

Morpeth

I would consider doing a max heart rate (MHR) test to establish you training intensities.

There will be many methods for this, and everyone will have a different idea but;

- Sit on the bike at your local gym (when there is nobody watching)
- Warm up, just spinning for 10 mins
- Find your natural cadence (rate at which you pedal)
- Gradually increase the resistance on the machine (say once every 2 mins buy one notch)
- Work until you cannot carry on, flat out.
- Take note of your heart rate at point of collapse (MHR)

Other methods include sprinting up and down hills etc..

From there you can determine your percentage workloads (80% etc...)

david 142

Morpeth wrote:

IOther methods include sprinting up ... hills etc

On my homeward hill my heart sprints alright. Its the only body part that does, mind!

Seriously, thanks for the reassuring answers! I think the way in which gym charts tell you that the max should fall as age rises had started me off on a wrong track. I take it that the charts are just reflecting a tendency for the heart to "lose power" as you get older.
I didnt think I was doing myself much damage at the moment because my recovery times are still improving, but I did start wondering if I was heading for problems - just as I'd actually started enjoying the odd hill...
Thanks again

Bronzie

david 142 wrote:

I think the way in which gym charts tell you that the max should fall as age rises had started me off on a wrong track.

These are probably based on the "220 - your age" ready reckoner which is just that............a ready reckoner that can be +/-15 bpm out from your "true" maximum.

bilbo.baggins

To the extent of my knowledge the definition of 'max HR being the maximum HR you can reach for any given exercise' is correct. It will be different for different activities as it is dependant on measuring specifically for that sport.

Morpeth's described method of measurement works. However, you really need someone SCREAMING encouragement at you to try harder otherwise you won't get your absolute max (although depending on how good you are at motivating yourself the difference may be small'ish). You'll know you're getting there as you are about to collapse in a heap, and you are reliant on your friend to take HR measurements as you have other things pre-occupying you! To take this approach, you should be used to regular intensive exercise and should be sure you have no latent heart problems - if you get this done professionally they rig you up to an 'heart monitoring' machine.

The 220-age is a rule of thumb only. My max HR is 18 above this, but this isn't indicative of anything to do with fitness really.

Using the % zones of maxHR is a cheap and cheerful way to estimate training zones. However to do this accurately you really need to know at what HR you start a significant transition from aerobic to anaerobic. As far as I recall, the 'zones' estimate this as around 80-85% maxHR. In reality it depends on how 'efficient' (trained) your body is - it may be above or below this.

david 142

Thanks. I do understand that charts and zones are guidelines and are never going to be as effective as getting myself assessed, but they are enough of a guideline for my purposes. Once I realised that 80% HRmax equated to an effort level that I could keep up for a few hours I stopped worrying about the details.
I was feeling quite chuffed about recent fitness improvements, then I had a moment of doubt about whether it was quite sensible to try so hard. Sorted now!

kenbaxter

I've only reached my max (at least I think I've reached it!) when I'm very fit. If you're not then chances are your legs and lungs will give out long before you reach max. Exceeded my previous max on a trainer last week doing a flat out sprint at 525W and popped it up 1 beat higher than previously. Then had to sit with my head under a towel for 10 minutes before the world stopped spinning and I was sure I wasn't going to throw up.

So it you've not seen the world in grey before, you probably haven;' hit it. You could always adjust your perceived max hr up a couple of notches to compensate when setting your training zones.

Alex_Simmons/RST

I tend to only hit max when I'm unfit. Much harder to do when I'm fit.

Mike Willcox

You choose whether to make the measurement of your HR important to your training or not. At the end of the day it makes do difference to the end result.

Ask yourself if knowing that your HR is at max or within 5 bpm of max is going to affect your level of effort.

If the answer is yes then you may be holding back on your effort or worse going too hard. If you let the way you feel decide your level of effort then it is of academic interest only.

Bronzie

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

I tend to only hit max when I'm unfit. Much harder to do when I'm fit.

My max heart rate is around 172 I think, but at the minute I'm not able to get above 164. I assumed this was because I'm a way off being at my best and that I'd be able to reach higher heart rates a bit later in the season.

I've done very little very high intensity riding so far this year. At the minute I'm finding that my legs are grinding to a halt (lactic build up) before I get the nice "seared lung" sensation that I get when I'm able to really go for it.

greenmark

So, generally, does reaching the max get easier or harder as you get fitter?

The reason I ask is that I've been doing daily spinning sessions (with occasional rests). Two weeks ago I was managing to reach 172bpm before I couldn't go any more and now I'm struggling to get it up above 166bpm.

Bronzie

greenmark wrote:

Two weeks ago I was managing to reach 172bpm before I couldn't go any more and now I'm struggling to get it up above 166bpm.

Is the 172 figure just the highest you've ever recorded, or did you have to turn yourself into a gibbering wreck to reach it? In other words, unless you were seeing stars / going numb / feeling sick at the time, 172 may well not be your "true" maximum.

The decrease in heart rate for the same output is what is commonly known as "getting fitter".

Alex_Simmons/RST

Bronzie wrote:

The decrease in heart rate for the same output is what is commonly known as "getting fitter".

It can also mean "getting fatigued" Or a range of things.

greenmark

Bronzie wrote:

greenmark wrote:

Two weeks ago I was managing to reach 172bpm before I couldn't go any more and now I'm struggling to get it up above 166bpm.

Is the 172 figure just the highest you've ever recorded, or did you have to turn yourself into a gibbering wreck to reach it? In other words, unless you were seeing stars / going numb / feeling sick at the time, 172 may well not be your "true" maximum.

The decrease in heart rate for the same output is what is commonly known as "getting fitter".

The highest I've ever recorded, a few years ago, was 175bpm. I always thought I had a few more bpm in me so I've estimated it to be around 178bpm.

The 172bpm was the highest I've managed recently - I just couldn't push myself any further to get any more.
What I'm concerned about is that I'm now not even able to get beyond 166bpm, no matter how hard I try. As far as I can tell, I'm suffering just as much as when I was reaching 172bpm.

So, I'm wondering if it is common that as people become fitter, the more difficult it is to push the boundaries of bpm. Am I getting fitter, or am I over-training?

Alex_Simmons/RST

greenmark wrote:

So, I'm wondering if it is common that as people become fitter, the more difficult it is to push the boundaries of bpm. Am I getting fitter, or am I over-training?

It's how fast you ride your bike (in general), not how fast your heart beats that matters. Your pace (power) should tell you if you are getting fitter.

PS - don't confuse normal overload and training fatigue with over-training. The latter in it's true sense is quite a hard thing to achieve.

billybiker

:oops:

Well I've learnt a lot by reading this thread. Just to add my two-penneth, if you want to find max heart rate the HRM will store the max you achieve so if you are flat out in a sprint for the finish, don't worry about HR as you can always check it later. I'm 52 and 2 years ago reached 197 in a sprint, absolutely flat out, but then almost had to be carried home! According to the 220-age I should have a MHR of 168 so thats obviously a completely useless and possibly very confusing way of working out MHR.

Does anearobic means that the effort its unsustainable? Reason for asking is that I've done two "practise" TTs this year and used my HRM for the first time. I was surprised to find myself in the 88% to 94% of MHR virtually the whole time.

Alex_Simmons/RST

billybiker wrote:

Well I've learnt a lot by reading this thread.

billybiker wrote:

Does anearobic means that the effort its unsustainable?

Well it basically means deriving energy from sources without using oxygen, so yes, that is an unsustainable level of effort.

billybiker wrote:

Reason for asking is that I've done two "practise" TTs this year and used my HRM for the first time. I was surprised to find myself in the 88% to 94% of MHR virtually the whole time.

Doesn't surprise me, that's about typical for TT efforts. You would be very much aerobic during these efforts, assuming they lasted more than a couple of minutes.