Garmin Edge Heart Rate Zones, What Do They Mean ?

gb155

My (and everyone elses) Edge 705 lists heart rate in BMP, % of Max HR and 5 Heart Rate zones, but what do they mean ?

Zone 1, I assume is recovery ?

Zone 5, I assume is the red line zone ?

is zone 3 the fat burn zone ?

UndercoverElephant

I would assume that if 1 is pootle and 5 is nearing death, the fat burning zone would be 2?

gb155

UndercoverElephant wrote:

I would assume that if 1 is pootle and 5 is nearing death, the fat burning zone would be 2?

Hummm I spend most of my time in Zone 3, at around 3.5, what does that mean for fat burn ?

UndercoverElephant

http://www.brianmac.co.uk/hrm1.htm

Having looked at the Garmin user manual, Zone 1 is 50 - 60%, Zone 2, 60 - 70%, etc. Zone three is more designed for improving your fitness, whilst still burning some fat.

Edit: And the more you push above zone 3, the less fat you'll be burning, and the more carbs you'll be using.

amnezia

I wouldn't pay too much attention to 'fat burning' zones, high intensity exercise is just as effective at burning fat as long periods of low intensity exercise.

davmaggs

Probably best to look at some sports science sites.

The short version (hopefully correctly) is that high intensity burns off your glycogen quickly and takes a heavier toll on your body if training regularly. Glycogen is needed to burn your blubber so the idea is that by slow down and being in the right zone you don't just knacker yourself out before you get to the fat.

A big part of HR training is that your HR rate isn't the same every day. If you have been training a lot or are perhaps under the weather then using a monitor means that you adjust what you are doing. Just sticking to routines or a watch doesn't account for the state that your body is in.

I suppose it might be like a rev counter. Amazon has some good books on the subject

amnezia

davmaggs wrote:

Probably best to look at some sports science sites.

The short version (hopefully correctly) is that high intensity burns off your glycogen quickly and takes a heavier toll on your body if training regularly. Glycogen is needed to burn your blubber so the idea is that by slow down and being in the right zone you don't just knacker yourself out before you get to the fat.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0895.htm
http://www.active.com/triathlon/Article ... g-Zone.htm

Agent57

The "fat-burning zone" is a myth. Just saying.

davmaggs

I'm not a medical professional so to state that something is or isn't a myth is outside of my skillset.

I do tend read sports science literature though and can say that (as per link above) there are common misconceptions carried in the kind of magazines that you see on the high street.

I think that the dismissing something as a 'myth' is overstating things as HR training is about a lot more than fat.

Greg T

davmaggs wrote:

I'm not a medical professional so to state that something is or isn't a myth is outside of my skillset.

I'm not medical either but I am opionated - therefore I am idealy skilled to ID myths.

The fat burning zone is myth.

Whilst low intensity exercise burns more fat as a % of energy used it also doesn't expend much energy.

High intensity exercise expends more energy and whilst the % from fat is lower this can overcome by the totals involved. It also ups your oxygen consumption after exercise.

There is a tipping point obviously. 5 mins of rifting yourself will not beat four hours steady state. It's complicated maths staying in the "fat burning zone" for an hour will not be as fat burning as an interval session.

There's loads of clever stuff on the net about it with the maths and graphs and everything.

Agent57

One of the problems with the idea of a "fat burning zone" is that some people think that's the only way to burn fat, when in fact any exercise "counts". So they may believe that 20 minutes at 60% MHR is actually better for fat burning (read "weight loss") than 20 minutes at 80% MHR. High-intensity interval training can consume more energy than a steady-state session, for example, and raise the general metabolic rate for a longer period post-exercise. While the body may source a greater proportion of calories from fat during moderate exercise, at higher intensities they'll simply burn more energy overall.

So that's why I say it's a myth. It's not necessary to operate in some specific level of intensity in order to lose fat. In fact, far better results may be obtained by operating outside of that so-called fat burning zone.

(Of course, moderate exercise for longer periods may be preferable for some, depending on their general state of health and ability to work at higher intensities.)

gb155

Thanks everyone, there is plenty of food for thought.