Max Heart Rate

Maybe because 220-age is nonsense, or maybe you didn't try hard enough, or maybe you're just lying about the whole thing?

Ah crap I was trying to do Columbo, I feel like I've let myself down.

There's loads of different formulae around for estimating max HR but what you have to take into account is that they'll all have standard deviations for a given sample of people of at least 6 bpm.

By the way there's a lag between heart rate and power and most max HR tests involve increasing the intensity of effort in steps over a 20 minute period. So going absolutely eyeballs out for 3km and measuring heart rate straight away may not be the most accurate method.

Dan777 wrote:

im no expert here but a lot of heart rate monitors allow you to view average HR and max HR at the end fo whatever ride you have done. i recently did a cat 4 race and pished as hard as possible and got a HR of 190, even when busting a gut going up 20%+ gradient hills the best i got was 189. if you can view the max HR after the event, just record it, surely this way you will learn your MAX HR?

Trying to find you Max HR is a bit of a thorny issue, not least because it can be quite a dangerous practise.
The only accurate way is in a lab with a technician. HRM are all well and good but there's lots of other variables to take into account i.e if you are suitably rested, have you been feeling ill etc.

I'm no expert but from my previous sport, where I trains a lot based upon heart rate and pretty much maxed it out (230), i were younger then

the only real way to find your max it to get there (or very nearly there). If you have access to a turbo trainer try some 30secs -> 1minute sprint repeats, with say 1 or 2 minutes rest , keep going until you pass out, throw up or die. Your HRM will let you know what your max is.

try http://www.brianmac.co.uk/maxhr.htm for several simple calculations

dennisn wrote:

Wait a second now. If no one knows of a "formula" for this maybe there isn't one.
Dennis Noward

I agree with this Dennis. Why would you want to know what your MHR is anyway? 90% of my maximum theoretical heart rate is more than enough for me, thanks very much! Any more than that and I'm asking for trouble in the recovery stakes. :roll:

As previously stated the formula is inaccurate, but further to this is an estimation of maximum heart rate for whole body exercise such as running. The major differance between running, cross-country skiing etc and cycling is the volume of muscle mass recruited during exercise which directly relates to the heart rate response. Therefore the formula will overpredict maximum heart rate for cycling. Throw in the +-/- 6-10 bpm in individual variatoion and its pretty meaningless for cyclists.

If you have a turbo trainer you could work out your max Hr by starting off at a very easy spinning pace and increase your effort/gear/resistance in stages every 2 minutes, your HR will show a linear increase with effort up until HRmax at which point it will plateau (obviously). Try and estimate your increases in effort so that you reach your HRmax in 6-8 stages.

Joe

unless you were ready to collapse/vomit/both, you probably weren't at your maximum

nail/head interface achieved

You've lost me, now....

I thought that there was a few positive responses on this.....

I can't say that everyone engaged their brain first, though!

I have used an HRM for the last 15 years and have tried on many occasions to find my HR Max. The highest I have ever recorded is 163 bpm even whilst racing. My lowest recorded resting HR is 30bpm. Using the 220 - age formula my Max should be 180bpm.

This has some interesting info and I find personally relevant as 220 minus age says for me 174 which is just rubbish, I easily manage 200 when I'm absolutely hammering it.

http://www.howtobefit.com/determine-max ... t-rate.htm

idaviesmoore wrote:

:? Another problem IMHO with HRMs is that people become too reliant on them. I have used a Polar for almost 17 years (I use Garmin now because of GPS) and found it useful in the early days. But as I got better (? :shock: ) at running and cycling I relied on it less and less.
Now I use it at certain times of the month as comparison on turbo training/treadmill sessions and sometimes when I'm racing. But as I do mainly triathlons now I find them unreliable in the water (pool based).
But in terms of finding a true MHR the data is inconclusive:-

1. 167 bike
2. 197 Run

If you always train with a HRM you lose the ability to listen to your body...sorry to sound a bit nerdish :roll:

Aren't you the clever boy and me the stupid idiot

What's good for you may not be good for others and just because you experience something one way doesn't mean everybody else has the same experience. I got my HRM for the opposite reason. I regularly overtrained before I got my HRM and after my last overtraining session which was so bad that I was left unable to train at all for months, if you can imagine that, I bought the HRM and I haven't overtrained since. My fitness has risen significantly over that time and that is because I have spent more time actually training rather than constantly going the through the boom bust cycle of the past.

I'm not obsessed by the numbers and rarely actually plan any training round. It is usually post ride analysis or if I know I am pushing along because I can see what the speedo is saying or if I am going uphill then I will look at the numbers just to make sure I am not overdoing it and perhaps back off a bit or else be a bit more conservative on the recovery once I go over the top however I find the ability to measure morning restingHR to be the most useful number of all. I can quickly tell if I am overtraining or getting ill because my restingHR will rise sharply from one day to the next by 5bpm or so and therefore I either take a rest or do a gentle ride or gym session.

As a matter of interest to this thread my maxHR as measured by using a testing protocol I found online I get a maxHR of 198bpm and 35 according to that generalized formula my maxHr should be 185bpm. My polar s710i and CS600 both tell me that my maxHR should be 187bpm so it just shows how inaccurate both the formula and the HRM based systems can be.