dangerous heart rate?

matstand said:

i've just purchased a garmin 301 speed/distance heart monitor. I am
thirty four so I guessed that my max heart rate should be about 186
(220 minus my age). On my first trip out with the monitor, I ran 3 flat
miles (my standard short run) at about my normal pace (7.5 mph). When I
reviewed the data of the run it said that my max achieved heart rate
for the run as 217 bpm. This strikes me as pretty high, as surely if

Don't worry about it. It's wrong to say that your max heart rate "should" be
anything. There's a lot of variation among healthy people. 220-age is just an
estimate and not a very good one for that matter.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"matstand" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

i've just purchased a garmin 301 speed/distance heart monitor. I am
thirty four so I guessed that my max heart rate should be about 186
(220 minus my age). On my first trip out with the monitor, I ran 3 flat
miles (my standard short run) at about my normal pace (7.5 mph). When I
reviewed the data of the run it said that my max achieved heart rate
for the run as 217 bpm. This strikes me as pretty high, as surely if
I'd have exerted myself my max heart rate would have been even faster.
Is a heart rate like this indicative of heart problems? Or is it a
mistake by the machine or the way I am using it?

Any help to put my mind at ease would be greatly appreciated.

In my experience, erratic high readings are commonly caused by (amongst
other things):

- Dry clothing flapping into contact with the chest strap. Polar suggest
slightly dampening clothing in the region of the chest sensor before you
begin exercising to reduce the slight static electic effects producing
"false heartbeats" in the sensor...... this works well for me. Once you get
well and truly sweaty during the exercise, this tends to become less of a
problem :-)

- Running underneath high voltage electricity lines, or radio
transmitters/masts which can interfere with the signal between the sensor
strap and the watch.

Cheers
Splodge

zero

but one wouldnt care about it then

otherwise the biggest danger seems to be getting newbies
worried about something unimportant

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

...When I
reviewed the data of the run it said that my max achieved heart rate
for the run as 217 bpm. This strikes me as pretty high, as surely if

Don't worry about it. It's wrong to say that your max heart rate "should"
be
anything. There's a lot of variation among healthy people. 220-age is just
an
estimate and not a very good one for that matter.

....and if I might tag along here, there's a good chance that that 217 is an
artifact. Heck, I've had max readings of 210+ on a run I was never running
hard during, and I know my max is low 180's.

If you have a particular kind of irregular heartbeat, you can get a reading
like that, but it's equally likely that it's bogus. Watch your rate while
running, it will generally rise gradually if you're running with any
oomph -- it won't spike to 210. If you start out at 180, it might rise that
high, but like most folks you're probably in the 130-150 range on an
ordinary run.

I'd be interested in what you get when you're watching it every 5-10 minutes
during your run.

-- Dan

"max achieved heart rate for the run as 217 bpm"

The reading was probably wrong. You might try experimenting
with wetting yourself and the HR strap just before the run.
Make sure it's pretty tight. Watch the readout for a bit too.
See if it jumps around.

And let's say it was correct. There's nothing wrong with the
reading. It just shows you what your heart was doing to maintain
that effort level. Coupled with your RHR, looks to me that you
are in regular shape for regular people. From an athlete's
perspective, you've got lots of improving to do. Your HR is
just one indicator of your fitness level. Figure it out and you can
use it to assist you in gauging your types of workouts. And you
can check it to measure your progress.

a last point, you might think about what you're trying to accomplish
by running 3 miles at 7.5 mph. Perhaps you're not getting
the benefit you're looking for. Maybe longer and slower, or shorter
and faster. Anyway, I know it's fun to have and the fact that you
can run anywhere now and count the distance is great. I like
it that I can measure my side trips when I'm out running. And I can
map new routes at will.
....thehick

Quoted message said:

i've just purchased a garmin 301

Aside from the other good responses you've got, I thought the
just-released-or-soon-to-be 305 was touted as having much more reliable HRM
functionality, which would imply the 301 has, well, room for much
improvement in that regard.

Charlie Pendejo said:

Aside from the other good responses you've got

He means mine.

pam in sc said:

matstand said:

i've just purchased a garmin 301 speed/distance heart monitor. ... 217 bpm. ...
Is a heart rate like this indicative of heart problems? Or is it a
mistake by the machine or the way I am using it?

False readings are very common. The chest strap needs to make good
electrical contact with the skin at both electrodes. To assure good
contact, there needs to be some moisture or other conducting
material in the gap. During dry, cool months, sweat might not be
enough to establish or maintain contact. This problem can be
avoided by providing conducting liquid or gel between the skin and
each contact. I use some saliva to provide the needed conductance.
Some people use store-bought contact gels.

Even when contact is good, with liquid/gel in place, jiggling of the
contact can cause momentary loss of electrical connection. A loose
strap allows more jiggling than a tight strap, of course.