Max heart rate

[cincinattikid]

Hello all,

I have recently purchased my first Polar HRM and am having difficulty establishing my maxHR. I have been on several testing rides (where ive pushed myself to the point of spewing) and have reached a maxHR of 161 which I could maintain for 10-20 seconds. Weird thing is that on these occasions the HRM has momentarily read 230-232 when I was going at my hardest (by momentarily i mean for less than 5 seconds) then returned straight back to 161. I am under the impression these 200+ readings are wrong because I dont see how I could drop 60 beats in just a few seconds.

I am 29 y/old, 85kgs, 6ft1in with a resting HR 48. I would have thought I could attain a much higher max HR than 161.

Can anyone offer an thoughts or experienced a similar problem?

Cheers from downunder.

 

[2LAP]

The 230's are no doubt wrong, I get similar problems when riding under power lines. If you have seen 161 a number of times and cant get it higher, then you can assume this is a max. Not sure what test you are using to get your max and this may be the cause of your low reading.

 

[Shabby]

Any quick jumps in heart rate are errors. The heart speeds up and slows dwn quite slowly, with some lag time.

It may take a while for your legs to be strong enough to challenge your cardiovascular system. I'd assume a value which is higer than you;'ve seen (perhaps 175 for you?), then base HR zones on that. If you can sit on 161 for any lenght of time, it;s not your max heart rate.

And remember, everyones physiology is different, so you need to learn how your body responds.

 

[Spider1977]

You can always try physically timing your pulse to verify. Alternatively give your HRM to someone else to try and see if it does the same for them (max at 161). Another reason is that the battery could be getting low or your sensors are dirty. Hold your sensors close to the Polar watch for a few seconds, this may help also.
I've run out of suggestions. Good luck.

 

[pj_s]

I'd agree with shabby - depending on the amount of training you've done, the bike may not be the best instrument to determine your max heart rate. My experience: I find that at the beginning of the season, ie when i am less well trained, it is hard to reach a max heart rate on the bike, even if I bike till i puke
possible options to determine your max heart rate:
- try some running sprints with your polar
- try sprinting against some buddies
- If you're well trained you could try the following routine: 1 min at H 130, 1 min H 140, 1min H 150, 1 min H160, one min H170 (or max you possibly can)

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Originally posted by pj_s
I'd agree with shabby - depending on the amount of training you've done, the bike may not be the best instrument to determine your max heart rate. My experience: I find that at the beginning of the season, ie when i am less well trained, it is hard to reach a max heart rate on the bike, even if I bike till i puke
possible options to determine your max heart rate:
- try some running sprints with your polar
- try sprinting against some buddies
- If you're well trained you could try the following routine: 1 min at H 130, 1 min H 140, 1min H 150, 1 min H160, one min H170 (or max you possibly can)

Pj_s,
it seems that you might have obtained a Max HR in a different exercise modality other than cycling, e.g., running. It's entirely possible to have a higher HRmax in running compared to cycling, especially if you do some run training.

Typically, for people who cross train, a HRmax can be obtained in running compared to cycling. And a higher one in cycling compared to swimming. However, for trained cyclists it's normal to reach 100 - 105% of running HRmax.

Use the HRmax obtained for each modality for training with.

Ric

 

[jster65]

cincinattikid,
Is your HRM and pulse strap wireless? I suspect they are and as such they are susceptible to frequency interruptions, which may cause inaccurate readings. My HRM and chest/pulse strap is wireless and this sort of thing happens to me as well. When I download the info to my PC from the HRM, I sometimes see, surges up to 222 for 5-second clips--I just ignore, because I don't think it's possible to reach 222 bpm then recover in 5 seconds.

Finding my MAX HR was painful. There are lots of training materials out there to help. I used the 220 minus my age "rule" until I found what my goals were; cycling up hills. Hence, I used my bike and some gradual (2-3 mile 5-7% grade) hills to find my max hr, and I did it in 15 second increments where I would apply more power (higher speed or cadence, same gear) every 15 seconds, and continued this for 3 miles or until I fell over--which I really did. From about mile two, I peddled standing up, and from that point on, I was in pain, hearing voices in my head, I could barely see, things were blurry, and like you, I spewed. It was intense. I reached my all time, known, high of 187 bpm. I am 38 years old, 210 pounds and am 6.0' tall. Prior to determining my max hr, I was in good shape, working out at least 5 hours per week and logging 30-50 miles on my bike per week. So finding my max was easier than it would have been had I not been in somewhat good physical shape. My point in sharing this is because I think finding the max hr is based in part on existing aerobic and anaerobic fitness levels which differs in each person. Hope it helps.

 

[pj_s]

Originally posted by ricstern
Pj_s,
it seems that you might have obtained a Max HR in a different exercise modality other than cycling, e.g., running. It's entirely possible to have a higher HRmax in running compared to cycling, especially if you do some run training.

Typically, for people who cross train, a HRmax can be obtained in running compared to cycling. And a higher one in cycling compared to swimming. However, for trained cyclists it's normal to reach 100 - 105% of running HRmax.

Use the HRmax obtained for each modality for training with.

Ric

thanks for that ric -> i did notice that i had higher max heart rate in rowing than biking. thought it was due to age difference (i rowed before biking). thank god it isn't
!!!

 

[zakeen]

Best way to preform a MAX HR.

Is on a Mag Trainer! put it in the smallest gear you have and spin as hard as you for 15seconds and 45 off. do about 7-10!

you should be able to get you true max!

like other said you didnt explain how you did you test, but I am guessing you just rode as hard as you can as long as you can, not the best way to do a MAX but I am only guessing

 

[Unregistered]

I find it amazing how differently HR seems to respond to intensity in different people. I'm 41, 70kg, resting HR about 48, ride about 80 - 150km per week. If I warm up, find a reasonable length hill, and sprint up it as hard as possible, I see 190-193 on the HRM pretty quickly (within a minute or two), which I assume is around my MHR. On an extended climb at hard but not gut-busting (maximal) effort for 20mins, I'd still expect an average HR just under 180. Even going at what feels like an easy-medium (talking) pace up hill I'll usually be over 160bpm average.

It seems like these are high values relative both to much fitter cyclists who can cruise faster up the same hills 20bpm lower than me, AND to less trained cyclists who for some reason can't get their HR up anywhere near these levels. I'm most interested in endurance performance (2 - 8 hr rides) and am sure I would do better if my body operated at lower HRs, but lacking the time to train seriously I don't know how I might achieve that goal.

 

[2LAP]

Originally posted by Unregistered
I'm most interested in endurance performance (2 - 8 hr rides) and am sure I would do better if my body operated at lower HRs, but lacking the time to train seriously I don't know how I might achieve that goal.

By increasing your VO2 max and LT, this can be done in very short sessions (1 to 1.5 hours) using intervals.

 

[Spider1977]

Discussions on malfunctions in the HR monitor. Mine did exactly the same as you spoke about. Acouple of days ago I strapped the monitor to the front light holder instead of on my wrist, for the first time. I noticed for about a thirty second period it jumped to 223 reading. Didn't happen again on that ride and not since. So it must be some sort of malfunction or loss of signal from sensor to monitor. I'm not particularly concerned about it, but just thought you'd like to know how it happened - might make some sense for other malfunctions. I know now that my max HR is between 186 and 190 - I can hit a peak in there somewhere quite consistently at high work rates.

 

[zakeen]

Just want you guys to remember going flat out doesnt always gets you max! it is easier with a fast cad(RPM).

think like this, your at the gym and you are squating 200kg(but you cant!) anyway you are doing it as hard as you can, how high do you think your heart rate is??? it would not be any higher then 75% of your max!

so dont think when you are pushing that big gear up a hill flat out and your heart rate figure is you max, cause it is not.

 

[dennysb]

For a while I too thought I had a super MHR. I finally found out that every time I would call home on my cell phone at the end of my ride, my HRM would spike to 210. Now I'm back to believe I have a more normal MHR (around 185)
javascript:smilie('')

Originally posted by cincinattikid
Hello all,

I have recently purchased my first Polar HRM and am having difficulty establishing my maxHR. I have been on several testing rides (where ive pushed myself to the point of spewing) and have reached a maxHR of 161 which I could maintain for 10-20 seconds. Weird thing is that on these occasions the HRM has momentarily read 230-232 when I was going at my hardest (by momentarily i mean for less than 5 seconds) then returned straight back to 161. I am under the impression these 200+ readings are wrong because I dont see how I could drop 60 beats in just a few seconds.

I am 29 y/old, 85kgs, 6ft1in with a resting HR 48. I would have thought I could attain a much higher max HR than 161.

Can anyone offer an thoughts or experienced a similar problem?

Cheers from downunder.

 

[luis correia]

I want to put another things in discussion, about the concerning about max heart rate.
Some researchers are prone to consider the feeling of exaustion, more important than the numbers of heart rate and even the VO2.
The numbers are important for scientific comparisosns but i agrre with the utilization of the tiring sensation of the cyclist.
Enjoy your ride and leave the quest for numbers for the people at the labs, if you want a accurate evaluation, look for a lab and schedule a complete evaluation to program your training.
Good ride to everybody.
Luis

 

[miazcarate]

Hello

I am 27 years old, 133 lbs, 5 8in.
During training, I have reached a HR of 204... I think is too high... my max HR should be 193...

Is this a problem?

Thanks!!!

 

[2LAP]

No that sounds about right; within a normal range.

The 220 - your age equation is so wildly out that its not even useful.

 

[Spider1977]

Originally posted by 2LAP
No that sounds about right; within a normal range.

The 220 - your age equation is so wildly out that its not even useful.

I agree with 2-Lap on this. If that equation was true then my max HR would be 177. There has to be a fitness factor in there somewhere as well.

On a positive note my max HR tells me that I'm only 30 years old. What a joy to relive my youth!

 

[cincinattikid]

Thanks to all who have replied to my original post. I have since been tested in a lab by an exercise physiologist, who confirmed my max heart rate to be 162 (more likely to be around 165 outside sterile lab conditions. I asked him how this could be confirmed, since someone simply going as hard as they can seems rather intangible (some people lazier than others, etc). Apparently there are ratios which can help confirm when someone is performng at their maxHR, such as comparing lactate levels through the test and also gas ratios (i think he mentioned VCO2/VO2, or something like that). Anyway, if you want answers about your individual readings youve gotta go to a lab!!! He said maxHR is not really a reflection of your fitness - it is a guide around which you can plan your training.

I discovered my VO2max is 59 and my sum of 7 skinfolds is 99.7mm, so it just shows how these things vary from one person to another. Lots of work to do!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[2LAP]

Originally posted by cincinattikid
Thanks to all who have replied to my original post. I have since been tested in a lab by an exercise physiologist, who confirmed my max heart rate to be 162 (more likely to be around 165 outside sterile lab conditions. I asked him how this could be confirmed, since someone simply going as hard as they can seems rather intangible (some people lazier than others, etc). Apparently there are ratios which can help confirm when someone is performng at their maxHR, such as comparing lactate levels through the test and also gas ratios (i think he mentioned VCO2/VO2, or something like that). Anyway, if you want answers about your individual readings youve gotta go to a lab!!! He said maxHR is not really a reflection of your fitness - it is a guide around which you can plan your training.

I discovered my VO2max is 59 and my sum of 7 skinfolds is 99.7mm, so it just shows how these things vary from one person to another. Lots of work to do!!!!!!!!!!!

Given that you acheived 165 outside the lab, its clear that you don't need a lab to tell you your maximum heart rate. The VO2 value is useful as it shows that you have some area for improvement there and you could reduce your body fat (which will result in an increase in your VO2 max (ml/kg/min)). A lactate profile is also useful, did you get one done?