BETTER WITHOUT ADS? Become a voluntary supporter

Welcome To Fetcheveryone

Our awesome training log doesn't hide its best features behind a paywall. Search thousands of events, get advice, play games, measure routes, and more! Join our friendly community of runners, cyclists, and swimmers.
Click here to get started
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here

Max heart rate is not as it should be, is this bad?

3 watchers
Aug 2012
2:08pm, 25 Aug 2012
2057 posts
  • 0
Yep, I know using working HR is better than absolute but didn't want to confuse the issue for someone who is new to using a HRM. just trying to give some ball park figures for a bit of guidance. Still doesn't change the fact that if the OP is really running easy at 168 BPM then her MHR is not 185 - I think that was what the general query was about.
Aug 2012
10:56pm, 25 Aug 2012
11218 posts
  • 0
Puffing Bertie
Thanks for that Loca, I will give it a go. It all makes a little more sense now :-)
Aug 2012
11:26pm, 25 Aug 2012
44035 posts
  • 0
plodding hippo
My max HR is over 200

And im 47
Aug 2012
11:38pm, 25 Aug 2012
5380 posts
  • 0
I've said it N times here before and nobody ever wants to hear it but let's have another go . . . . in the words of one of the men who came up with the original HR Max formula

"The common formula was devised in 1970 by Dr. William Haskell, then a young physician in the federal Public Health Service and his mentor, Dr. Samuel Fox, who led the service's program on heart disease. They were trying to determine how strenuously heart disease patients could exercise.
In preparation for a medical meeting , Dr. Haskell culled data from about 10 published studies in which people of different ages had been tested to find their maximum heart rates.
The subjects were never meant to be a representative sample of the population, said Dr. Haskell, who is now a professor of medicine at Stanford. Most were under 55 and some were smokers or had heart disease.
On an airplane traveling to the meeting, Dr. Haskell pulled out his data and showed them to Dr. Fox. ''We drew a line through the points and I said, 'Gee, if you extrapolate that out it looks like at age 20, the heart rate maximum is 200 and at age 40 it's 180 and at age 60 it's 160,'' Dr. Haskell said.
At that point, Dr. Fox suggested a formula: maximum heart rate equals 220 minus age.
But, exercise physiologists said, these data, like virtually all exercise data, had limitations. They relied on volunteers who most likely were not representative of the general population. ''It's whoever came in the door,'' Dr. Kirkendall said.
In addition, he and others said, gauging maximum heart rates for people who are not used to exercising is often difficult because many prematurely stop the test. . . . . .

''I've kind of laughed about it over the years,'' Dr. Haskell said. The formula, he said, ''was never supposed to be an absolute guide to rule people's training.'' But, he said, ''It's so typical of Americans to take an idea and extend it beyond what it was originally intended for.''"
Aug 2012
11:47pm, 25 Aug 2012
3280 posts
  • 0
I wore a HRM during a fetch mile and hit 201, don't think I've been near that figure since :)
Aug 2012
12:44am, 26 Aug 2012
5536 posts
  • 0
About time we got you to another mile, then ;-)
Aug 2012
7:33am, 26 Aug 2012
44036 posts
  • 0
plodding hippo
thank you saint
Aug 2012
8:42am, 26 Aug 2012
3281 posts
  • 0
Lol, yep I'll need to try and get to one soon D :)

Got something to say?

To contribute to the discussion, you need to either sign in or register as a user.

About This Thread

Maintained by Puffing Bertie
I have invested in a HR monitor, even though I hate them as i really dont want to know what is going...

Related Threads

  • heart
  • training

Back To Top