Heart rate

301 watchers
Sep 2013
3:41pm, 6 Sep 2013
29,044 posts
  •  
  • 0
Hills of Death (HOD)
Not sure if my HR monitor working properly my HR seems v low on it could this be battery ??
Sep 2013
3:46pm, 6 Sep 2013
3,902 posts
  •  
  • 0
paul the builder
Yes.

Or No.

You haven't given us an awful lot to go on, to be fair. Picture of the HR graph? Or how many runs? Is it low and steady, or declining, or fluctuating?
Sep 2013
3:54pm, 6 Sep 2013
27,036 posts
  •  
  • 0
Velociraptor
I do love the idea that if the battery on your HRM is low it goes into a sort of energy-saving mode by recording fewer beats :)
Sep 2013
4:53pm, 6 Sep 2013
490 posts
  •  
  • 0
Revbarbarag
Well now... On a good surface and level ground, 12 m/mile is very comfortable, though I might stretch it to 13 if I wanted to sing.
Sep 2013
5:15pm, 6 Sep 2013
1,164 posts
  •  
  • 0
runnyeyes
Rev...I would ditch the singing and try and stay around 12. :-) I think you're trying to build for a HM and a possible marathon next spring. IMO what will really help is carrying less weight.( sorry to be personal on a public forum) All running is excellent ...whether you are 70 or 75 or more. If you enjoy the HR training..great, but if it gets frustrating I would go by El Bees advice.

I can't think of one female mid age Fetchie who has seen the benefits that others gain from this programme, but I'd be interested to be corrected.
Sep 2013
5:30pm, 6 Sep 2013
2,181 posts
  •  
  • 0
rosehip
That's really interesting runnyeyes - would be great if any middle aged lady for whom this has worked well would step forward.

I've been trying to do similar to el Bee's suggestion - and my really really comfortable pace is ~12.25 on average if there are no hills. This does have my average for run HR coming in at 70% whr - but the trace is usually pretty spiky - possibly for the anatomical reasons mentioned.

Interstingly, mcmillan suggests 12.28 as my easy/long run pace based on my HM PB pace.

For the comfort of anyone in the vicinity I'd best not try singing though :)
Sep 2013
11:19pm, 6 Sep 2013
491 posts
  •  
  • 0
Revbarbarag
Hmm.... so ElBee says forget about the HR, just run slowly enough to chat with your mate. RE says run at 12 mins/mile and lose some ballast.

I think we all agree that if I run regularly, I will get fitter, yes? And will then run either faster at the same heart rate, or the same speed at a lower heart rate, yes? So I suppose I'm wondering..... ElBee, when you talk about women who have gained no advantage from 8 months or whatever of HR training - do you really mean they have got no faster? And were these established runners trying a new technique, or new runners? I've been running less than 6 months, and am still within the window of rapid improvement for newbies... also, building up my distance will automatically bring improvement, almost irrespective of how fast I run, won't it?

As for the weight issue.... well, already lost an awful lot, thanks.... and been all but stable for 6 months. I know from past experience that "trying to lose weight" is a bad idea for me - it tends to lead to binge eating. So, I won't be going on a diet any time soon. Or ever. But if, as I continue to eat reasonably healthily and run, and weight train, my body decides it can cope with being a bit leaner and lighter, you will hear no complaints from me.
Sep 2013
11:56pm, 6 Sep 2013
1,503 posts
  •  
  • 0
Drell
Rev, you've probably covered this already but I'm afraid I haven't read back.... How have you arrived at your max HR? I suspect using a formula (eg 220 - age) is especially inaccurate for women. See en.wikipedia.org for some discussion about the inaccuracy of that formula in particular, though not related specifically to women.

That formula gives 167 for me, whereas I reasonably regularly reach over 180 in races. So I use 185 as my max. Clearly this isn't as good as doing a proper max HR test, but it's also clearly better than using 167. So if you are using a formula, you may well be significantly under estimating your max.
Sep 2013
12:04am, 7 Sep 2013
8,153 posts
  •  
  • 0
GlennR
[makes note that Drell has admitted she wasn't going flat out at the end of that 5k I did the pacing for]
FR
Sep 2013
7:48am, 7 Sep 2013
16,721 posts
  •  
  • 0
FR
Spot on, Drell..... and getting a MaxHR can arrive in different circumstances. One method is to use hill reps, which didn't work for me, although absolutely giving it everything I couldn't get HR above 180.... and yet a sprint finish at the end of a parkrun I can easily get 185 :-)

So an accurate MaxHR is vital

About This Thread

Maintained by Elderberry
Everything you need to know about training with a heart rate monitor. Remember the motto "I can maintain a fast pace over the race distance because I am an Endurance God". Mind the trap door....

Gobi lurks here, but for his advice you must first speak his name. Ask and you shall receive.

A quote:

"The area between the top of the aerobic threshold and anaerobic threshold is somewhat of a no mans land of fitness. It is a mix of aerobic and anaerobic states. For the amount of effort the athlete puts forth, not a whole lot of fitness is produced. It does not train the aerobic or anaerobic energy system to a high degree. This area does have its place in training; it is just not in base season. Unfortunately this area is where I find a lot of athletes spending the majority of their seasons, which retards aerobic development. The athletes heart rate shoots up to this zone with little power or speed being produced when it gets there." Matt Russ, US International Coach

Related Threads

  • heart
  • training
  • vdot








Back To Top

Tag A User

To tag a user, start typing their name here:
X

Free training & racing tools for runners, cyclists, swimmers & walkers.

Fetcheveryone lets you analyse your training, find races, plot routes, chat in our forum, get advice, play games - and more! Nothing is behind a paywall, and it'll stay that way thanks to our awesome community!
Get Started
Click here to join 113,906 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here