for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Heart rate

1 lurker | 301 watchers

Dillthedog 21 Mar 4:03pm, 21 Mar 2025 6,957 posts	Quote Pin Dillthedog I found motivation in making constant slow gains, particularly running the same route regularly and seeing the ~~strava~~ graph (sorry Mr Fetch) for matched runs. While you may not think you are making progress that shows that you are. Similarly, I had a fairly sharp hill on my route which to begin with I had to walk. Slowly I got further up the hill without walking until I could run the whole length. Not quite the same sense of achievement that you may get from a marathon pb, but still worth a fist bump when you do then. Good luck with the next few months, you may find that an extended base building actually does you some good.
J2R 27 Mar 1:25pm, 27 Mar 2025 5,937 posts	Quote Pin J2R Has anyone here specifically targeted zone 1 in their training? As I mentioned earlier, until I get my angioplasty (which should be in the next couple of months), I have been told only to train zones 1 and 2. And to play safe, I have been hitherto sticking to zone 1. Or at least, I think I have, because I'm finding it difficult determining what zone 1 actually is, as it doesn't have an obvious biological marker like the 1st ventilatory threshold at the top of zone 2. One thing I've seen is that zone 1 is up to 60% of your HRmax. So, using the heart rate reserve (Karvonen) method, that gives me 118bpm, which is what I have been using. But if I were to use 60% of straight HRmax, it would be 99bpm, which would be a much lower level of effort. But what if I use the method recommended by Joe Friel and others, using percentages not of HRmax but of my lactate threshold heart rate, determined by his suggested flat-out 30 minute test? Well, I haven't done a test as such, but I ran a 5 mile race flat out in just over 30 minutes, so the average HR for the last 20 minutes of that, 159, can't be that far out. So I take 85% of that as the top of zone 1, following Friel, and I get 135bpm! So, I have 3 figures, 99bpm, 118bpm and 135bpm, which are so disparate as to be ridiculous! In a test run this morning, I looked at what pace and HR I would be at when fully warmed up and doing 5 steps in, 5 steps out per breath, which I think must by definition be classed as very easy, presumably zone 1 or at most low zone 2, and that took me to 122bpm max, 117bpm average in the km test. In any case, it was very comfortable chatting pace. I think I may stick with that for the next little while.
Shades 27 Mar 1:38pm, 27 Mar 2025 6,733 posts	Quote Pin Shades A few years ago, I often ran marathons with runners older than me and who had developed some heart problems and either had had treatment or were awaiting treatment. At that time the general advice from their consultants seemed to be to stay below 120bpm.
Dave A 27 Mar 2:04pm, 27 Mar 2025 24,594 posts	Quote Pin Dave A ave you looked at MAF HR training? The basic premise is for easy runs to be no higher than 180bpm minus your age.
J2R 27 Mar 2:18pm, 27 Mar 2025 5,938 posts	Quote Pin J2R Shades wrote:A few years ago, I often ran marathons with runners older than me and who had developed some heart problems and either had had treatment or were awaiting treatment. At that time the general advice from their consultants seemed to be to stay below 120bpm. I wonder what the basis of that was? The heart rate should, I imagine, be pretty much an individual figure, different for everyone. But maybe 120bpm was deemed to be generally safe.
J2R 27 Mar 2:20pm, 27 Mar 2025 5,939 posts	Quote Pin J2R Dave A wrote:ave you looked at MAF HR training? The basic premise is for easy runs to be no higher than 180bpm minus your age. Funnily enough, I was talking about just this to a running friend this morning, when he reminded me of the 180bpm minus age figure. That gives me 116bpm, very close to the figure I've been working with.
Shades 27 Mar 2:23pm, 27 Mar 2025 6,735 posts	Quote Pin Shades I guess it was considered safe and maybe easier instructions than zone 1 or zone 2 particularly if the runner is not familiar with HR zones. 120bpm is 75%MHR for me. I'm now of a similar age as the runners I mentioned.
J2R 27 Mar 2:52pm, 27 Mar 2025 5,940 posts	Quote Pin J2R I'm certainly happy to restrict my running to 120bpm for the next few weeks. Probably gives me around 8:30 mins/mile, which is easily enough to keep things ticking over nicely.
larkim 27 Mar 3:27pm, 27 Mar 2025 27,010 posts	Quote Pin larkim This might be an unfair slight on physicians, but I get the impression that GP and cardiology practices up and down the country tend to deal in round approximations for troublesome heart rate numbers and thresholds. The 220-age is still pretty commonly used for example. A relative of mine who is a Physician Associate tells me that it is still what is taught to be used when consulting with a patient about any initial cardiac issues. Karvonnen / HRR seems to me a pretty sensible way of approaching things - providing you know your upper and lower bounds, you at least know the range. But then whether nice round %age numbers really match your physiology is another thing; 60% for one individual could be just above a tipping point for "harm", whereas 62% could be the threshold for someone else. LT1 is obviously another data point, but even then that is not directly linked to the way your heart is working; it's a correlation of when various things get activated in your bloodstream and muscles in relation to the speed of your heart beats. Other things would presumably influence that such as blood pressure, heart stroke volume etc etc. All of which suggests "best guess" for yourself is the best approach!
Chrisull 27 Mar 3:37pm, 27 Mar 2025 22,752 posts	Quote Pin Chrisull The latest Garmin Fenix 7 (or is there an 8 now) is continually tweaking my MAX hr by a beat or two based on data from all my runs. How accurate is that these days considering I've not even attempted to run near my max HR for years? My gut feeling is, it probably isn't that wrong.

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

Show full description...

Related Threads

Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire. Jul 2023
Jack daniels marathon plan help May 2014
Polarized training Feb 2025
Low Resting/ High Training Heart Rate Jan 2021
No limit to the benefits of exercise in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease Jan 2021
Resetting Max Heart Rate Dec 2020
Resting Heart Rate: Is it normal Oct 2020
Heart rate zones Jul 2020
Running Heart rate Jun 2020
Heart Rate monitors Jun 2020

heart
training
vdot

Report This Content

You can report any content you believe to be unsafe. Please let me know why you believe this content is unsafe by choosing a category below.

Thank you for your report. The content will be assessed as soon as possible.

Heart rate

About This Thread

Related Threads

Report This Content

Tag A User

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