Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Do HRM's work
![[Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/c774edbcdcfca1c46d1ae3ca35c1cd01_100.png)
(or put another way what am I doing wrong!!!)
Having decide that I've probably been over training for my second 10k in 3 weeks time (see other thread) I decided to try using a HRM to make me run at a more sensible rate.
Anyway did the calcs max rate (220 -age) = 168, resting rate =66 therefore working rate =102 (hopefully making sense so far) therefore a slow recovery run at 60% should mean rate of 127> so i strapped on my HRM and jogged as slow as I could 7.5K in 52 minutes (any slower I'd be walking) trouble is HRM was showing between 140 &155, average at end of run was 145, which is about 80% of max ie a tempo run.
Anyone any ideas what I'm doing wrong?
Having decide that I've probably been over training for my second 10k in 3 weeks time (see other thread) I decided to try using a HRM to make me run at a more sensible rate.
Anyway did the calcs max rate (220 -age) = 168, resting rate =66 therefore working rate =102 (hopefully making sense so far) therefore a slow recovery run at 60% should mean rate of 127> so i strapped on my HRM and jogged as slow as I could 7.5K in 52 minutes (any slower I'd be walking) trouble is HRM was showing between 140 &155, average at end of run was 145, which is about 80% of max ie a tempo run.
Anyone any ideas what I'm doing wrong?
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
Hi Neil and welcome to the forums
Sorry if I am going to come across a little blunt, but this subject has been covered many times and a quick use of the search function would have found many threads raising the same subject and providing the same answers
However, if you click this it will take you to a website which will give you various ways of working out YOUR heart rate rather than rely on a one-size-fits-all formula
You're so right Schmunks, here I am
.
+ 1 for what she said - I'm not going to repeat it as I've done it loads of times before, but if you read what's on previous threads, you'll hopefully get enough info. Schmunkee's list is extremely helpful, but the thing that you're doing wrong is following an insufficiently accurate formula.
Also, look on these threads or google John L Parker's Heart Rate Training For The Compleat Idiot.
This is a proven method of HR training that is endorsed by many, but similarly has it's detractors
I use the J L Parker method, it works for me.
N P, it looks as though we're the same age, but my max HR is 191 and I know that because that's the figure that I've reached through exercise. If I'd been using 168 as my max, all my calculations would have been out by significant amounts, enough to render HR training pretty much useless.
Whilst I agree, you need to run a proper max heart rate test, the flip side is that you're probably not as fit as you thought you were either, which is the point of using the HRM.
When ever some one first tries using one they find it a struggle to go slow enough to maintain the correct HR, given time and suffient training you can knock minutes off miles for the same HR.