HRM, HR, MAXHR?

[Deleted User] · September 2003

I already mentioned that training and racing is highly individual thing. There is no right or wrong.

I am mainly interested in different opinions. 50 years ago fast times have been achieved without a HRM. Or the African runners have achieved great results (possibly by running in altitude).

My point is, HR is only one piece of a bigger puzzle.

[Deleted User] · September 2003

URR, If your point is "HR is only one piece of a bigger puzzle" then I don't hear anyone disagreeing with you. I don't think I've seen anyone say that a HRM is anything other than a tool to assist in training. How can it be anything else? Some people like to use that tool more than others, and many cope without it altogether. Some people achieve very fast times without wearing trainers. Does that mean we should all throw our trainers in the bin? Having the best trainers doesn't make us the best runners, trainers are just "one piece of a bigger puzzle". The same could be said for nutrition, hydration, stretching, speedwork, long runs...need I go on?

[Deleted User] · September 2003

URR, in your earlier posts on this thread you seem to be saying that HR and using a HRM is of no value in training. Sorry if I misunderstood you, but that is what it seemed to me you were saying. RHR is relevant, e.g. if my RHR is 75 then I need to put in a certain amount of effort to raise it to 150, but if my RHR is 50 I obviously need to put in more effort to raise it to 150. If I do not put in enough effort then my HR is not going to be high enough to have a significant training effect. If I put in too much effort and my HR is too high then I am not training efficiently. Also if you overtrain then your RHR goes up. So by monitoring your RHR you can catch that, and have a few easy days, or even rest days. Overtraining will result in poorer performance, and a person might be tempted to see a falling performance and think I must train harder, I am getting worse, where they should really be easing off. Monitoring your RHR will help you identify overtraining in an objective way and not fall inot this trap.

Saying that, I do not use a HRM all the time. I also run how I feel, e.g. this week I had 3 hard days in a row because I felt good. Monitoring HR and using a HRM is just one tool available to us, as has been said. The danger is getting carried away anything, whether it be HRM, pace (I ran this route in 40 mins last time some I have to run it faster this time), shoes, diet, etc.

Minks · September 2003

I have never used a HRM but I am going to go out and buy one very shortly. As someone who isn't naturally capable of judging pace/effort I think it will be very useful for me on long, slow runs (and certainly all the time when I start base training) to ensure that I don't go too quickly. I'm convinced that I've never actually run a long SLOW run or a recovery run - and I know I'm not training as effectively as I could be. I've improved both speed and stamina since I started running but I'm sure that with proper, consistent training my improvements could have been much bigger.

BUT - you have to go with what works for you. If you don't like gadgets, there's nothing wrong with that. If you do, there's nothing wrong with that either. Each to their own.

[Deleted User] · September 2003

Okay, I think there are a lot of interesting opinions. Please don't feel offended, I just want to challenge your argument.

Finally got back from my run with HRM. 80 Mins. on a quite hilly course, 34 mins. in "zone" (143-161), avg. HR 146, 962 Kcal, 50% fat burn. This is almost the same what I predicted (see first posting). I knew it will be aerobic anyway. Whenever I looked at the HRM it showed 185 and then fell 20 bps down to 165. Or 165 and then 125, not very reliable, I guess it's the dodgy old Polar HRM.

[Deleted User] · September 2003

Just got back from another session with my HRM

Typical session I do all the time, at least 4 times a week. (Note I had already 10m in my legs) 1 hr on the treadmill @ 6min/mile, got me 161 avg. HR. During the last 15 minutes the HR gradually climbed from 165 -> 172. I predicted it would be 160. In the end I got a stitch from the belt around chest.

The only useful information for me would be to see the avg. HR develop over a longer period (eg, 3 months). I guess if it would stay at the same level all the time then you do not make any improvements. If you can lower your avg HR then you can simply run faster and longer.

[Deleted User] · September 2003

HRM aficionados!

There is a good web site where everybody can check the personal stats

http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/maxhr.htm
Has all the race calculators, VO2Max and maxHR conversions.

Interesting, I played around with my numbers. It came up that my fastest race time is only worth 75% MHR, which is equivalent to an aerobic effort. Means, I didn't gave everything, I hardly made use of the anaerobic zone

Dawm! Why didn't I race with a HRM!!!!!!

[Deleted User] · September 2003

I think HRMs have a place for those following specific training programs and as Debster says may motivate others. I have always tended to train on the 'how I feel' basis unless doing eg a speed session, and although felling lousy, try and give it everything.
My GPS monitor definately motivates me, and I do find it difficult to train, particularly if there are no races to aim for.

WildWill · September 2003

URR - i am mister HRM and i dont feel 0fended, we all have our own aproach to what we do and that is what makes it fun

)

[Deleted User] · September 2003

I think it sounds like URR is getting to like his HRM! We might see him racing with it yet! :-)

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

HRM, HR, MAXHR?

Comments