Question about cardio heart rate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

DP, very in shape, 36/F. I could easily type at 171. I just did a 105 minute ride and my average HR was 158. I spent 40 minutes of that above 165. 170 is hard work but I can maintain for a long while When I get to 180-190 I'm huffing and puffing hard though and that wouldn't be able to multitask. 171 is mid zone 4 for me. My max is more like 198.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

DP, very in shape, 36/F. I could easily type at 171. I just did a 105 minute ride and my average HR was 158. I spent 40 minutes of that above 165. 170 is hard work but I can maintain for a long while When I get to 180-190 I'm huffing and puffing hard though and that wouldn't be able to multitask. 171 is mid zone 4 for me. My max is more like 198.

I wouldn't say "very in shape" with those HRs as a mid-30s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

DP, very in shape, 36/F. I could easily type at 171. I just did a 105 minute ride and my average HR was 158. I spent 40 minutes of that above 165. 170 is hard work but I can maintain for a long while When I get to 180-190 I'm huffing and puffing hard though and that wouldn't be able to multitask. 171 is mid zone 4 for me. My max is more like 198.

I wouldn't say "very in shape" with those HRs as a mid-30s.

Some people just have higher average heart rates. I went to a cardiologist actually while pregnant because my HR was higher than I liked. I think I have some underlying heart health risks due to it too. But my understanding is that the number is less important than how long you can maintain it.

My HR at rest is like 65. Before bed lying down its 60. I finish in the top 5% of peloton riders regularly, and not because my bike is miscalibrated. So whatever, I'm no Lance Armstrong or anything but I work out more frequently and longer than basically anyone else I know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

Yes, while you have STOPPED to idiotically respond. Maybe you need help foe your addiction. Seriously.

Addiction to DCUM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

DP, very in shape, 36/F. I could easily type at 171. I just did a 105 minute ride and my average HR was 158. I spent 40 minutes of that above 165. 170 is hard work but I can maintain for a long while When I get to 180-190 I'm huffing and puffing hard though and that wouldn't be able to multitask. 171 is mid zone 4 for me. My max is more like 198.

I wouldn't say "very in shape" with those HRs as a mid-30s.

Found the person who doesn't understand HRs.

Max HR & ranges are very individual and not particularly tied to whether one is in shape or not. Ignore those age-based formulas and pay attention to what your own personal max is (notice where you seem to top out when working hardest). Mine have been around the same since I was a nationals-level rower 30+ years ago.

Now, what *does* change is how quick I get up into the higher HRs - if I'm in shape, it takes longer (I can do more at a lower HR / more efficiency), if I'm out of shape, then my HR ramps more quickly and steeply.

[Anonymous]

OP this is just my anecdotal experience, but as I got older, I found that I was plateauing (sometimes even gaining weight) with hard-core cardio workouts. I had to switch to lower impact workouts that allowed my heart rate to stay in the fat burning zone. Sometimes that was just a brisk walk. Good luck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

DP, very in shape, 36/F. I could easily type at 171. I just did a 105 minute ride and my average HR was 158. I spent 40 minutes of that above 165. 170 is hard work but I can maintain for a long while When I get to 180-190 I'm huffing and puffing hard though and that wouldn't be able to multitask. 171 is mid zone 4 for me. My max is more like 198.

I wouldn't say "very in shape" with those HRs as a mid-30s.

Found the person who doesn't understand HRs.

Max HR & ranges are very individual and not particularly tied to whether one is in shape or not. Ignore those age-based formulas and pay attention to what your own personal max is (notice where you seem to top out when working hardest). Mine have been around the same since I was a nationals-level rower 30+ years ago.

Now, what *does* change is how quick I get up into the higher HRs - if I'm in shape, it takes longer (I can do more at a lower HR / more efficiency), if I'm out of shape, then my HR ramps more quickly and steeply.

No, I'm very familiar with HR and HR based training. While formula based max HR is crap, we'd expect to see a lower HR for a trained endurance athlete doing easy to moderate work. From a conditioning and fatigue load standpoint, time to elevate and decrease HR does matter, but you should also see a general lowering of HR for a given effort with increase in conditioning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

Lol I run six 8-minute miles while reading.

Are you holding on to the sides?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can read while doing cardio you aren’t working hard enough

I’m responding to this thread right now and my HR is currently 171 on my spin bike.

How? That seems pretty high unless you are overweight and out of shape.

DP. Nah. 171 is in my max zone. I would find it hard to talk but could sustain that for several minutes at a time.

49 yo woman who runs 5 days a week and 115 lbs.

50 year old who can sustain up to 180 for a time, but no way would I be responding to DCUM threads while there. Once I get over 160 BPM it is hard work.

Also because you have a life outside of DCUM. Let's get real.

DP, very in shape, 36/F. I could easily type at 171. I just did a 105 minute ride and my average HR was 158. I spent 40 minutes of that above 165. 170 is hard work but I can maintain for a long while When I get to 180-190 I'm huffing and puffing hard though and that wouldn't be able to multitask. 171 is mid zone 4 for me. My max is more like 198.

I wouldn't say "very in shape" with those HRs as a mid-30s.

Found the person who doesn't understand HRs.

Max HR & ranges are very individual and not particularly tied to whether one is in shape or not. Ignore those age-based formulas and pay attention to what your own personal max is (notice where you seem to top out when working hardest). Mine have been around the same since I was a nationals-level rower 30+ years ago.

Now, what *does* change is how quick I get up into the higher HRs - if I'm in shape, it takes longer (I can do more at a lower HR / more efficiency), if I'm out of shape, then my HR ramps more quickly and steeply.

No, I'm very familiar with HR and HR based training. While formula based max HR is crap, we'd expect to see a lower HR for a trained endurance athlete doing easy to moderate work. From a conditioning and fatigue load standpoint, time to elevate and decrease HR does matter, but you should also see a general lowering of HR for a given effort with increase in conditioning.

I’m the pp who you’re saying isn’t in shape. I wasn’t doing easy endurance level riding. I was in zone 3/4 threshold. And it took about 20 minutes to get my heart rate up and took sustained frequent zone 4 (out of 7) to keep it in the zone 4 (out of 5) hr zone. I was shooting to keep my HR up. Had I doing endurance level effort I would have stayed around 140 for most of the ride. FWIW. You know what they say about making assumptions.

[Anonymous]

So, if the formula-based HR is crap, how does one establish the best HR to work out at while you are getting back in shape?

[Anonymous]

When your HR is around 170-180, if you are in shape you have got to be moving pretty darn fast to get it there. So the stillness needed to type is what I'm not getting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When your HR is around 170-180, if you are in shape you have got to be moving pretty darn fast to get it there. So the stillness needed to type is what I'm not getting.

That’s the question, right? Can you phone in a cardio workout? The target heart rate charts I’ve seen don’t require people to get their rate up that high to get the befits of a cardio workout. What I’ve seen, a person could do and read/type etc. I agree that you won’t look like a fabulous athlete with this type of workout. But is it sufficient for heart health? Seems like it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, if the formula-based HR is crap, how does one establish the best HR to work out at while you are getting back in shape?

If you are just starting out I think it is fine to use the formula-based. Were it won't apply is to (say) the 50-year old who has been doing triathlons for 30 years.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone recommend a couple of website to explain:
the ranges/zones
Progression per fitness level