high heart rate
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2014-12-17 10:04 PM |
32 | Subject: high heart rate I've never really given my heart rate to much of a thought. i know it is high but i figure thats just what it is. I am 27 years old and would consider myself in good shape. My max is around 202-204, which is higher than the "formula". When I am training or in a race i can easily sustain up in the 180's the whole race. I usually will start pulling back when it gets up around 187-188 early in a race (sprints, or running/cycling races) If i am just out for a 30 mile ride i will average a heart rate around 170-175 and really not feel pushing it at all. Recently before a running race while standing there before the start and bouncing around my heart rate was already at 130. To me this is normal, when i told a friend he thought i was lying until i showed him my Garmin. Does anyone else have a natural high heart rate? Is this something i should be concerned with? Also my resting heart rate is around 49-52. |
|
2014-12-18 5:46 PM in reply to: sharkbait! |
Regular 606 Portland, Oregon | Subject: RE: high heart rate Originally posted by sharkbait! Does anyone else have a natural high heart rate? Is this something i should be concerned with? Yes. I am 30. Max: 210, Marathon: 185 No. |
2014-12-19 7:50 AM in reply to: sharkbait! |
Member 1748 Exton, PA | Subject: RE: high heart rate Not as high as yours. I'm 45, I don't really know my max, but I do hit 180 and above at times. When I hit 180 I slow down, figuring that I don't need to push my heart rate higher. In races, I can spend hours in the 160 to 170 range. Resting 45 to 65 depending on how much training I've been doing. I think some people just naturally have higher heart rates. |
2014-12-19 9:51 AM in reply to: sharkbait! |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: high heart rate Some are high, some are low, many are in the middle, typical bell curve plot. My so called max was during a 5k at 189 but like others said its a useless number. More important my run HR LT threshold is 176 and my bike LT is about 168 and hasn't changed in the decade of triathlons. What is HR LT threshold, in theory what you can hold for 1 hour (there's a lot more to it) and determined using an abbreviated test per this article. Then YOUR HR training zones can be derived from the test result [user/settings/training log settings/HR zone manager]. |
2014-12-19 12:46 PM in reply to: Donto |
Pro 4578 Vancouver, BC | Subject: RE: high heart rate I'm 10 years older than you and those numbers aren't out of line for me. For track racing I regularly maintain about 180 per race. I think the highest I ever see is 197. |
2014-12-20 7:40 AM in reply to: sharkbait! |
Veteran 308 | Subject: RE: high heart rate My high rate is very high. I have been trying to figure out why for years, I went to two cardiologists. One of them made me wear a holter monitor for 24 hours. During my 8 mile run, my HR hit 199 at one point. I'm 40 years old, so 199 was pretty much close to my max. My HR hits 160/170 during kind of easy runs at 10 min per mile pace. Doctors tested me for different heart problems and found nothing. They said I should not worry about it. But my common sense is telling me that fast running must be too hard for my heart . I do not believe that 180/199 HR four times a week for an hour would be good for my heart, so I run much slower that I can. I'm trying keep it my HR below 160. |
|
2014-12-20 8:05 AM in reply to: #5075479 |
243 Lincoln, Nebraska | Subject: RE: high heart rate I'm 41 and the highest I've seen for me is 203 while running. A half marathon puts it around 175 to 185 during the whole thing. |
2014-12-20 10:55 AM in reply to: sharkbait! |
Master 2406 Bellevue, WA | Subject: RE: high heart rate Heart rate numbers vary a lot, both resting, average, and max. It is generally true, however, that a high heart rate when doing moderate exercise is indicative of poor overall conditioning more than anything else. Your heart rate is a response to the demands your aerobic energy production systems are placing on your cardio system. The more trained you are, the more efficient your body becomes. More efficiency translates to same speed at lower heart rate, or higher speed at same heart rate. You will also gain simple mechanical efficiency over time (more efficient running, in particular). In general, I will start an open marathon with my HR in the 160s, and end the race in the 190s. Depending on training, my marathon finish times are anywhere from 3:30 to 4:20, but they all have that same heart rate pattern. A clear example of higher speed at the same heart rate. A few people have other, more medical reasons for a high heart rate at moderate levels of exercise.I had a coworker that was starting out run training and bought an HRM. When she told me her HR numbers I was quite surprised. Resting heart rate of 70, but just walking in the office would push it past 90. Then any sort of running, even 12 min pace, pushed it to 130 in a moment, then it seemed to stabilize. At my urging she saw a doctor, and long story short she does have a minor heart thing that they could correct but she chose not to and it has no significant impact other than she has a higher HR than most when running. There is a simple field test you should to do to track training progress of your aerobic energy system. This is the "maximum aerobic function" aka MAF test. If you search the web, there are several versions of it but in short, warm up for a while like 20 minutes, then run 3 miles at keeping your HR fixed at a high Z1 / low Z2. If needed, drop your pace over time to keep your HR fixed at your chosen HR. Over time, you should be able to produce a higher pace at the same HR. I've done a number of MAF tests keeping my HR fixed at 150. Years ago, my pace would be 11 min per mile, and I had to walk a bit to keep it at 150 for the last mile. Cardiac drift would set in (climbing HR at the same pace). At my best training level, my MAF test pace would be 7:15 per mile, and rock steady at 150 not only for the 3 miles of the test but for 2-3 miles after that. For reference, I'm 49 with a resting HR around 55 and a max HR of 204 (which I saw a few months ago setting a PR of 22:12 in a 5K). |
2014-12-20 2:03 PM in reply to: brucemorgan |
Veteran 308 | Subject: RE: high heart rate Originally posted by brucemorgan Heart rate numbers vary a lot, both resting, average, and max. It is generally true, however, that a high heart rate when doing moderate exercise is indicative of poor overall conditioning more than anything else. Your heart rate is a response to the demands your aerobic energy production systems are placing on your cardio system. The more trained you are, the more efficient your body becomes. For reference, I'm 49 with a resting HR around 55 and a max HR of 204 (which I saw a few months ago setting a PR of 22:12 in 5K. |
2014-12-20 2:30 PM in reply to: 0 |
Master 2406 Bellevue, WA | Subject: RE: high heart rate Originally posted by slonce5 So you are suggesting slowing down and training with at 65-75% zone HR even if it means extremely low speed? Well, yes. I think a lot of "beginner triathletes" could benefit from working on their aerobic base, and that does involve working in Z1 and not just hammering away in Z3 or Z4. That's fine for sprint and Olympic distance perhaps, but it won't get you 26.2 miles or HIM or IM. Mark Allen was an early proponent of Phil Maffetone's approach to HR based training. I learned about this in the 2005 timeframe and used it to great effect, going from 5 hour marathon in 2004 to a 3:31 marathon in 2008 (and I must point out that would have likely been a 3:18 had I not injured my heel at mile 18). You can see this on my results on Athlinks, when I was into marathoning a lot from 2005 to 2008. Some more reading: Mark Allen on Heart Rate Training and Anyone still doing the Mark Allen/Phil Maffetone low heart rate training thing? Edited by brucemorgan 2014-12-20 2:34 PM |
2014-12-20 2:38 PM in reply to: brucemorgan |
Veteran 308 | Subject: RE: high heart rate According to Mark Allen, I should be training at 140 HR . I agree with him, when I was training all he time at 160-180 HR I was always exhausted. Not during runs but after them. Now looking back I see that probably my body did not have a chance o recover properly. Since I'm getting back into running after knee problems I have to slow down to 14mph to run at 145. I wonder how many months will pass before I see any significant improvements. |
|
2014-12-20 2:58 PM in reply to: slonce5 |
Master 2406 Bellevue, WA | Subject: RE: high heart rate Originally posted by slonce5 According to Mark Allen, I should be training at 140 HR . I agree with him, when I was training all he time at 160-180 HR I was always exhausted. Not during runs but after them. Now looking back I see that probably my body did not have a chance o recover properly. Since I'm getting back into running after knee problems I have to slow down to 14mph to run at 145. I wonder how many months will pass before I see any significant improvements. Weeks probably, not months. Aerobic fitness comes pretty fast to start, if training for it. And the formula based HRs are ok when just starting out, but field tests are more accurate. You might try one; BT has good articles on the subject. |
2014-12-20 3:02 PM in reply to: brucemorgan |
Veteran 308 | Subject: RE: high heart rate Originally posted by brucemorgan Originally posted by slonce5 According to Mark Allen, I should be training at 140 HR . I agree with him, when I was training all he time at 160-180 HR I was always exhausted. Not during runs but after them. Now looking back I see that probably my body did not have a chance o recover properly. Since I'm getting back into running after knee problems I have to slow down to 14mph to run at 145. I wonder how many months will pass before I see any significant improvements. Weeks probably, not months. Aerobic fitness comes pretty fast to start, if training for it. And the formula based HRs are ok when just starting out, but field tests are more accurate. You might try one; BT has good articles on the subject. How many times a week should I run to see improvements in weeks? |
2014-12-20 3:16 PM in reply to: 0 |
Master 2406 Bellevue, WA | Subject: RE: high heart rate Originally posted by slonce5 How many times a week should I run to see improvements in weeks? There are a lot of opinions on that, but for me running 3 times a week worked well. One long steady pace run at 150 bpm on the weekend (usually Sunday, after a Saturday bike ride), a Tuesday run, and a Thursday run. Tuesday would usually be a shorter but faster paced run (165 bpm) steady at a faster pace, and Thursday would be intervals or pyramids with slow-and-easy 125 BPM for most of it, with hard-and-fast intervals. That sort of training took me from 4:30 marathons to 3:30. Lots of 20 mile runs too. :-) Back in the fall of 2006 I used training like that to go from 4:10 in Bellevue (some hills) to 3:53 in Portland (pretty flat except for mile 18), and then 3:50 in Seattle (quite hilly the last half). 2006 Virginia Mason Team Medicine Seafair Marathon & Half Marathon And 5K Portland Marathon Seattle Marathon & Half Marathon 2006 Edited by brucemorgan 2014-12-20 3:21 PM |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|