Other/Mixed Personalized Heart Rate Zones

[Deleted member 5559]

I had some concern over the default heart rate zones on my Polar. I could nasal breath into zone 3 so I wanted to personalize my zones to better align with "Training for the New Alpinism" heart rate zones. @mrprevost provided me some recommended methods a while ago for identifying heart rate zones. I've found that his recommended method matches the Karvonen method nearly exactly. If using a heart rate monitor, I highly recommend personalizing your zones using a more accurate method than (220-age)*zone %. It doesn't change MAF rate or anything due to that rate still being based on simple 180-age but it helped me categorize my training a little better.

For example:

Zone 1 (50-60%)

Standard Method (Polar Default): 93-111 bpm
Karvonen: 118-131 bpm​

MAF: 146 bpm

Standard Method = Top of Zone 3
Karvonen = Top of Zone 2​

 

[elli]

I did the following:
My max hr is when I feel veryvery close to thr... up. This is at ~175 . I take this as my personal max which I would use for calculations if I was planning practice according to hr regularly.
Example, given that the numbers may vary +/-X
Since I use my hr monitor mainly for aquajogging I have to calculate differently. Hr in water is about 10 beats lower than e.g. jogging on land. If peak hr is 158 during sprints in water it would be 168 on land, while the resistance - the power you need to move forward- being higher in water it might be even a bit more.
What do I mean by that? -
1.I tried to figure out my personal hr zones and do not let the hr monitor do anything else but showing the hr.
2. I sprint close hr max in water.

Does that make any sense?

 

[mprevost]

A good example of how variable this can be is a couple of athletes I tested in my lab a few years back. Both were 19 years old, and both were very fit cross country runners. Both achieved a VO2 max value in the mid 70s (elite). One had a max heart rate of about 212 or so and the other about 180. Most people are not aware of how much variability there is in max heart rate, and as a result, heart rate zones.

 

[elli]

A good example of how variable this can be is a couple of athletes I tested in my lab a few years back. Both were 19 years old, and both were very fit cross country runners. Both achieved a VO2 max value in the mid 70s (elite). One had a max heart rate of about 212 or so and the other about 180. Most people are not aware of how much variability there is in max heart rate, and as a result, heart rate zones.

Then you have the professional background for what I have tried to do on my own.

 

[Anna C]

A good example of how variable this can be is a couple of athletes I tested in my lab a few years back. Both were 19 years old, and both were very fit cross country runners. Both achieved a VO2 max value in the mid 70s (elite). One had a max heart rate of about 212 or so and the other about 180. Most people are not aware of how much variability there is in max heart rate, and as a result, heart rate zones.

Interesting. I'm wondering if this effect is more linear, or does it just increase the spread? So for these two athletes, would their "zones" start at the same number, and one one with the higher Max HR just have a wider range in each zone?

 

[Steve Freides]

When I used a HRM for a brief period a decade or two ago, I came up with what I thought was an easy way to determine my own max HR. I went out for a run that started and ended at home. As I was about a mile from home, I picked up the pace a little, and the closer I got to home, the faster I ran. My last hundred yards or so were all-out, as fast as I possibly could go, a nothing-left-in-the-tank effort.

The HRM recorded a max HR, and that’s what I recorded and subsequently used. If memory serves, it was 184 bpm, and I was in my early 40’s at the time.

Isn’t this easy enough to do that everyone ought to do it for themselves from time to time?

-S-

 

[mprevost]

Interesting. I'm wondering if this effect is more linear, or does it just increase the spread? So for these two athletes, would their "zones" start at the same number, and one one with the higher Max HR just have a wider range in each zone?

Well it is sorta liner. Consider that they both had resting heart rates in the 40s. Draw a straight line from there to max heart rate for each and each one is a linear increase with work intensity to max but one has a steeper slope (the one with the higher max heart rate). But, the other (the one with the lower max heart rate) would have a higher stroke volume at max HR so it evens out.

Their HR zones would be quite different though. They would track pretty much with standard percentages.

 

[mprevost]

When I used a HRM for a brief period a decade or two ago, I came up with what I thought was an easy way to determine my own max HR. I went out for a run that started and ended at home. As I was about a mile from home, I picked up the pace a little, and the closer I got to home, the faster I ran. My last hundred yards or so were all-out, as fast as I possibly could go, a nothing-left-in-the-tank effort.

The HRM recorded a max HR, and that’s what I recorded and subsequently used. If memory serves, it was 184 bpm, and I was in my early 40’s at the time.

Isn’t this easy enough to do that everyone ought to do it for themselves from time to time?

-S-

For sure. A hard mile effort with a sprint at the end is a pretty good way to estimate max heart rate.

 

[Anna C]

But, the other (the one with the lower max heart rate) would have a higher stroke volume at max HR so it evens out.

Hmm... great point!