VO2max And Calories Burned

Dude, training with heart rate is so 1970's! It's like jogging wearing a sweatband and listening to John Denver's Rocky Mountain High on your walkman. It's so wheat germ and granola!

Seriously though, we were talking about increasing (maximizing) your VO2 max. There's no better way to do that than running intervals, and you want to run them fast enough so that you're at least at your VO2 max pace, the pace at which you consume the most O2. As I mentioned earlier, when doing aerobic capacity intervals, heart rate lags effort. By the time your heart rate gets into the "proper zone," your interval is over and your walking already.

Although plenty of people train using heart rate, heart rate isn't a very good gauge of when you're at your VO2 max. Heart rate is a proxy for effort, and often not a very precise one. Heat, hydration, stress, all affect heart rate. For any given effort, heart rate can be all over the place. If you've been training too much lately your heart will let you know by only sluggishly increasing. On the other hand, when your body is ready and rearing to go, heart rate often responds very quickly to running effort.

If your interested in digging into the details, as I said, I recommend Friel's "Fast After Fifty." Key in on the aerobic capacity intervals. Another book I'd recommend is "The One Minute Workout," by Martin Gabala. Gabala is the researcher who sort of discovered what intervals can do you for you fitness and VO2 max. The book's title is to peak interests, but the book explains interval training and gives a number of examples of interval routines. Buy Friel's first.

I do a lot of intervals, and I do the run parts to the point that I am in zone 5 for quite a while, and believe me, I am huffing and puffing, and I do the walk parts at a power walk pace that keeps my heart in at least zone 3. This gives me the benefits of steady state and intervals at the same time, because I never get below zone 3.

Weather you say it's power, pace, heart rate, or what ever technical term you want to use... if you push yourself for x amount of time, for x number of times per week, you will increase your fitness level. You don't even really need to measure anything. I just like the data and being able to look at my workout history to gauge my progress.

And what's wrong with the 70's?

I had some great times back in them days...:)

I do a lot of intervals, and I do the run parts to the point that I am in zone 5 for quite a while, and believe me, I am huffing and puffing, and I do the walk parts at a power walk pace that keeps my heart in at least zone 3. This gives me the benefits of steady state and intervals at the same time, because I never get below zone 3.

Weather you say it's power, pace, heart rate, or what ever technical term you want to use... if you push yourself for x amount of time, for x number of times per week, you will increase your fitness level. You don't even really need to measure anything. I just like the data and being able to look at my workout history to gauge my progress.

And what's wrong with the 70's?

I had some great times back in them days...:)

In order to increase/maximize your Vo2max, you might want to consider adding short VO2 max intervals to your weekly workouts, independently of the regular hour long workout you do. In other words, on one or two days a week, do strictly a set of intervals, say 3 minute intervals with 3 minutes of rest in-between. Start with a couple of repetitions, increasing to a total of 5 intervals, (15 minutes of HIIT, and 15 minutes of rest.) It's my understanding that doing the intervals alone, while fresh, (not in the middle of an hour-long slog) can have greater positive effect on VO2 max. As discussed earlier, heart rate will be not so useful as a gauge of intensity, as it lags the effort. You'll need to decide on a pace. Joe Friel recommends doing a five minute time trial, determining your best average pace over 5 minutes, and then using that pace in your 3 minute intervals.

In order to increase/maximize your Vo2max, you might want to consider adding short VO2 max intervals to your weekly workouts, independently of the regular hour long workout you do. In other words, on one or two days a week, do strictly a set of intervals, say 3 minute intervals with 3 minutes of rest in-between. Start with a couple of repetitions, increasing to a total of 5 intervals, (15 minutes of HIIT, and 15 minutes of rest.) It's my understanding that doing the intervals alone, while fresh, (not in the middle of an hour-long slog) can have greater positive effect on VO2 max. As discussed earlier, heart rate will be not so useful as a gauge of intensity, as it lags the effort. You'll need to decide on a pace. Joe Friel recommends doing a five minute time trial, determining your best average pace over 5 minutes, and then using that pace in your 3 minute intervals.

I do something similar at my apartment complex. Each lap is .3 miles. I power walk a lap and run a lap. I do 5 laps of power walking and 5 laps of running, so total of 3 miles.

I this similar to what you are saying?

I respect the fact that you are into this Joe Friel dude, but there is also a lot of information and books on heart rate training too, and I am not going to discount that.

I do something similar at my apartment complex. Each lap is .3 miles. I power walk a lap and run a lap. I do 5 laps of power walking and 5 laps of running, so total of 3 miles.

I this similar to what you are saying?

I respect the fact that you are into this Joe Friel dude, but there is also a lot of information and books on heart rate training too, and I am not going to discount that.

Yes, there may be a lot of books, but which ones convey accurate information, accurate as of 2017? A little understanding of the issues will go a long way in your training, present and future. What I wrote isn't controversial at all. It's common knowledge among serious athletes. Joe Friel is the expert experts call on. How about Matt Fitzgerald? "Heart Rate Monitoring Is Useless At Very High Intensities."


http://running.competitor.com/2014/06/training/is-heart-rate-monitoring-worth-the-bother_7095/2

Dude, I am 52 so not a heck of a lot younger and my running VO2Max (which is not age dependent in any way) runs 45 to 51 depending on my current fitness level and I ran 6 miles today at 8:13 / mile pace and burned about 640 calories. My average HR was 153 BPM and max is 178 for reference.

Wasn't trying to put you down in any way, was an honest observation based on the data.

Your VO2Max might increase a bit after a few weeks, mine is lagging a little behind where my 735XT put it after only a few runs with the fenix.

I´ve changed from 735xt to Fenix 5 (and before I had a 620 and a 235). My VO2Max has decreased 6% from one to another (just one run). But it´s the normal thing when you change devices. Worst part is that you never get back to the past. I can´t reach the VO2max I got with my old forerunner 620

I may be over simplifying, but I would think that if your heart rate is higher than the person beside, if all other factors are equal, you are probably burning more calories than the person beside you. My simple take would be that the person running with a lower heart rate is running more efficiently (ie. their body is trained to a higher level and requires less exertion to complete the same task) and therefore you require more energy to achieve the same output.

This mostly incorrect.

What you're missing is that heart rate differences are mostly due to differences in aerobic fitness. Through a combination of adaptations, a fitter person has a higher capacity to process oxygen in working muscles. Basically, they have a bigger engine, so they can cruise comfortably at a speed that would be redlining for others. It doesn't mean that they consume less fuel (calories), though.

It's true that if all factors are equal, the person with a higher heart rate is probably burning slightly more, but the difference is indeed quite small. Running economy matters a bit. Also, you burn a tiny bit more as you approach your lactate turnpoint, because anaerobic metabolism is terribly inefficient. Again, the impact on overall calorie burn is very small.

Yes, there may be a lot of books, but which ones convey accurate information, accurate as of 2017? A little understanding of the issues will go a long way in your training, present and future. What I wrote isn't controversial at all. It's common knowledge among serious athletes. Joe Friel is the expert experts call on. How about Matt Fitzgerald? "Heart Rate Monitoring Is Useless At Very High Intensities."


http://running.competitor.com/2014/06/training/is-heart-rate-monitoring-worth-the-bother_7095/2

The CDC, the AHA, and the WHO all recommend 150 minutes or moderate or 75 minutes of vigorous activity per week to maintain a good fitness level (double to increase fitness level). Every fitness device on the market uses heart rate zones for training. most marathon runners train at very long distance's at very slow paces for races. Many experts recommend steady state cardio over HIIT for better overall cardio improvement.

I could barely walk a mile a little over 2 years ago. Now I can run 5 miles and power walk 10 miles. I did it by keeping my heart rate in the cardio zone for long periods of time. Not by going fast. Sure, I have gotten a little faster over that time, but going faster is not what raised my fitness level. Exercising in the cardio zone for x number of minutes and x number of days per week is what did it. Speed comes as time goes on and you have to go faster to get your heart rate up because your fitness level is improving.

To totally dismiss heart rate training and call it useless is absurd.

I had a stress test done about 2 1/5 years ago that did not come out good. They had to do a catheterization which uncovered that a small portion of the bottom of my heart was slightly enlarged. They told my I probably had a mini heart attack at some point. I was obese and extremely out of shape at that time, and I was told I had to start exercising or else. They recommended walking and getting my heart rate up for at least 30 minutes per day and at least 3 days a week. I just had an EKG, echocardiogram, and another stress test done within the past month, and they all came back 100% normal now.

None of this improvement had anything to do with speed. The speed only increased as my fitness level increased and I had to go faster to get my heart rate to the same level, or walk on hilly terrain at slower paces to get my heart rate up. Either way the goal is to get your heart rate up and keep it up. Exercising your heart and lungs makes them stronger along with your joints, bones, muscles, and circulation.

I would rather listen to the various organizations and my doctors who all recommend heart rate based training. I am trying to respect your methods, and you seem to be totally dismissing mine. But that's fine because what I am doing has been working for me.

Will I get faster?

Sure, because I have to keep my heart rate up.

I think the benefit of heart rate training possibly depends on your individual goals. I use HR zones for my fitness routine, purely because I have learnt (partially due to Garmins stats) what my threshold is before I have a major lactic acid issue. This helps me get out more often, as I am not suffering from muscle fatigue. When I run purely on instinct, I often suffer for the next couple of days.

This allows me to train and still enjoy other activities, without the associated issues from lactic acid buildup. Training this way is steadily improving my fitness. I have lost weight, but found I also have a lot more energy. I am faster on the tennis court, can walk the golf course without getting tired, spring up stairs rather than struggle etc. It (heart rate based training) is certainly helping me, as it tempers my enthusiasm during a run, which may otherwise result in me being too stiff to exercise for the next couple of days.

The CDC, the AHA, and the WHO all recommend 150 minutes or moderate or 75 minutes of vigorous activity per week to maintain a good fitness level (double to increase fitness level). Every fitness device on the market uses heart rate zones for training. most marathon runners train at very long distance's at very slow paces for races. Many experts recommend steady state cardio over HIIT for better overall cardio improvement.

I could barely walk a mile a little over 2 years ago. Now I can run 5 miles and power walk 10 miles. I did it by keeping my heart rate in the cardio zone for long periods of time. Not by going fast. Sure, I have gotten a little faster over that time, but going faster is not what raised my fitness level. Exercising in the cardio zone for x number of minutes and x number of days per week is what did it. Speed comes as time goes on and you have to go faster to get your heart rate up because your fitness level is improving.

To totally dismiss heart rate training and call it useless is absurd.

I had a stress test done about 2 1/5 years ago that did not come out good. They had to do a catheterization which uncovered that a small portion of the bottom of my heart was slightly enlarged. They told my I probably had a mini heart attack at some point. I was obese and extremely out of shape at that time, and I was told I had to start exercising or else. They recommended walking and getting my heart rate up for at least 30 minutes per day and at least 3 days a week. I just had an EKG, echocardiogram, and another stress test done within the past month, and they all came back 100% normal now.

None of this improvement had anything to do with speed. The speed only increased as my fitness level increased and I had to go faster to get my heart rate to the same level, or walk on hilly terrain at slower paces to get my heart rate up. Either way the goal is to get your heart rate up and keep it up. Exercising your heart and lungs makes them stronger along with your joints, bones, muscles, and circulation.

I would rather listen to the various organizations and my doctors who all recommend heart rate based training. I am trying to respect your methods, and you seem to be totally dismissing mine. But that's fine because what I am doing has been working for me.

Will I get faster?

Sure, because I have to keep my heart rate up.

Hey, I think it's great that running has improved your health. Congrats. But this whole subtopic started off with you being less than satisfied with your VO2 max. It's low. As I've tried to explain, the best way to increase (and maintain) your VO2 max is with interval training. No rocket science here. It's pretty standard stuff. I never said heart rate training is useless. I said it's just about useless for *interval* training. If you'd like to increase your VO2 max, I'd recommend a series of 3 minute intervals, with the same amount of rest in-between each interval. Ten minute warmup, three minute interval while you're sucking down O2 at your max, then three minutes walk. Repeat a couple of times, and then a five minute warm down. How do you decide how fast to run each interval? Not with heart rate. Heart rate won't cut it. You can just run your ass off if you want until you're about to poop, but that's not necessary. You only need to run at a pace at which your body's O2 consumption has peaked, your VO2 max. You can go to a lab and have your VO2max pace measured, or you can simply estimate it as the average pace you can muster over your fastest five minute running time trial. That average pace is a good estimate of your VO2 max pace.

For a guy your age, once a week hard interval workout is probably best. If you can handle two, then great, but remember that recovery after intervals takes longer, they take more out of you. Work that into your training program, and you'll break through your VO2 max ceiling.

What don't you get? This isn't some esoteric training plan. It's pretty conventional.

Hey, I think it's great that running has improved your health. Congrats. But this whole subtopic started off with you being less than satisfied with your VO2 max. It's low. As I've tried to explain, the best way to increase (and maintain) your VO2 max is with interval training. No rocket science here. It's pretty standard stuff. I never said heart rate training is useless. I said it's just about useless for *interval* training. If you'd like to increase your VO2 max, I'd recommend a series of 3 minute intervals, with the same amount of rest in-between each interval. Ten minute warmup, three minute interval while you're sucking down O2 at your max, then three minutes walk. Repeat a couple of times, and then a five minute warm down. How do you decide how fast to run each interval? Not with heart rate. Heart rate won't cut it. You can just run your ass off if you want until you're about to poop, but that's not necessary. You only need to run at a pace at which your body's O2 consumption has peaked, your VO2 max. You can go to a lab and have your VO2max pace measured, or you can simply estimate it as the average pace you can muster over your fastest five minute running time trial. That average pace is a good estimate of your VO2 max pace.

For a guy your age, once a week hard interval workout is probably best. If you can handle two, then great, but remember that recovery after intervals takes longer, they take more out of you. Work that into your training program, and you'll break through your VO2 max ceiling.

What don't you get? This isn't some esoteric training plan. It's pretty conventional.

I started this thread because my F3HR shows my VO2max as fair to good, my A3P shows me as good, and my V800 shows me as good. The first reading I got from my F5 was poor, and the calories burned shows about half the calorie burn as all my other devices.

I also mentioned 2 or 3 times that I do intervals. My apartment complex is .3 miles per lap, s o I do 5 power walk laps and 5 run laps for a total of 3 miles. On the run laps I do push myself. I can only stay at close to my MHR for so long without having to stop. I probably do this 1 to 3 times per week, and I also do steady state (run 3 to 5 miles) 1 to 3 times per week. On recovery days I power walk or just casual walk depending on how beat up I feel. On the weekends I have been getting into trail running because I want to strengthen all those muscles around my old ass joints...:)

plus it's fun as hell...:)

One thing I should probably do more of is recovery. I tend to be a little hard core and many of my activities that start out as recovery turn into a workout.

I have been thinking about the device under counting the calories, but now I think it is probably correct, and most other devices over count calories. I always only ate back half the exercise calories anyway.

Also, I did a 3 mile run at lunch yesterday and my VO2max went up a little, so maybe it takes time for the device to become more accurate.

I think speed will increase as your fitness level increases because you will have to go faster to get your heart rate up, so however you want to look at it or measure it, if you push yourself your fitness level will improve. I hope we can at least agree on that...:)

Just because we look at things differently doesn't mean we cannot improve fitness.