What do you put for maximum heart rate

Do you use one of the formulas, or do you use "the maximum you have ever observed", or something else?

At age 67, the (220-age) formula gives 153. There are some other published formulas the highest of which (that i've seen) would give 161.1 for my age.

I was doing the Brigham Young University jog test to see what it gave for my VO2max, which involves jogging one mile (I don't usually jog). My max HR for that mile was 170. (That was right at the end; it was not a spurious peak).

So, what do people think? Use 153, 161.1, or 170, or something else? And of course its a quiz, so also "and why do you say what you say?"!

Thanks!

0 TrippyZ over 6 years ago

Run to exhaustion over a period of 25 minutes. The first 5 mins at warm up increasing speed gradually. The last 10 minutes should be difficult. The last 5 minutes should be very hard. The last 2 minutes very very hard. You should feel terribly ill at the end. MaxHR is the highest recorded rate.

If you die during this test please contact your doctor.

0 mcbadger over 6 years ago

LOL at the doctor.
The formulae work OK for a lot of people, but there's a non-trivial fraction with maximum HR much higher than the formulae values. I'm 53, I've seen 199 in the last year, and regularly hit 200 a few years back..
The value I've used is from a sprint finish at the end of a 10k race, which I could be confident was a good reading, and I can vouch for feeling pretty rough at the end of it.

0 reittila over 6 years ago

Depends of you physical condition. The 220-age formula is just an average for average people. I would take 170 as a good starting point in this case.

0 Former Member over 6 years ago

220-age formula is way off for me. I use max recorded heart rate in my sprint finish at the end of last half marathon.

0 TomCon over 6 years ago

Sounds like folks do "highest ever seen"...and so i'll give that a shot!

By the way, does anybody know if a higher Max HR will make calculated calories for an activity (given all the exact same data except max HR) go up or down? Thanks.

0 C966 over 6 years ago

Sounds like folks do "highest ever seen"...and so i'll give that a shot!

By the way, does anybody know if a higher Max HR will make calculated calories for an activity (given all the exact same data except max HR) go up or down? Thanks.

MaxHR is the maximum heart rate your can achieve "physiologically", so if you have seen 170bpm it means that your maxHR is at the very least 170bpm, using the formulas' 153bpm estimate would be much further away from the real maxHR,

The age formula is notoriously unreliable and unscientific and can give way off the mark estimates.

Still, your maxHR could be higher than 170bpm, it is worthwhile to do a maxHR test you can even do on your own, since the more accurate values you input into your Garmin, the more accurate results it will give you back.

0 TomCon over 6 years ago

Well, I was thinking for a 1 mi jog for me...that might be pretty close to max. I don't usually jog! And it felt pretty max!! But, you're right, if i actually reached that, then my max is at least that...maybe i'll go 1-2 beats higher for max. So, when folks say "more accurate results back"...does that mean calorie burn? That is one of the reasons i got the watch, to better track calorie burn. Does anybody know if a higher max HR will give higher calorie burn or lower? Or, is it not really a factor in calorie burn? (given, say, that all the other observed data from an activity is identical, other than max HR). thanks!

0 C966 over 6 years ago

Well, I was thinking for a 1 mi jog for me...that might be pretty close to max. I don't usually jog! And it felt pretty max!! But, you're right, if i actually reached that, then my max is at least that...maybe i'll go 1-2 beats higher for max. So, when folks say "more accurate results back"...does that mean calorie burn? That is one of the reasons i got the watch, to better track calorie burn. Does anybody know if a higher max HR will give higher calorie burn or lower? Or, is it not really a factor in calorie burn? (given, say, that all the other observed data from an activity is identical, other than max HR). thanks!

It is very hard to hit your MaxHR and only for a very short time before you have to stop so you won't likely hit it in a steady pace jog unless you do intervals trying to reach it, it could be around 10% higher bpm than your anaerobic threshold. If you search google you will find DIY tests to find your maxHR which consist in incremental intervals so you are able to reach it before exhaustion prevents you from it.

As to the MaxHR affecting calorie burn calculation, if you base your Heart Rate Zones on the maxHR and if your maxHR value is not accurate then that will throw off your HR Zones and intensity of your workout, will throw off your VO2max, etc and that may affect the calorie calculation though I'm not sure how Garmin's calorie burn algorithm works exactly, but an accurate VO2max should be very important as I believe that is the value it would use to calculate your MET.

That said, I recommend to not read too much into the calorie burn value as they are notoriously unreliable since many factors needed to calculate the calorie expenditure cannot be accounted for by the watch (ex: running economy, wind, etc) so take the value with a grain of salt anyway.

0 Former Member over 6 years ago

If you did the test and hit 170 then your maximum hearth rate is 170. That’s it.. the MHR depend from person to person and it’s the maximum your heart can do at your age.. and then burning bands depend from MHR and your resting hearth rate. Once you have the maximum and the resting the bands are calculated as a % of these numbers...

its really easy as that...

and and if I may add... if you are in the phase we’re youre start running... the watch and Harmon connect will adapt.. my highest threshold for the zone 4 (where you want to spend most of your time) used to be 150... now it’s 167 if I consider my lactated threshold or 170 if I consider my MHR... so the program adapt based on your performances... and I think it’s just great.
when you start running you cannot keep running in your high end of zone 4 for probably more than few minutes (I couldn’t for a minute). The more you practice the more you can go up... after more than 14 months doing a really hard workout I peaked my hearth rate at 191 (I’m 50 years old). I still consider 189 as my highest (and I wear the band that is pretty damn accurate) .

so again this is the great thing about the farming devices and the sw... it keep listening to how your perform and how the body react and adapt your limit on what it sees and your performances ....

if if you’re not a professional runner just set the MHR to the number you got from your professional test and go from there...

calories are are never accurate (everyone knows that guy that can eat an entire cake shop in a day and it’s skinny as hell) that is called metabolism. How do we burn it depend on how we eat, what we eat etc... just set up a calorie goal that you know it’s a bit challenging and go from there (e.g I have. 3000 calories goal) it won’t be accurate but it give you a goal about being active... if you see that you keep get weitght then either you eat better or you increase your calories goal (I suggest to do the first )