# Heartrate question - Untrained -> Trained



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm 49.5 years old, and spent most of the pandemic sitting on my ass doing nothing. I'm 6'3 and 203lbs. I quit my 1-2 pack per week on\off smoking finally for good in dec 21. I've put in a solid 6 weeks of 7-10 hours of Z2 or MAF style base building + strength training. I can set my treadmill to 5 incline and 4 mph and walk for hours at a heart rate around 125, and can tightly control it to whatever I want by changing speed/incline. 

Based on every estimation method possible, my max heart rate should be somewhere around 170 (i.e. 220-age etc). When I go ride anything except flat pavement, my heart rate is averaging 165 over 1.5 hours and hitting a max of 185. I use both the latest apple watch and a polar heart strap. I get the same results working out fasted vs fully fueled. I for sure don't think the treadmill work is translating to the bike from a muscle use perspective, but I do see similar results if I run on the treadmill vs incline walking. I am well versed in MAF training theories etc. As I am sitting here typing this, my heart rate is 63. When I sleep it usually bottoms out around 49-53. 

I'm confused about why my max is so far over my theoretical max. I have heard alot of theories on this:

Untrained athletes heart can go past max due to 'thrashing' (my term, don't know the right medical one).
Untrained heart can't pump as much\efficiently as trained heart can per stroke so has to beat faster.
People have different size hearts genetically. Smaller hearts beat faster and its perfectly normal.

I have some cardiologist appts and a stress test set up this week, but wanted to hear from other people's experiences. 


Do you have a HR that is way above the theoretical max for your age?
Did your Max HR decrease as you trained?
Did you have similar experience to mine that was related to a medical issue?


----------



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

I should add, my apple watch is the latest and has the ecg. It's never detected an abnormal rhythm (afib etc). I did have an "SVT" event last hear where my HR went to 220 while I was just sitting on the couch and paramedics broke it with a medication. Drs said it's an electrical issue and I should think about meds or an ablation if it happens more frequently, but it hasn't happened again.


----------



## DeoreDX (Jul 28, 2007)

Sounds pretty similar to numbers I get at 46yo if I do a hard effort 1-1.5 hours. Except I have seen 190's on the HRM.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Max heartbeat derived by some formula is really kind of pointless. I've always hit higher numbers than the 'calculated max heart rate'. 

You mentioned elsewhere you've got a stress-test coming up. Talk to your cardiologist about this. You'll get much better, and much more tailored, information


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

220-age is an average. Individualized max heart rates will fluctuate around that average, but some could deviate quite a bit from it. Sounds like yours is around 185 minimum. I would go with that rather than 220-age.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

220-age is useless. You want to know your max heart rate? Get a stress test, or more conveniently, push to the point where you can go no further. Take your pulse. That's YOUR max HR.
I got a Stress echo cardiogram at age 60. My max was 203, as I recall. I'm about to hit 70 and so far this season my max was 186. Other than the fact that I didn't die, it's meaningless.

Edit: Just for the hell of it, I just checked my Wahoo app for HR on Navajo Rocks in Moab from a couple of weeks ago.
2 hrs 37 min, average HR over the ride was 159 and max was 184. 63% of the time HR between 160-178. 26% in what they say is the "cardio" zone. Sadly, not nearly enough to burn off a pizza at Pasta Jay's!
It's a pretty decent app and ties in with Strava for tracking.

It also gives you your "best" 20 minute HR which, I guess is useful for calculating training zones?


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

I have a degree in exercise physiology, as others have stated above, virtually all formulas for max HR are junk, any math-based calculation, Karvonen or otherwise is really no more accurate than a BMI. It can describe trends or expected norm ranges in a large group of people, but is almost useless for a single person.

You have an Apple Watch, the best way to calculate training zones is to put in a few true max efforts of several minutes each- long enough for your HR to stabilize at max. From there you can calc your 'training zones'.
That said- even your traning zones have a little variance based on your lactate threshold and VO2 max. But that's a rabbit hole and not worth the worry.

FWIW, I'm 41, and My Garmin regularly sees 200-202 BPM on a 2-4 minute singlespeed climbing effort. I've had "hard" rides of 2 hours average in the 180's.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

The 220-age formula is pretty well useless. One of those things that was never really based on any solid reasearch (or any at all) but has been stated as fact for years.

General trend is your Max HR declines with age. How much it declines and what it actually is varies massively.


----------



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

Anyone noticed their max changing as they become more trained?


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

TBoneAz said:


> Anyone noticed their max changing as they become more trained?


Donno, but I'd be willing to bet what you think of as 'max' before and after is different.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

TBoneAz said:


> Anyone noticed their max changing as they become more trained?


Haven't noticed max changing, but ability to sustain near max and time to recover from max certainly change.


----------



## Noplacelikeloam (Mar 2, 2021)

dysfunction said:


> Donno, but I'd be willing to bet what you think of as 'max' before and after is different.


This made me laugh. Spot on.


----------



## Noplacelikeloam (Mar 2, 2021)

Impetus said:


> I have a degree in exercise physiology, as others have stated above, virtually all formulas for max HR are junk, any math-based calculation, Karvonen or otherwise is really no more accurate than a BMI. It can describe trends or expected norm ranges in a large group of people, but is almost useless for a single person.
> 
> You have an Apple Watch, the best way to calculate training zones is to put in a few true max efforts of several minutes each- long enough for your HR to stabilize at max. From there you can calc your 'training zones'.
> That said- even your traning zones have a little variance based on your lactate threshold and VO2 max. But that's a rabbit hole and not worth the worry.
> ...


This! While I don't have a sports degree, I am ACSM Gold, former coach and PT and completely agree. These days, the basis for Max HR is more of concern for a manufacturers liability of a heart attack than a useful measurement of performance.


----------



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

Lionel_Hutz said:


> Haven't noticed max changing, but ability to sustain near max and time to recover from max certainly change.


I sure as hell hope so LOL. 



Noplacelikeloam said:


> Max HR is more of concern for a manufacturers liability of a heart attack


I'm just trying not to blow myself up at this point TBH!.


----------



## fredman1085 (10 mo ago)

TBoneAz said:


> I'm 49.5 years old, and spent most of the pandemic sitting on my ass doing nothing. I'm 6'3 and 203lbs. I quit my 1-2 pack per week on\off smoking finally for good in dec 21. I've put in a solid 6 weeks of 7-10 hours of Z2 or MAF style base building + strength training. I can set my treadmill to 5 incline and 4 mph and walk for hours at a heart rate around 125, and can tightly control it to whatever I want by changing speed/incline.
> 
> Based on every estimation method possible, my max heart rate should be somewhere around 170 (i.e. 220-age etc). When I go ride anything except flat pavement, my heart rate is averaging 165 over 1.5 hours and hitting a max of 185. I use both the latest apple watch and a polar heart strap. I get the same results working out fasted vs fully fueled. I for sure don't think the treadmill work is translating to the bike from a muscle use perspective, but I do see similar results if I run on the treadmill vs incline walking. I am well versed in MAF training theories etc. As I am sitting here typing this, my heart rate is 63. When I sleep it usually bottoms out around 49-53.
> 
> ...


Max heart rate is very specific to the individual. I've always had a high Max, when I raced (road and mtb) in my later 30's, it was tested (by USCF National Coach Clark Natwick) at 196. I had friends who raced and worked every bit as hard as me and were every bit as fast too, and their max was in the lower 180's.

Now, I'm 63 and my Garmin is saying my Max hit so far is 185. Personally, I believe your Max heart rate is also tied into your fitness. Your heart is a muscle and can work harder and faster the more it is trained. When I was out of shape the last few years, I could barely hit 170, now that I've been riding again, it's gone up (same device). I doubt I'll ever get above or maybe even 'to' 190, but it feels good to be able to push hard again.

Because of these things I find it frustrating when the media states that so-and-so's heart rate is this or that during an event, as if that particular number means anything other than that's his/her heart rate. The guy right next to him might be 10 beats higher or lower and yet they're likely in very similar condition. So, the numbers are interesting but meaningless unless you also know their personal max heart rate. Again, just based on my absurd amount of reading in my youth and my own personal experience and observations. Other's may vary.


----------



## DennisT (Dec 29, 2019)

TBoneAz said:


> Anyone noticed their max changing as they become more trained?


Don't know about 'max' specifically, but HRs that used to force me to stop and lean on my handlebars now are only mildly uncomfortable. So my tolerance is definitely going up.


----------



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

fredman1085 said:


> Max heart rate is very specific to the individual. I've always had a high Max, when I raced (road and mtb) in my later 30's, it was tested (by USCF National Coach Clark Natwick) at 196. I had friends who raced and worked every bit as hard as me and were every bit as fast too, and their max was in the lower 180's.
> 
> Now, I'm 63 and my Garmin is saying my Max hit so far is 185. Personally, I believe your Max heart rate is also tied into your fitness. Your heart is a muscle and can work harder and faster the more it is trained. When I was out of shape the last few years, I could barely hit 170, now that I've been riding again, it's gone up (same device). I doubt I'll ever get above or maybe even 'to' 190, but it feels good to be able to push hard again.
> 
> Because of these things I find it frustrating when the media states that so-and-so's heart rate is this or that during an event, as if that particular number means anything other than that's his/her heart rate. The guy right next to him might be 10 beats higher or lower and yet they're likely in very similar condition. So, the numbers are interesting but meaningless unless you also know their personal max heart rate. Again, just based on my absurd amount of reading in my youth and my own personal experience and observations. Other's may vary.


Exactly what I was looking for - Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Notthatbryan (Aug 7, 2021)

My max HR is substantially higher than the 220 - age predicts. At 42 it says my max HR should be 178. My actual max is around 210. It's always been high my whole life. resting HR is mid 50bpm, currently my Garmin says my 7 day resting HR is 56.


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

As many have mentioned...220-max is just a guideline and fairly meaningless. The stress test by a doc method returned 204 for me back when I was about 40ish. At 51, I hit 178 last week during a fairly hard effort.

Over the past 3 years, my fitness has gotten quite a bit better and I tend to have a lower heartrate during hard efforts. But, I have no idea if my max has changed. My recovery from elevated (170+) to reasonable (<120) seems a lot faster than when I was out of shape.


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

TBoneAz said:


> ...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just trying not to blow myself up at this point TBH!.


I'm over 50 and do this all the time. Fortunately, I still recover pretty quickly. But blowing ones self up periodically is a good way to find and feel that threshold, and to test your ability to recover.
During a race (which I do seldom), I will be on the rivet for the whole race (180bpm +/-, 75-120 minutes - usually there's a noticeable lull somewhere after 75 minutes, then something happens and I get back to it). I'm sure my power output is comparatively pretty lame to 20 yrs ago, but I still _feel_ the same. As my fitness improves, my power output increases, but my HR is the same and I feel the same. The recovery time generally gets shorter and shorter, which is a cool feeling.

-F

PS - I also trail run - I really enjoy it - but the only benefit to MTBing is running up and down big hills ("buffering lactic acid" I think is how I've heard it). Running on the flats only helps my cardio, but does little for performance on the bike.


----------



## abeckstead (Feb 29, 2012)

I'm 44 and my max HR is higher than the 220-age formula. I looked at data from a few races and used my max HR from them to set up my zones. From races, I know what the HR number is that my chest is pounding out of control and my legs stop working. I setup my zones and have HR % displayed on my Wahoo computer. I can camp at 98% for the entire race if I choose, or stay under 80% for those long endurance days and save my bullets for the hard efforts.


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

Fleas said:


> PS - I also trail run - I really enjoy it - but the only benefit to MTBing is running up and down big hills. Running on the flats only helps my cardio, but does little for performance on the bike.


I've started running again, with a goal of doing a marathon. I used to be a runner (4:12 mile in high school), but running on a scholarship in college made me HATE it. Anyway, I am unpleasantly surprised at how little my biking fitness helps my running, ha!

With running, I can get my heart rate up quickly, easily, and hold it there. Mountain biking, not so much.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

HRV is probably the most useful hr info. My max hr changes from day to day.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> HRV is probably the most useful hr info. My max hr changes from day to day.


How do you know your max HR changes day to day? Do you mean literally, as you hit it everyday or are you speaking more figuratively?

And how do you use HRV?


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

tick_magnet said:


> How do you know your max HR changes day to day? Do you mean literally, as you hit it everyday or are you speaking more figuratively?
> 
> And how do you use HRV?



I seems to be the best way to monitor optimal training and recovery status, so far.

So many factors affect heart rate, many are indicated by hrv. Literally I might easily be able to hit 170bpm during max efforts one day and a few days later might only be able to hit 145 doing the same effort (verified by power meter)

Heart rate can be a great training tool but I don't think it's very useful for me as far as staying in particular training zones.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

So are you saying hrv is the degree with which your HR varies at the same power? Or are you using some of the more formal statistical measures that are now available on apps, etc?

I have noticed that if I'm fatigued, I can't hit my max. Actually, I can never hit my max on the roads. But off road, it's a lot easier for some reason.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

tick_magnet said:


> So are you saying hrv is the degree with which your HR varies at the same power?




No, but that is a small part of it. Better to google "HRV" than to hear my fumbling explanation of it. It's pretty complicated.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

I've been looking into it. But it seems like there are some issues still to be worked out. I think lots of people are jumping on the hrv bandwagon because it's the latest new thing. Not saying it's not valid but I think it's still an evolving area. The recent hrv based dfa alpha test for aerobic threshold was hailed as the next evolution in training and it turned out to be a huge fail. Even one of the original innovators, (Altini?) no longer promotes it.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

tick_magnet said:


> I've been looking into it. But it seems like there are some issues still to be worked out. I think lots of people are jumping on the hrv bandwagon because it's the latest new thing. Not saying it's not valid but I think it's still an evolving area. The recent hrv based dfa alpha test for aerobic threshold was hailed as the next evolution in training and it turned out to be a huge fail. Even one of the original innovators, (Altini?) no longer promotes it.




Agree. Still it's a lot more useful than just looking at hr numbers alone.


----------



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

Update: My cardiac stress test confirmed my max at 185. Got there quicker than I would like, so there is tons of work to do, but DR approved so I don't have any issues. Another useful tidbit is my apple watch 6 was dead on with the 10 lead lab ecg the whole time - I was impressed. . I actually had to repeat the test on 2 different days due to a computer malfunction on day 1.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

baker said:


> I've started running again, with a goal of doing a marathon. I used to be a runner (4:12 mile in high school), but running on a scholarship in college made me HATE it. Anyway, I am unpleasantly surprised at how little my biking fitness helps my running, ha!
> 
> With running, I can get my heart rate up quickly, easily, and hold it there. Mountain biking, not so much.


Running utilizes considerably more muscles overall than biking and therefore your HR will get higher, quicker, while running. 
That's what they said in a TR podcast I listened to recently anyways. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

TBoneAz said:


> Update: My cardiac stress test confirmed my max at 185.


Add there another 5 or maybe even 10 bits and you might really have your real max HR. This might sound crazy to you, especially as you did "stress test", but thing with max HR is and stress tests determining max HR is, that 90% of people (probably more) will never be able to go so hard for long enough to really reach max HR. I have been in pro sport for long enough to know how much it mentally takes to take your body to real max. Most of people who were never in that level of sport, will simply quit way before they will reach max effort. Max HR is afterall exactly what it says.... real maximum effort, something what you can't go any faster or harder even if your life would depend on this. And doing this, is not something what most of people can do, so number you get with stress test is anything but real max HR.


----------



## TBoneAz (Aug 28, 2012)

primoz said:


> Add there another 5 or maybe even 10 bits and you might really have your real max HR. This might sound crazy to you, especially as you did "stress test", but thing with max HR is and stress tests determining max HR is, that 90% of people (probably more) will never be able to go so hard for long enough to really reach max HR. I have been in pro sport for long enough to know how much it mentally takes to take your body to real max. Most of people who were never in that level of sport, will simply quit way before they will reach max effort. Max HR is afterall exactly what it says.... real maximum effort, something what you can't go any faster or harder even if your life would depend on this. And doing this, is not something what most of people can do, so number you get with stress test is anything but real max HR.


Yea, I guess I wasn't vomiting, so there was probably more in the tank.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I don't do this with cardio but when I was young broke and lifting a lot, I would tell/ fool myself as I ran out of strength: 'I get 1 million dollars if I can do just one more of these'. It was my mental trick. Then I would tell myself the same thing for the next hard rep. With that motivation I'd always hammer out another 50% reps until I really could not humanly do another. 

It's amazing what your body can do, if your mind just wills it. 

Now I don't lift for any less than 2 million...

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## robj20 (Apr 24, 2011)

I just let my Garmin do my max HR and so far the highest ive seen is 195 at age 38. What i do see changing as i get fitter is my resting HR which at the minute is 40bpm, but during summer when im more active ill see it go down to around 32bpm.


----------



## Dunnigan (9 mo ago)

I think I saw >200 in my younger 30s, but that was a finish line sprint in a race. I don’t have that kind of motivation in training. At 49 last year I saw 184 trying to hold someone’s wheel toward the end of a race, but who knows what I could do now if a bear were chasing me.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Dunnigan said:


> I think I saw >200 in my younger 30s, but that was a finish line sprint in a race. I don’t have that kind of motivation in training. At 49 last year I saw 184 trying to hold someone’s wheel toward the end of a race, but who knows what I could do now if a bear were chasing me.


At one point I was minus 15 years old. That was around 1986, though. 

There was some "flat spin" research going on when I flew the F-14. I got into a simulator that was the front seat of a Tomcat on the end of a stick (centrifuge) and they spun me up to 4 or 4.5G's eyeballs forward. The F-14 can hit 6G's eyeballs out and it incapacitates the pilot. Anyway, I hit 235, as I recall, hooked up to an EKG for that. Kind of got the flight surgeon concerned, but I lived. Got bloodshot eyes, too. My wife thought I'd been out drinking for lunch.


----------



## Dunnigan (9 mo ago)

MSU Alum said:


> At one point I was minus 15 years old. That was around 1986, though.
> 
> There was some "flat spin" research going on when I flew the F-14. I got into a simulator that was the front seat of a Tomcat on the end of a stick (centrifuge) and they spun me up to 4 or 4.5G's eyeballs forward. The F-14 can hit 6G's eyeballs out and it incapacitates the pilot. Anyway, I hit 235, as I recall, hooked up to an EKG for that. Kind of got the flight surgeon concerned, but I lived. Got bloodshot eyes, too. My wife thought I'd been out drinking for lunch.


This fits with my thinking, that true max HR is crazy hard to find on you own, where you decide how hard to go till you stop. Maybe some people can do a stress test and just keep cranking until their legs simply won't obey any more commands to move, but that takes an extreme amount of motivation--motivation one usually finds when fleeing for one's life, or if you body is being subjected to incredible external stress and your brain signals for 235bpm because it thinks you need it to survive. 

For training, it seems that LTHR is far more important and measurable than max.


----------

