Heart Rate monitoring Training

average_runner

How many people use a heart rate monitor for their training?

Do you find it useful and a good thing?

sconhome

Only really useful if you have figured out your HR zones properly with a field test. Takes most people (new to HR training) a few weeks to adjust before they start to see real gains as pace goes up relative to HR.

Regular repeatable testing is a good thing.

seamus

In training I typically find it useful as a guide to tell me whether I actually am tired or overdoing it today or if I just feel a bit groggy. If I'm tired or otherwise not on form, my HR will register a good deal higher than I would expect at certain paces. I'll know then to pull it back a bit.

I also find it useful on very windy days or very hilly terrain for adjusting my pace to suit the conditions rather than doggedly trying to stick to a target pace and killing myself.

I find it most useful in races for getting as much effort out as I can. On a 5k, for example, I know that I can push it to about 190bpm and keep it there. If I'm pushing 193/194bpm early in the race then I'm going to run out of steam before the end and I know I have to pull back.

First Up

Main value I found when I started using one was to keep my HR low enough during my long runs. Very easy to exceed the target HR otherwise.

adrian522

I use it in the sense that I wear one, I don't use it in the sense that my pace is completely dictated by my heart rate.

I find it useful to check back afterwards and verify if my pace was too fast or too slow for what I was supposed to be doing. Sometimes I feel my run was too hard for example but upon checking I see that the HR was more or less correct so I'd be happy enough.

It's a good tool but I don't base all my training around it.

Yaboya1 uses it a lot more and if you are interested in that sort of training maybe check out his log.

average_runner

What's he best way to determine your resting heart rate etc?

Seems to be many methods on the web

First Up

average_runner wrote: »

What's he best way to determine your resting heart rate etc?

Seems to be many methods on the web

Not sure what you mean by "etc." but the simplest way is to sit for a while and then take your pulse for ten or fifteen seconds and then multiply to calculate the bpm rate. Do it a couple of times and take the average.

It doesn't have to be exact.

seamus

Resting heart rate and max heart rate are typically the easiest to get. Though for RHR you need to take the measurement without interference - i.e. no coffee or food in the last hour, no exercise in the last 3 hours, etc. Also having just gotten out of the bed (or just getting into bed) are not great because your heart rate will be way down.

Sit on the couch for half an hour, watch Friends or something, and take the measurement. Do this a couple of times in a week and take your average. Easy.

There are numerous ways of getting your max HR, they're all online. In general though they involve fartlek-style high intensity intervals to build you up and then a final nauseating push to your limit to find out just what your max is.

Being honest though, zones and zone training has never really worked for me. I just tend to know what HR to expect at what paces, i.e.
150bpm: Warm up
170bpm: HM pace
180bpm: 10k pace
190bpm: 5k pace.

average_runner

First Up wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by "etc." but the simplest way is to sit for a while and then take your pulse for ten or fifteen seconds and then multiply to calculate the bpm rate. Do it a couple of times and take the average.

It doesn't have to be exact.

Suppose what i meant was, there seems to be different ways of getting your max heart rate, like 220 - your age, which seems very generic.

Thanks for the info.

adrian522

Yeah, there are loads of formulas you can use but really the only way to get your max is to get your HR up as high as possible, running a 5k race, doing hill repeats etc, and recording your highest reading.

220-your age is not going to be accurate as it would mean everyone with the same age had the same HR.
Another formula used is 208 – 0.7(age).

And also 207 – 0.7(age). All of them suffer from the same flaw though.

Read it about it here:

http://www.runnersworld.com/health/what-is-my-maximum-heart-rate

First Up

average_runner wrote: »

Suppose what i meant was, there seems to be different ways of getting your max heart rate, like 220 - your age, which seems very generic.

Thanks for the info.

Well max hr is obviously a different matter. I suggest you just run as hard as you can for as long as you can and take a reading. Do that a few times (e.g 300 or 400 metre repeats) and it won't take long to see where you max out.

Again you don't need precise numbers - you just use you rhr and mhr to calculate your training zones.

RayCun

I do.

It's like asking if you use a Garmin in training though - there are lots of different ways of training with a HRM, better, worse, harder, easier.

I suppose also like using a garmin - there's no point using a garmin to run to set paces if it doesn't measure a km properly and the pace it tells you is not your real pace. And there's no point training by heart rate if you don't know what your max heart rate and HR zones are.

I don't wear the monitor in races

demfad

average_runner wrote: »

How many people use a heart rate monitor for their training?

Do you find it useful and a good thing?

I find it useful especially in base training.

One of the best uses I find is making sure you run the "easy" runs truly easy.
Initially when you do this you will find that the pace feels ridiculously slow.
Aerobic effort is reduced to correct levels, but now muscular effort is too low.

After time however the speed generally will return to where it was. (especially if you do strides)
You're now running the easy runs with less aerobic effort.
The muscular effort has returned to being similar (barring slight gains in efficiency).

As you're "easy" runs are now easy then either:

1. You are more rested for your aerobic sessions and they will be better,
2. You are able to run more easy mileage so general muscular strenght and aerobic fitness improve.
3. A mixture of both

Now what you find is that keeping the pace at the new HR is actually more difficult, and "easy" in terms of muscular effort is now at an even lower HR.


Now if one runner did the above and his athletic twin (at this point) didn't, they might give a similar answer on a perceived exertion question (easy).

However one of the runners would be running at a far lower % of his available aerobic power to achieve the speed.

He can now run more miles per week and/or run better sessions. As time goes on this difference will be more pronounced as one runner can also handle a bigger seasonal workload.

Thats one beneficial use right there.

ger664

I use it for easy and recovery runs to make sure thats what they are. Can be useful on windy days as well. I dont wear it in races anymore and but the times I did I turned off the display with HR readings. Started just using a dumb stop watch and just check K/Mile splits. Watch can be very distracting in a race when really you should be concentrating on running as hard/good as you can.