Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
26-10-2019, 17:20   #1
WiseOldOwl
Registered User
 
WiseOldOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 22
Heartrate and running

Getting back to running after 4 month break. Average heartrate of 168 on an easy 5k today. Unfortunately I didn’t have a HR on watch when I was running regularly so I can’t compare. Watch also showing I was in zone 5 for 24 mins which I’d imagine in impossible. I’m 46 year female,average resting HR 64. Any thoughts?
WiseOldOwl is offline  
Advertisement
26-10-2019, 18:34   #2
IvoryTower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,033
168 after a 4 month break sounds normal to me, maybe not zone 5 though, you would have to find out your max hr to configure zones correctly
IvoryTower is online now  
26-10-2019, 18:35   #3
skyblue46
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiseOldOwl View Post
Getting back to running after 4 month break. Average heartrate of 168 on an easy 5k today. Unfortunately I didn’t have a HR on watch when I was running regularly so I can’t compare. Watch also showing I was in zone 5 for 24 mins which I’d imagine in impossible. I’m 46 year female,average resting HR 64. Any thoughts?
It's not likely to have actually been an easy run. What is your 5k PB? What pace were you running at today?
skyblue46 is offline  
26-10-2019, 18:44   #4
adrian522
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,120
Wrist based HR is not reliable at all, unless you are wearing a chest strap HR readings can be ignored.
adrian522 is offline  
Thanks from:
26-10-2019, 18:48   #5
WiseOldOwl
Registered User
 
WiseOldOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyblue46 View Post
It's not likely to have actually been an easy run. What is your 5k PB? What pace were you running at today?
5k pb 24 something and average pace today 5:57/km. Slow for the old me but maybe not so easy for the new me! 😂
WiseOldOwl is offline  
Advertisement
26-10-2019, 18:48   #6
WiseOldOwl
Registered User
 
WiseOldOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by IvoryTower View Post
168 after a 4 month break sounds normal to me, maybe not zone 5 though, you would have to find out your max hr to configure zones correctly
Yes I’m guessing the zones configured by the watch are just way off.
WiseOldOwl is offline  
26-10-2019, 18:50   #7
WiseOldOwl
Registered User
 
WiseOldOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian522 View Post
Wrist based HR is not reliable at all, unless you are wearing a chest strap HR readings can be ignored.
That’s what I was hoping. Heart didn’t feel like it was jumping out of my chest or anything , felt fine .
WiseOldOwl is offline  
26-10-2019, 23:21   #8
rom
Registered User
 
rom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian522 View Post
Wrist based HR is not reliable at all, unless you are wearing a chest strap HR readings can be ignored.
Disagree. I find it very good. Though it does show random numbers now and again like 180 on an easy run when it should be sub 140 etc and then drops to 140. Saying that they can be ignored is not true. Taken with a pinch of salt would be true.
rom is offline  
Thanks from:
26-10-2019, 23:34   #9
adrian522
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,120
They can be ignored, they are not accurate enough to base training off. If you want to do proper HR training you need a strap. If you just want a general idea it is fine, but you can't read too much into it.

I use it myself but I don't have much faith in its accuracy. It can be + or - 10BPM

https://trailrunnermag.com/training/...eart-rate.html

Quote:
An August 2017 study in the Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise Journal had even more disheartening findings. Fifty athletes spent time on the treadmill, elliptical and stationary bike, and correlation varied from 0.75 to 0.92. As that study concluded: “Electrode-containing chest monitors should be used when accurate HR measurement is imperative.”
adrian522 is offline  
Advertisement
27-10-2019, 00:37   #10
WiseOldOwl
Registered User
 
WiseOldOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by rom View Post
Disagree. I find it very good. Though it does show random numbers now and again like 180 on an easy run when it should be sub 140 etc and then drops to 140. Saying that they can be ignored is not true. Taken with a pinch of salt would be true.
Yes I get weird spikes sometimes, like 150 bom climbing a stairs .
WiseOldOwl is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet