Max HR - Too high?
 

My question has been answered. Thanks DrPete, umd and everyone else.

Hello!
:winter:
I was doing a ride on the trainer (hand surgery...) and threw in some 3x3 intervals 3 min recovery. Anyways, the first minute built up to 185-200, the next two were 200-220 for the length of 2 minutes. I didn't feel like I was going to puke, my legs just ran out to the point were all the effort felt like I was biking through molasses, but HR stayed high. The highest I saw was 221. Is this something I can lower? I've always thought a low heart rate was healthiest..

:(

Youngin

A low RESTING heart rate is healthier. Be glad that you can peak out that high. As you age, it will drop.

You are both wrong

Max HR just kinda is what it is. If you're at 220 and don't feel like you're about to black out, though, I'm guessing you were the victim of a little interference or a bad contact.

More important than your max HR is power output at your lactate threshold, which is usually around 90% of your max. But I lack the energy to get all in-depth there.

As for the resting HR thing, a low RHR is cool to brag about but it doesn't necessarily indicate fitness. My RHR is 50, but there are pros in the TDF with RHRs in the low 60s. I guarantee you that they're stronger pedaling with one leg than me.

I'm 16? Well after to be sure, I went to 200 and did the old count for 15 seconds and multiply, the monitor was pretty accurate.

You aren't sure?

Not sure how much it matters.

He even writes in upspeak!

http://www.blurtit.com/q447825.html

The ghetto calculation for max HR is 220 minus age. Of course, since mine was 204 at age 30, you can tell it's a bit of a SWAG.

Is max hr what a person should be able to hit, shouldn't go over, is gonna die if they do, what?

Max hr is basically just the maximum hr that you can hit. If you go over it, it means it was wrong. Everybody's is different and the number doesn't mean anything. More important is LTHR and for training zones, % of LTHR.

It's the HR you reach when you're ready to puke and pass out simultaneously, i.e. a completely non-sustainable, above-max effort. Think sprinting for 3 minutes. There are a couple published ways of testing it on a road bike, all of which involve pain.

That sounds like fun, why do you have to tempt me?

Thanks

I'm not into the pain thing yet, that comes in years 3 and beyond, I'm only starting my first full year on my bike. 220 - 45 = 175. But I can easily hit 190 on my garmin ride after ride, and I don't push as hard as I could. Guess I should push hard once and see how high it goes. Maybe I'll like it, then do the pain test.

so I hit 230, am I gonna die?
 

OK, the answers yes of course.
So I'm 57 and I hit 230 the other day on a hill climb. The ride before that Ihad a max of 220. These were on hill climbs and it's pretty common for me.
I don't necessarily hold it long and it drops pretty fast when I stop climbing but I never felt bad or anything. It was pretty strenous but that was the whole point. I did some reading and found that a fit person uses a different figure than (age from 220) and came up with 177 for my heart rate as opposed to my previous of 163. I feel great spinning at 150 to just a bit under 160, like I could run all day at this rate. So I guess I am a little confused as to exactly what thes numbers really mean if they are static numbers.

I have some killer hills around here and I am planning to see how high I can peg this thing to. I would have ridden these hills before I got my heart monitor. Never in my hill climbing have I ever felt at any kind of risk. I have pretty much maxed out my energy on a couple of the hills though and I wish I had the heart monitor on then, I bet it really would have been up there.
no, I do not believe I have a death wish.

+1. Took the words right out of my mouth. It may help those who can't get their heads around this concept to understand that the formulas are based on averages and there is a great deal of deviation from average. Evan as an average, many of the formulas are inaccurate, but that's another subject. Even if a formula accurately represents the average, there are still many data points that are above or below average. Reality is a bell curve. Think of height. The average male may be 5'10" (or whatever) but that doesnt mean all men are 5'10". Even if that average is accurate, there is still a great deal of deviation.

you know,
 

You're lucky you didn't write that in all caps or I would have thought you were shouting. I honestly didn't know that, but I was suspecting to think that. Thanks for pointing that out in such a subtle sort of way (just kidding) really appreaciate it.

I was shouting.... people don't listen otherwise.

Max heartrate is that cool graph you see on the elliptical at the gym. If you're 16 it's 300. By the time you're 40 it's down to 125. Never deviate from these numbers as it's VERY DANGEROUS.

:p

Ka-boom...splatter.

who knows, people are a mixed bunch.
when i was 16-18, i could run up to the 220s and 224 was as high as i ever timed it...albeit i was about to die. the only reason i could count my bpm, was that i had to stop and get off the bike, becasue i could go no further.

I would assume you are having issues with your HR monitor with HR numbers in the 220-230 range at age 57. No offense but I highly doubt those numbers are correct. Assuming your max HR has decreased with age as it has been shown to do, you'd be over 240-250 bpm and that would be very rare. You could be a genetic freak but it's highly unlikely.

+1. 230 is the magical number that HRMs read when getting interference. For instance, on one of my rides there's a bridge over some electric rail tracks--I magically hit 230 there, every single time, without fail.