Benefits/Purpose of Heart rate monitors?

RonanP77

I've heard people mention having HRMs before but don't actually know anyone that uses them. I was wondering in what way would one help me? Are they worth getting?

My guess is they'll let me know if I'm pushing too hard but other than that I'm not sure what the benefits are. Do many of you use them and if so, would you recommend them?

rom

Yes
http://www.angio.net/personal/run/hadd.pdf

RonanP77

Cheers, there's a lot to take in from that. I'll definitely be sticking one on my Christmas wish list. It's probably a better measure for my training runs than just going by time or distance.

rom

http://philmaffetone.com/180-formula

Though I do know people who have max HR of 210 and are nearly 40.

Its a great way to ensure that your easy runs are easy. Don't over think it. If you use it just for that then you will be doing a lot.

RonanP77

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. My resting HR is about 56-58 but I have no idea what my max is. I guess I'll find out after Christmas.

pointer28

Similar to what Rom said above, I find it best for keeping easy days easy.

I don't pay too much attention to it for shorter or harder stuff, but have a look afterwards to see how I'm doing. For example if my Tempo runs are coming in at a lower average HR for a couple of consecutive sessions, then I know I'm getting fitter so I increase the target pace slightly for those sessions.

RonanP77

They sound fairly usefull so. I told my 3 year old daughter this morning that she's buying me one for Christmas. She's not too keen on buying anything for anyone but I think she can be convinced.

RonanP77

Should I be looking for one with a chest strap or does it make any difference?

sconhome

Chest strap monitors measure from the electrical impulses of the heart muscles. I have yet to test a light based unit but I wonder how accurate they are under varying light conditions whilst running.

RonanP77

I was thinking of the Garmin vivofit fitness band with a HR monitor but I don't know if it's a chest strap that comes with it or not.

sconhome

Yes it is a chest strap with the Vivofit.

However those activity monitors are not much use for proper training. They are more of an introduction to activity/ exercise and option of Heart Rate.

Depending on your phone I would suggest going the route of Polar H7 Bluetooth chest strap and the Polar Beat app on the phone. App is free, strap around €70 and you are up and running with options on sport profiles and zonal training.

You can then upgrade to the likes of the Polar M400 watch and use the same chest strap with that. If you're looking for a watch from the start the M400 with HR is impossible to beat for functions and value.

sconhome

rom wrote: »

Yes
http://www.angio.net/personal/run/hadd.pdf

rom wrote: »

http://philmaffetone.com/180-formula

Though I do know people who have max HR of 210 and are nearly 40.

Its a great way to ensure that your easy runs are easy. Don't over think it. If you use it just for that then you will be doing a lot.

Regarding formulas the only way to train properly by heart rate is to get proper lactate testing done to identify your training zones and to do a field test to find your true max Hr.

Anything like the 220-your age is not accurate in the main. Fine, it simplified the explanation of what zones are but is pretty much useless for training correctly.

Get your tests done and train your body properly.

RonanP77

I use Strava, it mentions heart rate if you buy the pro version, you must get a strap when you sign up for it.

tunney

AKW wrote: »

Chest strap monitors measure from the electrical impulses of the heart muscles. I have yet to test a light based unit but I wonder how accurate they are under varying light conditions whilst running.

The miofit one *seems* to work but not convinced.

In "older days" I used a optical one from my ear on the trainer. I ran parallel tests as well with Polar chest straps and there was no statistical significant difference.

tunney

AKW wrote: »

Regarding formulas the only way to train properly by heart rate is to get proper lactate testing done to identify your training zones and to do a field test to find your true max Hr.

Anything like the 220-your age is not accurate in the main. Fine, it simplified the explanation of what zones are but is pretty much useless for training correctly.

Get your tests done and train your body properly.

At the *Very* least its worth noting that 220-age was intended for males only. Females is 230-age

regardless but are junk but 230-age is less junk for women.

menoscemo

AKW wrote: »

Regarding formulas the only way to train properly by heart rate is to get proper lactate testing done to identify your training zones and to do a field test to find your true max Hr.

I have always found I get a higher HR at the end of a short race than any 'field test' I have ever done. I'd go with the highest (credible) recorded max HR as my true max HR.

28064212

RonanP77 wrote: »

I use Strava, it mentions heart rate if you buy the pro version, you must get a strap when you sign up for it.

No, that just means if you upload a file that has heart-rate information attached, you can access that information on Strava

tunney

menoscemo wrote: »

I have always found I get a higher HR at the end of a short race than any 'field test' I have ever done. I'd go with the highest (credible) recorded max HR as my true max HR.

Suggests that you have issues motivating yourself in training, no?

menoscemo

tunney wrote: »

Suggests that you have issues motivating yourself in training, no?

Most likely so, but there are many like me and it's not a bad thing I would have thought. Surely it is best to give your max performance in a race environment rather than on a training run, no?

Anyway my Point is don't dismiss the number that you hit at the end of a 1mile-5k race as not being your max HR because you didn't hit the same number when doing hill sprints.

rom

AKW wrote: »

Chest strap monitors measure from the electrical impulses of the heart muscles. I have yet to test a light based unit but I wonder how accurate they are under varying light conditions whilst running.

Used one in the race at the weekend. It was a half and it said I was running at 185 avg when my max is 192 ish. The level of effort was not 185. Fine it good for easy runs.

mossym

menoscemo wrote: »

Surely it is best to give your max performance in a race environment rather than on a training run, no?
.

if the field test is to find your max hr, surely you need to go as hard as you do in any race?

going 95% then saying filed tests are flawed cause my hr goes higher in a race where i go 100% points at an error in the execution of the test, not at field testing itself

RayCun

moving off topic now I guess...
the hill sprints are a good field test because you can push yourself very hard, but still, if the hill was just before the finish line of a race and I was shoulder to shoulder with someone else, I'd expect to go harder there.
Wouldn't you?

tunney

menoscemo wrote: »

Most likely so, but there are many like me and it's not a bad thing I would have thought. Surely it is best to give your max performance in a race environment rather than on a training run, no?

Anyway my Point is don't dismiss the number that you hit at the end of a 1mile-5k race as not being your max HR because you didn't hit the same number when doing hill sprints.

If you hit it then its your Max regardless of field tests agreed.

Not suffering in training though.........

tunney

RayCun wrote: »

moving off topic now I guess...
the hill sprints are a good field test because you can push yourself very hard, but still, if the hill was just before the finish line of a race and I was shoulder to shoulder with someone else, I'd expect to go harder there.
Wouldn't you?

If you're soft maybe.

RayCun

tunney wrote: »

If you're soft maybe.

:pac:
I train to race, not to hit numbers on a computer program

tunney

RayCun wrote: »

:pac:
I train to race, not to hit numbers on a computer program

Meant if you need someone else to hold your hand in a race to push yourself

menoscemo

mossym wrote: »

if the field test is to find your max hr, surely you need to go as hard as you do in any race?

Yes, I would think I feel as bad or worse in a field test as I would at the end of a race, but somehow I can still push a bit harder in an actual race.
I have done a few field tests of Max Hr, been on the verge of puking and sometimes actually puked but I have still hit 3-4 bpm higher at the end of races

Like Ray I would see this as a good thing as I train to race not the other way round. This would be the general feeling in Athletics, maybe not in Triathletics

menoscemo

mossym wrote: »

going 95% then saying filed tests are flawed cause my hr goes higher in a race where i go 100% points at an error in the execution of the test, not at field testing itself

BTW I am not saying (or have I said) that the field test is flawed at all, just pointing out that many people will hit higher values in a race than in any field test (no matter how hard they push themselves in a field test).

An_Reathai

AKW wrote: »

Regarding formulas the only way to train properly by heart rate is to get proper lactate testing done to identify your training zones and to do a field test to find your true max Hr.

Anything like the 220-your age is not accurate in the main. Fine, it simplified the explanation of what zones are but is pretty much useless for training correctly.

Get your tests done and train your body properly.

Going really off-topic now but does anyone have any recommendations as to the best place to get proper lactate testing done in the Kildare/Dublin area? Thanks

sconhome

An_Reathai wrote: »

Going really off-topic now but does anyone have any recommendations as to the best place to get proper lactate testing done in the Kildare/Dublin area? Thanks

Sports dept in Trinity Collge

RayCun

tunney wrote: »

Meant if you need someone else to hold your hand in a race to push yourself

ah, there's pushing yourself, and there's pushing yourself to gain a meaningless place in a mid-pack battle, completely different