UKH

Hi all, I'm hoping someone can calm my nerves a little.

I have been running for about 6-7 years although I took about 2.5 years off with injury. Ive always been sporty-ish being decent at most things but excellent at none. I took to running much more than most pursuits and became quite fit for my age with decent times.

I am now back on the running game properly and am following a plan to regain some fitness, lose some weight and run a marathon in October. My loose training scheme is to get the miles up gradually to try and remove the chance of injury. For now I am just getting the miles in by adding a mile a week whilst the legs strengthen up and I am up to 18 miles this week spread over 3 or 4 runs. So, I have just done a 6.5 miler at about 8min/mile on flat road terrain with breezy conditions. I decided to wear my heart rate monitor (Garmin, attached to a Garmin FR630) to see what the fitness levels are and I have just checked the heart rate for each lap and I was a constant 181-183bpm for every lap. This seemed high so Ive just checked a couple of articles which state that this is way too high.

I'm 41, stocky and a tad overweight at the moment. I sometimes get a pain in my neck (both sides) during running which I tend to run off.

Am I going to collapse in a heap of death if I carry on? In two weeks time, I will be heading into the 20s and starting to add a longer run each week.

Edit. I have pretty normal resting heart rate.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Does seem quite high, although it's a personal thing - you might have a naturally high max heart rate and high heart rate at lactate threshold, which would make your cruising heart rate higher than average too. I can sustain a heart rate of 183ish for 20 minutes or so, but when I'm doing steady, endurance cycling it's 130-135. It doesn't sound crazy high though. I'd be interested to see what others say.

I take a very male perspective on such things - I test it by giving it a good thrashing and if it doesn't break I'm fine. Like having a headache and giving it a good pressure testing by knocking one out...

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Oh, and the fact that you're worrying about it will only make it worse. I had an interview before Christmas - promotion if I got the job, redundancy if I didn't. My heart rate was about 20bpm higher than normal, and me telling it to f*cking slow down didn't appear to work.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

The 180+ readings are almost certainly an error. You mentioned breezy conditions--most heart rate monitors struggle in the wind. I don't think you're going to die (but don't blame me if you do!!)

In reply to alicia:


Really? How do bike mounted ones cope when you're doing 50mph downhill?

In reply to alicia:


By the way, he definitely WILL die at some point...

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

What is your resting and max hr? Then you'll have more idea how ab/normal your working 180bpm is.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

That's fine.

The age formula is usually well out. I'd suggest 8:00/mi for 10k is pushing it a bit.

Your heart is self limiting, you'll get to a point where it can't pump the oxygen round your system, the muscles will be starved and you'll slow down.

You'll need to do a max test to find the actual max. Mine goes up into the 190s and I'm nearly 10 years older than you.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Pain in the neck could be due to clenching your face when it gets hard. Relax.

In reply to summo:

Anywhere between mid 50s and early 60s lowest and the maximum I can find over about 5 years data is about 205.

In reply to DancingOnRock:


Im normally quite relaxed in the face. The pain tends to be at the shoulder/neck junction either left or right side.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:


Like a stitch?

How breathless are you when running 8min miles? Could you speak whole sentences?

In reply to Yanis Nayu:


Yes, very much like a stitch, but higher up.

>How breathless are you when running 8min miles? Could you speak whole sentences?

Yes, just about.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

41, stocky, tad overweight, just getting back into running - 8 min/mile is way too fast, no wonder your HR is so high.

Slow things down, and build up your aerobic fitness - you should be able to hold a conversation as you run ( will probably equate to about 140-150 bpm ).
Maybe do 1 faster, shorter effort a week ( eg a parkrun ), but it is not essential at this stage, just build that fitness

In reply to steelbru:

I agree. I'm 41 too, though unfortunately don't use an HRM. 8 min/mile (given what the OP said about weight and fitness) does seem like quite a lick for the majority of the weekly running.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

My heart rate, to the best of my knowledge, has never gone over 185. Interval sprints, hill training, marathons, 5ks, ultras, spin classes. Never.

From this in surmise that heart rate data is deeply personal and you shouldn't worry. At least not until you've monitored it over time.

Relax.

Oh and if you're having a heart attack it's not going to hurt in your neck is it!?

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Can you talk when you're running (easily)?

Have you checked "manually" your stated heart rate?

I've had mine to 200 at some points but I knew I was doing it!! There'd be no surprises when looking at the data.

Wind makes no difference, like someone said what about biking, which is where I use mine HRM most of the time.

At 185 I'm breathing very heavily and talking in full sentences (normally) is not possible.

In reply to XXXX:

Actually neck pain is a sign of heart issues, but a full on heart attack will have pain elsewhere too! Is not very likely though.

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Heart-attack/Pages/Symptoms.aspx

Is you are worried go to see your doctor, they may wish to do a set of health checks, such as cholesterol, bmi, etc. Brevet a bag idea for someone returning to exercise at 40+. It's part of the standard par-q most sports use.

In reply to krikoman:

I found Garmin very unreliable in the chest strap dept when I used them, and discussion on many forums do discuss the effect of wind drying out the connection of the chest electrodes and affecting recorded heart rate.

I'm sure some people have no issues but it's not unheard of.

In reply to Dave B:


Ah, I see the logic in that. I wet mine (Garmin) before use and the sweat keeps the connection going. When I've forgotten to wet it, it doesn't work properly until I warm up and sweat, but it reads low not high as it's not picking up the heart beats.

In reply to mountainbagger:

I reckon it's too fast for the bulk of the weekly mileage - I can run a 6 min mile and Daniel's running formula suggests, from memory, about 9:30 min miles for steady endurance running.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Why don't you train to heart rate rather than pace?

In reply to Yanis Nayu:


I havent really thought about it. 8 mins doesnt feel desperate and as this is average some are much less. Certainly the longer, runs as they, start will begin at 830 or slower.

In reply to Dave B:

Every day's a school day!

In reply to steelbru:


I don't think you can really say that without a bit more information. I remember what Richard was running before he got injured, so possibly 8 m/m isn't all that fast, but only he can really decide that.

My advice would be to go off feel, forget about the heart monitor.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

The 220 minus your age as a maximum is just an average, despite what some websites may suggest. Similar to yourself I have a higher max HR than average. When I used to bother wearing a monitor, 200+ was regularly seen when pushing to the limit, and 180-190 in general for the rest of the run. A few years ago when aged 27 it even went up to 223 on one run, which according to the equation would have put my age as minus 3. The only time I wear a HR monitor now is during an annual occupational medical - I figure if there was something wrong with my heart they would pick it up then.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:


Even if you don't train to a hr monitor, the guidelines of being able talk easily when doing aerobic/easy/recovery runs etc isn't a bad one. Those nearer thresholds can be done by feel a little bit too, what pace is sustainable etc..

In reply to The New NickB:

This is true, Nick. My race pace at 5k was 6.45, 10k 7 and HM 7.20 although this was some time ago.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Heart rates are very perosnal affairs and there is only universal rule - if your heart isn't beating you're dead. I cycle a lot (gave up on running because of my knees). I'm 55 and my max heart rate is 168. When I'm putting in a sustainable effort, it's around 135 'sustainable' being an hour or so. A friend of the same age has a max of somewhere 220 and bowls along at 185. I can go faster than he can. The simplistic max heart rate calculation is about right for me and way off for him. So what? You'll know what your max heart rate is by finding the point at which everything starts to unravel really quickly.

No problem with my HRM in the wind

In reply to nniff:
A running coach told me a reasonable way to get your max HR is to do a Park Run flat out then add 5 to the max HR achieved (if using a garmin monitor). He also gave me a plan where most of the running is done at 75% max HR with only one run a week at building up to 80% then 3X10mins at 84-88% with 3 mins in between followed by 7 min cool down.
Initially its hard to keep your pace down but it does seem to work in getting faster and fitter, counter intuitive really.


BTW I'm 60 and my max HR is c 180

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

You are almost certainly running too fast. I'm the same - it can be quite difficult to actually run within the aerobic threshold if that pace for you is almost unbearably slow.

As others have said, you should really be able to hold a conversation or maintain nose breathing while running. If you want a definitive answer, you could get a lactate threshold test. I don't know where you're based, but Frontrunner in Sheffield can do the test (I am not affiliated with them).

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

The max my heart rate has ever been recorded at is 190 bpm (I'm a cyclist rather than a runner, but this was on Winnats Pass I think...) but I'm 24, and I have a friend in his mid 50s who regularly exceeds 200 bpm when pushing hard. Obviously this doesn't fit with MaxHR= 200-age being totally reliable. Similarly, my girlfriend ran a half marathon last year and had an average HR of 197 for nearly 2 hours. Obviously this is all anecdotal and if you are worried, you should definitely seek medical advice, but it shows that these things see huge variation between individuals.

In reply to Dave B:


Obviously not sweating enough!!!


>I'm sure some people have no issues but it's not unheard of.

Well I've learnt something new, cheers. I think I'd have been checking it manually if I thought it was giving false readings.

In reply to JimR:

I don't think that's going to be anywhere near Your max - if you assume you're running Your flat out 5K at lactate theshold (and for most punters that's probably optimistic as most People won't hurt themselves enough) then Your max is only 5 beats over threshold. Very, very unlikely.

Well, maybe going for three burnups or so a week is how the OP likes to train. It works very well for some People. If you decide to drop the pace then you have to start doing intervals or some other hard work otherwise you're just going to end up running slower as that's what you're training yourself to do

In reply to Yanis Nayu:


I can't maintain a high heart rate on a bike either. I think it means my legs aren't strong , big enough to really stress my heart - my legs are the limiting factor

In reply to JimR:


Yeah that seems pretty unlikely to me. I think 5k is way to long a distance to be approaching max heart rate. The guidance given in "Training for the new Alpinism" is to do a warm up jog for about 15 minutes then run hard up a steep hill for 2 minutes, flat out for the last 20 seconds. You should basically be on the point of collapse at the end of this.

After doing this test last year I recorded my max heart rate at 205 bpm. Details of my test here for anyone interested - https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/729019139

In reply to planetmarshall:


Depends how you run 5K, if you push all the way then sprint propery at the end then I think it works. My Park run PB is 20:41 (last year).

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

As others have said, heart rate is personal and if you want to use it in training you really have to watch it regularly to figure out what is normal for you.

In general, your resting heart rate will decrease as you get fitter, although how far down it will go probably depends on other factors including genetics. You can watch your own resting rate decrease as you train, but it isn't really comparable with anyone else. Your max heart rate is mostly unrelated to fitness and varies a lot from person to person, but will generally decrease as you get older.

For me, the highest I have ever recorded is 185 and I haven't topped 183 in the last 2 years. I generally sustain high 170s over 5-10km and around the 172 mark over a half. But I run with a friend who is about 10 years older than me and routinely sustains 185 over a 10km and has recorded a max of over 200.

I find that there are three things I watch for to see if my fitness is improving. Firstly, as I get fitter I can run at a set pace with a lower heart rate. Secondly, I can run faster at a set heart rate. Thirdly, the amount of time it takes for my heart rate to return to resting after a run decreases. For me, these are better indicators of fitness than just using heart rate measurements alone.

In reply to wbo:


...more likely your head. Try a race!

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

If his HR were actually in the 180s, he would be at the sort of pace he could only sustain for a couple of km's. It would feel like an absolute max effort. This doesn't sound like that.

I've had roughly 5 to 6 hr monitors over several years and all but one drops signal in windy conditions. No doubt several things impact that, such as sweat rate and how the monitor is positioned.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Btw if you do want to test out whether your readings might be an error, get some conductor gel (e.g Buh-Bump) and try using that instead of water.

And after a while of running with an HR monitor, you'll start to get an idea of when the reading is wrong and when it's not. It's definitely worth the effort even though they can be a massive pain in the neck--they are a great training and racing aid.

In reply to alicia:
Beat in mind his resting HR is pretty high. If, for example your resting HR is 60, you have a max of 205. Thats a range of 145, and 180 is only 80% or so of this, which is managable.

To Johnjohn - dont think so - ran 1/2. Marathons at 170-180 5-noe, but just couldn't hold >145 on a bike. Lack of muscle bulk

In reply to johnjohn:


More likely physics, and physiology. Achieving a max heart rate while running is hard work, but as soon as you get on a bike you're obtaining a massive mechanical advantage. To get that same cardiovascular output on the bike you'd have to be working your body phenomenally hard. I'd be skeptical of anyone who says they've achieved max heart rate on a bike who isn't also an Olympic track cyclist.

In reply to wbo: you should try going on lower gears, easier on the legs but harder for the heart. (With increased cadence)

In reply to planetmarshall: Max heart rate is very sport specific. I might be an outlier but Ive recorded 200HR in a indoor cycling test, 196 during actual MTB but only 194 in long hill sprints.

This was when I was a hobby MTB and fell runner. Now fat and knee injured... Back on the bike but God I miss running!

In reply to DanielJ:


spot on!

In reply to DanielJ:

I suspect that cycling rates are lower due to the body not being vertical and the blood not having to be pumped to a higher pressure.

Once the heart is at 60% it has reached maximum stroke volume and after that the stroke reduces as the rate increases. That's why running easy at 60% is the most efficient way to exercise.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Another member of the high max hr group here; max is 205. Resting is about 60.
I've been running a decade or more and run marathons and ultras (albeit slowly). My average for my last marathon earlier this month was 179 and park run is at 191.
One of the chaps in my club is a heart surgeon. He said that heart rhythm was more important than going by just max.

I expect we would make a good long term study group for exercise induced mortality rates!

In reply to DancingOnRock:
>I suspect that cycling rates are lower due to the body not being vertical and the blood not having to be pumped to a higher pressure.

There are things called venomuscular pumps. Bits of the foot and the calf act under compression to squirt blood around and so reduce the need for the heart to pump at higher pressure. So whilst you might gain by being in a sitting position, you might loose by not having the lower legs working to move blood around as much. But then again, I'm not a doctor.

http://www.phlebolymphology.org/the-venous-system-of-the-foot-anatomy-physi...

In reply to dread-i:
Yes. I had a quick Google and there didn't really seem to be any real answers other than people get different results for different activities.

I guess also that you're swinging your arms pretty hard when running so more muscles being recruited.

It's all pretty academic because you the get a range to work within which changes depending on heat and himidity anyway.

I've been collecting data for several years now and my rates are pretty much known for all different conditions. I know only wear it out of habit and for interest. It does show some very interesting results at the beginning of my runs when I'm getting close to a marathon and know I am feeling overtrained. I get some very odd high (true) peaks in the first few minutes of a warm up.

In reply to DancingOnRock:

I get that sometimes. What surprises me is the way the heart rate appears to race (over 180bpm) for up to 10 minutes or so, before decreasing rapidly down to a sustained rate of 160ish. I've found I can eliminate this spiking with a 10 session on the turbo trainer to get things going - in this session I rarely get above about 120bpm, but it still reduces the initial running heart rate.

In reply to kathrync:


This is one of the most important pointers to fitness and improvement. The rest is really so personal and of little use, apart from the fact I like data

In reply to planetmarshall:

When I was 23 I did 3 minute max power hill intervals on my road bike, which would hurt like hell, and my heart rate would go up to 206 but never any higher. Figured this was my max. I had a resting heart rate of 44. In a mountain bike race I once had a heart rate of over 190 for the first hour. Still never did better than 5th though ...

In reply to tony:


I agree. I recorded a few heart rates after I noticed Garmin had registered a max of 217 (but 162 average) after one run. A high max HR usually correlated with a faster start on a 5k ish distance plus warm up, but there didn't seem to be any correlation between max HR and pace with little warm up.