DFW Running Club!!

RichOneday_2

boyse7en wrote: »

Well, I use a Polar HRM to record it, so it's as accurate as that is. Maintaining an average of 187bpm isn't easy (I was pretty knackered at the finish and my calves seized up!), but keeping it below 160 when running certainly is.

Did your Resting rate come down much when you started running? I'm assuming that a RHR of 40bpm wasn't something you were born with.
I've only been doing this about 9 months, and haven't noticed much of a drop in heart rate.

The highest it has ever been is 56. Reasonable fitness takes it to low 40s and, at peak fitness, will touch 35-36.

It will drop as you get fitter, ie the pump becomes more efficient at chucking blood volume around your body, but not in big drops, maybe 5-10 bpm between normal fitness and peak fitness.

As a comparison the highest I've ever recorded was 170 at the end of an 800m rep.

becky_rtw

Awww I want to measure mine now

LOL you are getting all sciency and I cant take part no fair!

Does anyone else on the board measure theirs I wonder??

Idiophreak

RichOneday wrote: »

The highest it has ever been is 56. Reasonable fitness takes it to low 40s and, at peak fitness, will touch 35-36.

It will drop as you get fitter, ie the pump becomes more efficient at chucking blood volume around your body, but not in big drops, maybe 5-10 bpm between normal fitness and peak fitness.

As a comparison the highest I've ever recorded was 170 at the end of an 800m rep.

So, in those terms, does pushing your HR towards its max help to reduce it overall, or is trying to keep your rate down whilst exercising a better way of going about it?

Or should you just measure HR as a side effect, rather than a goal in itself?

beer_tins

Maz,

Did I promise to show you a wedding pic? Got some low res ones back from the photographers, but good enough to post up here if someone tells me how!

RichOneday_2

Idiophreak wrote: »

So, in those terms, does pushing your HR towards its max help to reduce it overall, or is trying to keep your rate down whilst exercising a better way of going about it?

Or should you just measure HR as a side effect, rather than a goal in itself?

Put it this way - if you do too much of your training at high % HR you stagnate very quickly and peak at pretty leisurely speeds.

Top athletes will rarely exceed 20% of total workload at elevated HR. My plan at the moment incorporates 6%.

When you do elevate it you have to be very selective about what you're actually working on - high HR work depletes resources very quickly and if used incorrectly is just a waste. eg doing a 15x100m session when training for a marathon.

RichOneday_2

becky_rtw wrote: »

Awww I want to measure mine now

LOL you are getting all sciency and I cant take part no fair!

Does anyone else on the board measure theirs I wonder??

Suffice to say yours was high as you got to the top of that big hill this morning!:p

(Land_of)_Maz

beinerts wrote: »

Maz,

Did I promise to show you a wedding pic? Got some low res ones back from the photographers, but good enough to post up here if someone tells me how!

oooh ace!!!

well if you have a hosting site you can copy the image codes into any post and the pics will appear... A photo bucket account is free and easy to use....

if you don't want to do that, then you could email them to me and i will post them up for you.....

or if they are already on a website, just a link would do?

beer_tins

(Land_of)_Maz wrote: »

oooh ace!!!

well if you have a hosting site you can copy the image codes into any post and the pics will appear... A photo bucket account is free and easy to use....

if you don't want to do that, then you could email them to me and i will post them up for you.....

or if they are already on a website, just a link would do?

I'll PM you! Would be good if you could do it (I presume you have a photo bucket account?)

boyse7en

Idiophreak wrote: »

So, in those terms, does pushing your HR towards its max help to reduce it overall, or is trying to keep your rate down whilst exercising a better way of going about it?

Or should you just measure HR as a side effect, rather than a goal in itself?

I think a bit of each is required. You need to build your ability to run for sustained periods at a low HR, but if you just do that you won't build any speed up, so you need to include some higher-intensity training too.

RichOneday_2

These are the benchmark figures for how the heart should function when untrained and trained:

Resting Conditions:
Cardiac Output (ml/min):
Non-athlete 4,900
Athlete 4,515

Heart Rate (bpm)
Non-athlete 70
Athlete 43

Maximum Exercise:
Cardiac Output (ml/min):
Non-athlete 22,800
Athlete 36,100

Heart Rate (bpm)
Non-athlete 190
Athlete 190