So what is the deal with this target heart rate stuff?

[mb]

I really don't understand the whole target heart rate goal for cardio. Some of the machines at the gym have built in heart rate monitors and charts that tell you what your target is. One says mine should be 150, another says 170. I am 23 years old.

Using any of the hundreds of calculators online, I get anywhere from a max target heart rate of 99 (yeah right) to 181.

Today I went to the gym but didn't feel like staying too long, so I did 25 minutes on an elliptical cross trainer (5 minutes warm up, 15 minutes fast as hell, 5 minutes cool down). The machine said my heart rate was up to 191 for several minutes, but I felt and do feel perfectly fine.

Is there really a specific heart rate I should be doing cardio at for maximum effectiveness? I usually try to keep it around 170 and that seems to be OK, but I am absolutely clueless.

 

[mrkun]

The general formula for max heart rate is 220 minus age (220 - 23 = 197). However, this is just a rough estimate. Anyway, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with your cardio? Regardless though, you probably don't wanna be at 191.

 

[mb]

I guess I'm looking to build some endurance. I'm going to Italy in a few weeks and I will be doing a lot of walking. Last time I went I was out of shape and it slowed me down.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: supafly
I guess I'm looking to build some endurance. I'm going to Italy in a few weeks and I will be doing a lot of walking. Last time I went I was out of shape and it slowed me down.

Ah. I think for traditional cardio they say like 70% of max heart rate for 30 minutes. I'm a big HIIT fan though, personally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training

http://www.exrx.net/FatLoss/HIITvsET.html

http://www.exrx.net/ExInfo/HIIT.html

If you're interested in trying it, you can do longer intervals with shorter rest periods. Don't start off trying to do tons of intervals though.

 

[oboeguy]

191 for a long time and you're out of shape? You need to change careers to that of "pro athlete" or get a more accurate HRM.

Anyway, accuracy issues aside, it depends. Doing interval training without an "aerobic base" is pretty stupid. Given that your efficiency is gong to be different for different modes of exercise (e.g. running, cycling and on the elliptical) the "target" probably varies depending on what you're doing. BTW, if you do get into intervals, do a recovery day the day the next day where you go easy.

 

[CKent]

225-age = max heartrate. Target heartrate for optimal fat burningis 70-85% of max. Quick & dirty: 140 is usually good to shoot for.

 

[TheNinja]

as people mentioned, typically around 220-age is your max heart rate. then if you run about 75-85% it is a good cardio workout. if you run about 65%-75% it is a better fat burning workout. these are just estimates though. I'm 29 and typically I try to get around 140 for fat burn and around 165 for cardio.

 

[mrkun]

Also, heart rate has nothing to do with burning calories. If you run a mile with a pulse of 120, you'll burn the same amount of calories if you had ran the mile with a pulse of 150.

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: mrkun
Also, heart rate has nothing to do with burning calories. If you run a mile with a pulse of 120, you'll burn the same amount of calories if you had ran the mile with a pulse of 150.

Something about the speed at which fat can be metabolized, I think. If you go too hard your body will just tap into carbs since they're more available.

 

[oboeguy]

Originally posted by: mrkun
Also, heart rate has nothing to do with burning calories. If you run a mile with a pulse of 120, you'll burn the same amount of calories if you had ran the mile with a pulse of 150.

Are you crazy? That's completely ridiculous.

What is true is that at different levels of effort (and training), one's body will burn fat and carbohydrates in different proportions.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: oboeguy

Originally posted by: mrkun
Also, heart rate has nothing to do with burning calories. If you run a mile with a pulse of 120, you'll burn the same amount of calories if you had ran the mile with a pulse of 150.

Are you crazy? That's completely ridiculous.

What is true is that at different levels of effort (and training), one's body will burn fat and carbohydrates in different proportions.

But you'd still have to burn the same amount of calories, because you're performing a fixed amount of work, correct? Although that does make sense if your body gets them from different sources.