# Max Heart rate vs age



## cbk57 (Aug 12, 2009)

I am posting this as a related thread to the person that posted max heart vs vow. I have not trained consistently with heart rate before. I am 43 years old and when I used a heart rate monitor about 15 years ago I thought my max heart rate was 186. Bach then though the unit I had did not have memory. Now I have a garmin 510 with heart rate. At the beginning of the season I was seeing max heart rates in the range of 178. I had heard the formula about age minus 220 and thought this was pretty good. However as I have trained this year consistently monitoring heart rate I have seen progressively higher numbers. Two months ago I was seing 183 now and then. I did a race a month ago and hit 186. Two weeks ago I did another race and hit 189. Today's race peaked at 190. Now I am wondering if max h/r varies with training and fitness more so than age. Any thoughts on this?


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

Yes; max heart rate will vary with genetics and training. Only through periodic testing will you know what your max is. 220 minus your age is a good ballpark number, or a place to start. Usually, one way to find your MHR is to perform 3 all-out sprints with at least 10 minutes rest between efforts. Average the results. I bet you'll see your MHR vary throughout the season and if you keep records long enough, see it decline with age.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

cbk57 said:


> Now I am wondering if max h/r varies with training and fitness more so than age. Any thoughts on this?


Maximum heart rate declines with age and there's nothing you can do about that. So looking at you numbers, it appears that you never recorded your maximum heart rate 15 years ago. The 220-age formula generally yields numbers far too low for someone who actually races bicycles.


----------



## cbk57 (Aug 12, 2009)

It is a lot easier to keep records now that I can just download my workout to the computer and have full comparable data for the entire workout. Perhaps 15 years ago when i was training my max heart rate was really higher than I thought it was just using the old hrm and glancing at it during the event. During a race you really don't have time to watch a computer, at least I don't. Yesterdays race, once I turned the computer on, I never had time to look at it again until I turned it off.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

cbk57 said:


> Perhaps 15 years ago when i was training my max heart rate was really higher than I thought it was just using the old hrm and glancing at it during the event.


That's my guess as well. When I raced way back when, I used a heart rate monitor when training, but took it off for actual races. I'm convinced that my maximum heart rate then was much higher than the highest number I ever recorded (on paper) after a training session. I was never motivated to push myself that hard in training.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

I'm 42 and even with 6 years of hard/steady training ... my max HR has not gone up with training and has slowly declined a little. For me, under an all out 1 minute effort that leads into a sprint in a race ... I can only get my HR up to 177-178, which is around my max. 

Sometimes you can build it up ... sometimes genetics says ... This is what it is and you are stuck with it. 

With that said ... It hasn't slowed me down any and my fitness has improved over time, just not my max HR ... so in reality I could give a rip about max HR and I'll pay attention to my power meter over my HR. The only think I use HR for any longer is watching out for dehydration and exhaustion. When I'm dehydrated or tired, my HR is lower than normal and I know I need to slow things down for a day or two.


----------



## cbk57 (Aug 12, 2009)

I don't have a power meter I also did a lot of interval training in the spring using sufferfest videos. I have never raced a lot but whether a fast group ride or race I have always felt the only thing that matters is hanging on or sprinting when the time comes. If you can't hold nothing is going to help.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

58 YO - I saw 197 last fall. I can ride at 160 all day. 

Genetics. 

Len


----------



## MontyCrisco (Sep 21, 2008)

Lots of good feedback in this thread. I'd just add that you shouldn't worry too much about max HR. The key is instead to figure out your threshold HR, as this gives you a good place to figure out your training zones. If you do some searching you'll find advice on ways to test LTHR, and how to set zones. It usually involves a 20-30 minute time trial, and a little math.

Lots of folks will tell you that a power meter's the more accurate way to set zones and train, and it is. But HR training can get you pretty darn far.


----------



## RJP Diver (Jul 2, 2010)

FWIW - "max heart rate" is not a number you should be able to hit that declines with age, but rather an approximation of the safe upper limit of a heart rate you should hit. Idea is you should not exceed it, not "endeavor to increase it."


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

wim said:


> Maximum heart rate declines with age and there's nothing you can do about that. So looking at you numbers, it appears that you never recorded your maximum heart rate 15 years ago. The 220-age formula generally yields numbers far too low for someone who actually races bicycles.


Agree, there is too much individual variation for the formula to be of use. But, max heart rate is not affected by exercise, so not affected by whether one races bicycles or not.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

looigi said:


> Agree, there is too much individual variation for the formula to be of use. But, max heart rate is not affected by exercise, so not affected by whether one races bicycles or not.


Here's a pretty good summary: Heart rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

looigi said:


> But, max heart rate is not affected by exercise, so not affected by whether one races bicycles or not.


Agree, my writing was unclear. What I meant to say is that the 220-age formula is more of a guesstimate and generally yields numbers too low to be of much use to someone racing bicycles. If you want a max heart rate formula, there are better ones out there.


----------



## kmak (Sep 5, 2011)

Peter P. said:


> Yes; max heart rate will vary with genetics and training. Only through periodic testing will you know what your max is. 220 minus your age is a good ballpark number, or a place to start. Usually, one way to find your MHR is to perform 3 all-out sprints with at least 10 minutes rest between efforts. Average the results. I bet you'll see your MHR vary throughout the season and if you keep records long enough, see it decline with age.


Why would you average the results when you are looking for maximum heart rate? Wouldn't you just take the highest of the three?


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

"220 minus your age" heart rate is a bogus, meaningless number. 

It derives from the general, sedentary, 'average' population, of whom 30% is obese ... it's also so that people who break a sweat getting out of a chair, will have an HR to reference so they dont have a heart attack opening the fridge door.


----------



## cbk57 (Aug 12, 2009)

I would not say by any means that I have intended to increase my max heart rate. The numbers I have observed are simply a by product of being able to record my efforts. My latest high reading of 190 was in the sprint for the mens 40 plus road race. No one seemed very interested in making sure that they were not exceeding their maximum safe limits. I have found the overall data useful in comparison to the efforts I could put out earlier in the year.


----------



## RJP Diver (Jul 2, 2010)

cbk57 said:


> I would not say by any means that I have intended to increase my max heart rate. The numbers I have observed are simply a by product of being able to record my efforts. My latest high reading of 190 was in the sprint for the mens 40 plus road race. No one seemed very interested in making sure that they were not exceeding their maximum safe limits. I have found the overall data useful in comparison to the efforts I could put out earlier in the year.


With training effect, I would think that your max heart rate would decline rather than increase - heart/CV system becomes more efficient, rather than less so.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

cbk57 said:


> No one seemed very interested in making sure that they were not exceeding their maximum safe limits


No need to to that unless there's a medical abnormality. In very simple terms, the body automatically shuts down to protect itself from harm.


----------



## mikerp (Jul 24, 2011)

cbk57 said:


> I am posting this as a related thread to the person that posted max heart vs vow. I have not trained consistently with heart rate before. I am 43 years old and when I used a heart rate monitor about 15 years ago I thought my max heart rate was 186. Bach then though the unit I had did not have memory. Now I have a garmin 510 with heart rate. At the beginning of the season I was seeing max heart rates in the range of 178. I had heard the formula about age minus 220 and thought this was pretty good. However as I have trained this year consistently monitoring heart rate I have seen progressively higher numbers. Two months ago I was seing 183 now and then. I did a race a month ago and hit 186. Two weeks ago I did another race and hit 189. Today's race peaked at 190. Now I am wondering if max h/r varies with training and fitness more so than age. Any thoughts on this?


Go into your Garmin and set your rate at the high number (I'd actually add a few beats unless you were at the point of keeling over at the time, but that's just me). Realistically it's gives you a good idea in what zone you are while riding. (+/-)


----------

