checking with you all for my heart rate zone to burn fat and not burn muscle.

my age is 27 so my max heart rate is 193.

Im figuring that 65 % to 75 % of that is between 125 and 144.... is this correct?

Anything higher then 144 is bad for me because i risk burning muscle.... correct?


Just want to make sure i got these numbers correct. thanks.

I got mine by doing the following:

find resting heart rate (RHR).

Resting Heart Rate can be found by sitting w/ your eyes closed, and just resting, open your eyes after 2 minutes of this, and see what your heartrate is, mine was 41. There are other methods for this, including sleeping w/ your heart monitor on, and checking first thing when you wake up. I am good at relaxing, so I think my method works fine for me. My girlfriend however had to use the second method :-).

find max heart rate (MHR), you already have this :-).

find heart rate reserve (HRR), HRR = MHR - RHR.

This is the range of possible values, you can't go below min, or above max, so they should not really be included when finding your target zone.

find your target zone (65% - 75%, or whatever you want).

(HRR * .65) + RHR = lower bounds.
(HRR * .75) + RHR = upper bounds.

Hope that helps.

thanks.... why is the upper and lower bounds important?

if i just wanted my zone of fat burning then is the above calculation correct?

also... i have the F1 watch and i cant figure out how to set my zones.... every time i press the side button it turns off.

if i just wanted my zone of fat burning then is the above calculation correct?
Yeah, they're correct. Those numbers aren't magic either... if you go over 144, you won't instantly start burning muscle. Just try to stay within those bounds for as long as you can.

I don't know about your particular HRM, sorry.

I found this calc online, and I figured it made sense because. Here are the two formulas, calculated for me.

I am 26, so:

220 - 26 = 194.
194 * .65 = 126.1
194 * .75 = 145

The above includes 0 - 41, which are useless to me, my heartrate does not go lower than 41, I think my way is more accurate.

I am 26, so:
220 - 26 = 194
resting heart rate = 41
194 - 41 = 153
(153 * .65) + 41 = 140.45
(153 * .75) + 41 = 155.75

Google "resting heart rate" and "heart rate reserve" for yourself and read about it.

Hope that helps.

Those numbers aren't magic either...

Agreed, it is all estimation anyway. Just different methods to estimate :-).

The above includes 0 - 41, which are useless to me, my heartrate does not go lower than 41, I think my way is more accurate.
Hmm... not sure I agree with your math here.

220-age = approximate maximum heart rate

So for me, 220-33 = 187. So 187 is my max heart rate. Now we are looking to find 65% and 75% or you max heart rate. That's 187 * 0.65 and 187 * 0.75.

If you subtract out your min heart rate (41?) then you're not calculating a percentage of your maximum heart rate, you're calculating a percentage of your heart rate range. That doesn't seem right.

not sure I agree with your math here.

It's not MINE :-).

http://www.primusweb.com/fitnesspartner/library/activity/thr.htm

I found many articles like this when I first decided to calculate my target zone. The method on the above site is the one I chose.

It's not MINE :-).
That's interesting... I saw this differently than you did. It says to calculate 220 - age, so you did that.

Then it says to subtract your resting heart rate from that number. Is your heart rate 41? That's a really, really low heart rate. This number makes a big difference in the equation, that's why I ask.

Anyway, after you subtract that, then you multiply that by the intensity of your exercise level. This is related to, but not the same as your hr%. In other words, when I excercise at 75% intensity, I'm at a higher heart rate then 75% mhr.

I'm just being picky here... I'm really just curious because your numbers are quite higher than mine.

Yeah, when I rest w/ my eyes closed for 2 minutes, I go to 41bpm. This is repeatable, basically, I have tried this a number of times, and that is what it is.

I guess the deciding factor is if you are going for 65%-75% of your maximum heart rate, or of your heart rate reserve. I decided to use the method I outlined above. It made more sense to me. I figured the fact that my resting heart rate is 41, why would I let all those beats I will never see drag down my zone.

Put another way... 41 to 194 is my range of acheivable heart rates, let's say this correlates to my range of effort. My heartbeat/effort range is not 0 thru 194, thus if I want to do 65% of the effort I am capable of, then I need to do (194 - 41) * .65.

Makes sense to me.

Does anyone else have any thoughts?

i just had my fasted cardio session with the polar watch.


heres what i noticed....

when i was doing my normal jogging (slow... moderate) i could hit 165 easy... never below 144. when i walked as hard as i could (somewhat) i could never get over 144.... so i was between 135 and 144 when i walked hard. it doesnt feel like im doing anything just walking though.... jogging really makes me feel like i did something... but walking is a lot easier on my legs.


right now i feel this wierd sensation at certain parts of my body.... legs and butt.... its like my muscles or nerves are twitching or something.... not sure what it is. feels wierd.



well what should i do guys? walk or jog? can i really burn fat walking? it doesnt seem like i would ..... but the math and the watch say so.

Yeah, when I rest w/ my eyes closed for 2 minutes, I go to 41bpm.
Man, you're in shape!!!

I ran for a while, and had the same problem you are, my HR was too high when running, and too low when walking. Thus, I ran for 1 minute, walked for 1 minute. Dunno if this is good or not but it worked for me. Since then, I have picked up in line skating for outdoor, and bought an elliptical for indoor. Both methods allow me to keep my HR dead on my target. Dunno about tingling, I don't experience this, I just get fatigued, which means, I have to walk slow for a bit after cardio :-).

So when people say stay within the 65-75% range does that mean with it adjusted for your resting pulse or simply the straight percentage? When I run usually its in the 162 pulse range and that would be about 83% but when adjusted for resting pulse its about 78%. I really don't get too fatigued when I run, I can run about 15 miles at the rate I usually do, but I'm concerned about my heart rate being too high, I don't want to lose muscle.

So when people say stay within the 65-75% range does that mean with it adjusted for your resting pulse or simply the straight percentage?

I guess that is the question. I am not sure of the answer. My interpretation was that it was adjusted for my RHR. I have used the formula I provided above. I have not had any problems. I have been doing cardio at 140 - 155 bpm for 6 months, I have lost lots of fat. I don't think I have lost notable muscle mass. I base this on my BF% readings, and my strength gains. I also base this on the fact that my arms have gotten BIGGER while the rest of me gets smaller.

As I said earlier, it is all estimates anyway, so I believe you are likely to succeed in either case!

I have been doing cardio at 140 - 155 bpm for 6 months, I have lost lots of fat. I don't think I have lost notable muscle mass. I base this on my BF% readings, and my strength gains.



and this is with doing cardio in the 65 to 75 percent zone.... correct? and you do this by i mintute jogging and 1 minute walking?

and this is with doing cardio in the 65 to 75 percent zone.... correct? and you do this by i mintute jogging and 1 minute walking?

Yes, 65 - 75. Yes initially I did it using the walk/run method. Nowadays, I use my elliptical exclusively. When it gets warm out again, I will go back to walk/run and inline skating.

Everyone is going to be different. If I take 75% of my supposed MHR (188) is 141, 75% of my adjusted is 155.

There is no way I could run at 155 HR for 45 minutes. My MAX HR is probably much lower than 220-age, and my resting is ~52. I have to run at ~9 mph at 3% incline to get up into the mid-150's. The max I have ever managed on my treadmil (doing 10mph at the end of a 10k) is 166!

141 is going hard for me.

So it's all a bit of a guess anyway. Chances are if you can keep the pace going for 45 minutes and feel like you could keep going for another 20-30 mins, you are well in the areobic zone.

if i hard walk im in that zone for a good amount of time. if i jog (like i used to.... i would jog for 45 to 50 minutes straight) im going above 150 easy. i can keep that pace of 150 to 165 for 45 mintues and still feel like doing a little more though my legs are worn out and numb. also during most of that time i am not able to have a conversation with anyone.... they say that if you are doing cardio and are able to have a convo while at it then you are in the zone.

ive been jogging like this for 2 weeks now and im curious if i lost some muscle. i guess ill just do the hard walking thing and see how that works out even if it doesnt feel like im doing much.

Totally agree with what has been said. It will vary from person to person and how much conditioning you have. I am 31 and my max should be about 190 or so. The highest I have ever gotten my heart rate monitor up to when I was running - ( I have a polar heart rate monitor with all the bells and whistles) - was 186 or so. moderate easy pace that I could sustain for a long time would be around 155 or so. When I get in the 170's I am really pushing it. It isn't very often that I get higher than 182, very rare occasions.
I love my heart rate monitor. It helps me push myself. Sometimes when I am thinking of taking it easy, I just look down at it and think " Oops, nope, push harder."

My husband gave me mine for my birthday last year.