# Max heart rate



## Dadam (26 Nov 2022)

I'm 53 and been cycling fairly regularly for a few years. Before then I didn't get a lot of exercise. Nowadays, while not as a fit as I should be, I reckon I'm fitter than the average middle age bloke with a sedentary job.

The formula to determine the max seems to be 220 minus your age, which would put me around 167. The problem is when I'm cycling I spend long periods up in the 180s. As soon as there's a hint of a hill it goes right up there and often doesn't drop below 160 until I stop. Some hills I simply couldn't get up without going over 170 even in granny gears and keeping below it would pretty much rule me out of cycling as I'm surrounded by them.

I also have a mild form of atrial fibrillation, but it's not all the time, just occasionally. Usually times of mental or emotional stress or just random. It does not usually come on when exercising. I'm not on any medication and when discussing with the cardiologist he didn't advise taking particular care not to let it get too high. His general feeling was a bit of cardio would be a good thing.

I've just got an ebike (Orbea Gain) and I've not noticed any reduction, I'm just faster up the hills!  I feel like I've got to keep spinning to get the assistance so might as well dig in.

So should I be dialling it down a bit, or is it ok just keep within what feels comfortable?


----------



## dave r (26 Nov 2022)

The formula is flawed I wouldn't take to much notice of it.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 Nov 2022)

dave r said:


> The formula is flawed I wouldn't take to much notice of it.



The formula isn’t flawed, it was not produced for working out an individual’s max HR. It’s the misappropriation that’s the problem.


----------



## ColinJ (26 Nov 2022)

Forget the formula - It is one of those those things that works for some people but not for others! (@dave r just beat me to it!)

180s _IS _pretty high for someone in their 50s, but if it isn't causing you any problems then I wouldn't worry _too much_ about it.

Do watch out for that AF though! I started suffering from it off and on after health issues 10 years ago. I can set it off if I push myself too hard on the bike. I'm talking about the last 5% or so of effort. I can go up steep hills slowly but if I tried to race up them then I would often get myself into trouble. 

Obviously, if you start to have problems then you are overdoing it.

You've got me wondering how high _MY _heart rate can go these days. 30 years ago it was around 200 bpm, but it must be way down from that now. I might put some batteries in my old HRM and see if it still works...


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 Nov 2022)

ColinJ said:


> I might put some batteries in my old HRM Pace Maker


FTFY


----------



## Jameshow (26 Nov 2022)

ColinJ said:


> Forget the formula - It is one of those those things that works for some people but not for others! (@dave r just beat me to it!)
> 
> 180s _IS _pretty high for someone in their 50s, but if it isn't causing you any problems then I wouldn't worry _too much_ about it.
> 
> ...



What do you need to do if you do go into AF might be worth knowing if you go into it on a ride? 

I have family history of AF to watching closely.


----------



## ColinJ (26 Nov 2022)

Jameshow said:


> What do you need to do if you do go into AF might be worth knowing if you go into it on a ride?
> 
> I have family history of AF to watching closely.


A friend who suffers from bouts of AF swears by the Valsalva manoeuvre. I have tried it and not had much luck with it but I just read about a modified version where you lie down after blowing and elevate your legs. That is supposed to be much more effective. I'll give that a go next time.

The AF that I have experienced was fairly mild, but still not pleasant - a fluttery rhythm rather than one going completely crazy.


----------



## biggs682 (26 Nov 2022)

I normally see a max in the 160's on my rides


----------



## Dadam (26 Nov 2022)

ColinJ said:


> The AF that I have experienced was fairly mild, but still not pleasant - a fluttery rhythm rather than one going completely crazy.



That's pretty much like mine, fluttery. What I do is sit down, try to relax, breathe deep. Interesting you mention the Valsalva. I take a moderate breath, hold it, then squeeze the diaphragm as if trying to exhale but hold it in for a second or two. A couple of those seems to settle it...usually.


----------



## stephec (26 Nov 2022)

I ran a 10k race today, not exactly flat out, and at 53 years old had an average bpm of 167.


----------



## Dadam (26 Nov 2022)

RHR averages around 50.
All of this assumes my Garmin vivoactive watch is reading accurately of course!


----------



## presta (26 Nov 2022)

Dadam said:


> should I be dialling it down a bit


Yes.


Dadam said:


> I also have a mild form of atrial fibrillation


Did that start before or after you started the exercise? A history of chronic endurance training increases the risk of developing AF ~5 fold.


Dadam said:


> the cardiologist he didn't advise taking particular care not to let it get too high


Cardiology never have accepted my AF is anything to do with exercise, despite me turning up on their doorstep in an ambulance 10 times after following their advice to resume exercise. 


Ming the Merciless said:


> The formula isn’t flawed, it was not produced for working out an individual’s max HR. It’s the misappropriation that’s the problem.


Yes, it is a population average, but nevertheless my local hospital still use it as the limit on a Bruce test.


ColinJ said:


> if it isn't causing you any problems then I wouldn't worry _too much_ about it


Mine wasn't causing any problem right up to the point where it was, I got away with it for ~30 years


ColinJ said:


> if you start to have problems.....


...it's too late.


ColinJ said:


> A friend who suffers from bouts of AF swears by the Valsalva manoeuvre


I've tried to blow the plunger out of a syringe for the paramedics numerous times, I never managed to either force the plunger out or cardiovert. Drinking cold water was another suggestion I had from a GP, that's not going to work for me, hot/cold food/drink triggers my AF, one of the symptoms I noticed before diagnosis was the way my heart would race after drinking from the bottle on the bike.

I'd been getting runs of palpitations when I got into bed for years, but it wasn't until a few weeks after my first Bruce test in 2009 that I started seeing it on the bike. Ironically, I took the clear Bruce test as a green light to exercise even harder and ignored the HRM because I thought it was faulty. I went downhill fast after that, and found myself on an ambulance ride to an appointment with a diagnosis shortly after a second Bruce test in 2012.

Despite the facts of the matter, I never really did accept that my AF was preventing me from exercising, or give up hope of regaining my fitness and returning to cycling, but after years of trying to train as carefully as possible, all I succeeded in doing was making my health and fitness worse. In late 2019 I reflected on 7 years of losing fitness as I followed formal programs, and decided I might just as well go back to ad-hoc traing as I used to. That ranks as one of the worst decisions I've ever made, the effect was catastrophic, and I've not cycled at all since 1.4 20.

AF doesn't stop everybody from exercising though, my electrophysiologist will tell you he has patients who are olympic athletes, but you pay a high price if the gamble doesn't pay off.


ColinJ said:


> The AF that I have experienced was fairly mild, but still not pleasant - a fluttery rhythm rather than one going completely crazy.


I thought a HR of 200+ was a hoot when I was diagnosed, but I don't now.


Dadam said:


> As soon as there's a hint of a hill it goes right up there and often doesn't drop below 160 until I stop. Some hills I simply couldn't get up without going over 170 even in granny gears


Been there, done that. My HR would shoot up at the slightest provocation then not come back down again, it's caused by chronic overtraining. What's your lying/standing HR like? Mine would go from ~42 laying down, to ~100 standing still, a rise of >30bpm is POTS.


stephec said:


> I ran a 10k race today, not exactly flat out, and at 53 years old had an average bpm of 167.


That's as may be, but how fast does your HR return to normal when you stop?

"_A greater reduction in heart rate after exercise during the reference period is associated with a higher level of cardiac fitness......Heart rates assessed during treadmill stress test that do not drop by more than 12 bpm one minute after stopping exercise (if cool-down period after exercise) or by more than 18 bpm one minute after stopping exercise (if no cool-down period and supine position as soon as possible) are associated with an increased risk of death."_


----------



## dave r (26 Nov 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> The formula isn’t flawed, it was not produced for working out an individual’s max HR. It’s the misappropriation that’s the problem.



https://www.castlehillfitness.com/fitness-training/dispelling-the-220-age-myth


----------



## Dadam (26 Nov 2022)

@presta 
The AF first presented before I started cycling at all, and when I was doing very little exercise. I would hardly describe my activity as chronic endurance training. I cycle to work once or twice a week (<9 miles round tri) and occasional ride on a weekend. 
I think I can rule out chronic overtraining as a cause in my case


----------



## Dogtrousers (26 Nov 2022)

I've always thought your max heart rate was just that - a personal maximum. The highest I ever regularly record mine (typically when struggling up steep hills) is roughly 13bpm higher than the 220-age formula. I'm not too worried by that. That may not be my _absolute_ max, but it's the maximum I get when out cycling. Maybe I could go higher in some kind of lab test I don't know.

But beyond that, atrial fibrillation and scary sounding things like that - seek advice from your GP.


----------



## stephec (26 Nov 2022)

presta said:


> That's as may be, but how fast does your HR return to normal when you stop?
> 
> "_A greater reduction in heart rate after exercise during the reference period is associated with a higher level of cardiac fitness......Heart rates assessed during treadmill stress test that do not drop by more than 12 bpm one minute after stopping exercise (if cool-down period after exercise) or by more than 18 bpm one minute after stopping exercise (if no cool-down period and supine position as soon as possible) are associated with an increased risk of death."_



Usually I'll cool down straight after so it drops gradually, but if I stop abruptly it gets to about 90bpm in under a minute if I just stroll around a bit.


----------



## Alex321 (27 Nov 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> I've always thought your max heart rate was just that - a personal maximum. The highest I ever regularly record mine (typically when struggling up steep hills) is roughly 13bpm higher than the 220-age formula. I'm not too worried by that. That may not be my _absolute_ max, but it's the maximum I get when out cycling. Maybe I could go higher in some kind of lab test I don't know.



Yes it is a personal maximum. And the maximum is mainly a result of genetics and age, though it does tend to reduce more slowly with generally fit people.

It is mainly useful to know in order to know where the various "zones" are for exercise.

Mine is way higher than the 220-age, or even the slightly better (for over 40s) 207 - (0.7 * age), or the adjusted for fit people one of 211 - 0.64 * age. Those give 157, 163 and 169 respectively, and I'm sure mine is in the high 170s. I actually hit 179 on the road last week, at which point I got off and pushed - that was after a few hundred yards of over 20% gradient.

Two years ago, I regularly went over 170, but now I'm fitter and more experienced on hills, and the ones that would have been around 172-174 are now done at around 165-168, and it is quite rare I go over 170 - but it does still happen on occasion.

And once I reach level ground, even while still cycling, it will drop back by around 20bpm within a minute or two.


----------



## Dogtrousers (27 Nov 2022)

One fairly obvious question is "who cares?". Why is your MHR interesting? 

The only answer I have (there may be others) is that this enables you to define personal zones.

And why are zones interesting? They enable you to do HR based structured training, and also enable you to more easily get numeric feedback on your effort level so you can make decisions like "this is a very long ride, I'm riding in a zone that's not sustainable, better back off". And lastly, if you have recorded your HR you can look at how much time you spent in zones and think things like "I thought I was taking it easy but my HR was higher than expected. Maybe something's wrong. Oncoming cold or something "


But you can still do this stuff if your value for MHR is not strictly correct.


----------



## Arrowfoot (27 Nov 2022)

Dadam said:


> I'm 53 and been cycling fairly regularly for a few years. Before then I didn't get a lot of exercise. Nowadays, while not as a fit as I should be, I reckon I'm fitter than the average middle age bloke with a sedentary job.
> 
> The formula to determine the max seems to be 220 minus your age, which would put me around 167. The problem is when I'm cycling I spend long periods up in the 180s. As soon as there's a hint of a hill it goes right up there and often doesn't drop below 160 until I stop. Some hills I simply couldn't get up without going over 170 even in granny gears and keeping below it would pretty much rule me out of cycling as I'm surrounded by them.
> 
> ...


In a nutshell there is no "scientific merit".


----------



## steveindenmark (27 Nov 2022)

I am 64 and like to ride long distance. I hope to ride the Pan Celtic Race next year. When I ride, I try as hard as possible to keep under 150bpm for the entire ride. It means slowing down, especially on hills. My average for a ride is about 135bpm for a ride. Its not easy trying to keep your heart beat down while trying to surge ahead. It takes discipline. But I read somewhere that to ride far, you have to slow down. I find that by concentrating on the heart beat monitor, it helps to make you concentrate on keeping a low heartbeat. Take your eyes off it and it climbs rapidly..


----------



## berty bassett (27 Nov 2022)

another one for not taking much notice of formula . if you ride all the time with hr data then only you will know what pattern you are capable of . takes some time to look at data and get what you want out of it but its doable 
ie long rides set display to show av and you should know the number you can maintain , same with short rides . on hilly rides I keep an eye on hr make sure it doesnt go above certain number then I know I can maintain that effort till top 
short hills waste of time with hr as they are over before you get data so I just go for it up them and rest a bit at top if I want 
personally I use the data just to see how hard I was trying and means nothing to anyone bar myself 
this all depends on whether you feel good in yourself and not got a cold or something , better than average speed as that can change with the wind and rain and traffic etc in my own opinion 
then you can start with power meter and really get confused  but worth it
not worth mucking about with AF - you ain't got a back up ticker , I have heart issues and that's why I keep an eye on what its up to (a bit ) I should listen to the experts who get paid to keep people alive more than people like me


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Nov 2022)

dave r said:


> https://www.castlehillfitness.com/fitness-training/dispelling-the-220-age-myth



It was a trend line never intended to be used to calculate an individual’s max heart rate. It’s been misused since, as per your article. But that wasn’t intended purpose of formula.


----------



## Sharky (27 Nov 2022)

Dadam said:


> Some hills I simply couldn't get up without going over 170 even in granny gears


What gear is your Granny using and what gradient? 

Dropping to very low gears isn't always the best as it puts the stress on the heart and lungs. Whereas a higher gear will put the stress on the arm and leg muscles. The trick is to find the balance where stress is equally apportioned. 

Technique is also a skill to be learned. Knowing when to stay seated and pedal or to get out of the saddle and use more strength. And when standing on the pedals never completely lock out the legs. Once the legs are fully straight, it's just your body weight trying to turn the pedals. 

I'm getting on a bit, but it's rare for a hill to defeat me, but have no issue with getting off and walking.


----------



## Dadam (27 Nov 2022)

Sharky said:


> What gear is your Granny using and what gradient?


The hill I have in mind is at the end of my commute home. It's not huge. It averages 4 or 5 % over 1.2 mile with a short section in the middle that hits 9-10%. It's that bit that gets my heart motoring, but it's usually because I'm a bit tired anyway and I've been working fairly hard on the first half of the commute which is pretty flat. I'm also usually carrying a pannier with a laptop and change of clothes.

I've not tried this one on my ebike yet as I've been working from home for a couple of weeks. But on my hybrid it's got 28/38/48 up front and 11-32 cassette. So I'll usually be on 28-32 or 28-28 for the steeper bits.


----------



## Dogtrousers (27 Nov 2022)

berty bassett said:


> another one for not taking much notice of formula . if you ride all the time with hr data then only you will know what pattern you are capable of . takes some time to look at data and get what you want out of it but its doable


Oddly enough, this is why the 220-age formula isn't so bad. It will give you a decent enough ballpark figure to set up your zones. Then after that you can figure out your own patterns.

There are alternate formulae that are supposedly more "accurate". But why bother? Just ride your bike for a while and you will eventually discover it.


----------



## Jameshow (27 Nov 2022)

If


steveindenmark said:


> I am 64 and like to ride long distance. I hope to ride the Pan Celtic Race next year. When I ride, I try as hard as possible to keep under 150bpm for the entire ride. It means slowing down, especially on hills. My average for a ride is about 135bpm for a ride. Its not easy trying to keep your heart beat down while trying to surge ahead. It takes discipline. But I read somewhere that to ride far, you have to slow down. I find that by concentrating on the heart beat monitor, it helps to make you concentrate on keeping a low heartbeat. Take your eyes off it and it climbs rapidly..



I find that if I'm exerting myself on a long ride I pushing too hard. 

Far better to change down a gear than go into the red. 

The only exception is short rises which I'll get out the saddle to climb.


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Nov 2022)

Alex321 said:


> Mine is way higher than the 220-age, or even the slightly better (for over 40s) 207 - (0.7 * age), or the adjusted for fit people one of 211 - 0.64 * age. T


These are two useful formulae but as others have said; it's personal. I was an early adopter of HRM (Polar, with memory, early 80s) for training and in competition (running). Racing I'd normally finish at over 200 (max 207) and when tested I 'managed' 196. Now on a bike maybe last year I had it over 180 (which is a fair few above 211 - 0.64 * age).
I make no comment about the OP's AF - CycleChat is just that: chat, and heart issues seem above the 'chat' threshold, except for hearing other people's tribulations and resolutions.
See also: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/heart.225112/page-2#post-4995807
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/heart-rate-range.281254/page-3#post-6587348
As @presta says, if the recovery rate is good then all is good whatever the top number is, as far as simple HR is concerned.


----------



## Dadam (28 Nov 2022)

Thanks for the replies. To answer a couple of points, I'm not especially worried per se. I just wanted to understand what sort of rate should be avoided at all costs, and what should I avoid being in for too long; when to stop for a rest.

Looking again at my Strava traces, my perception that once up my HR stays at a high rate seems to be because most of my rides are commutes and always end with a steep hill! Other rides it does seem to recover reasonably quick, e.g. a minute or two at a traffic light, or a gentle downhill.

Regarding the AF I appreciate people don't want to seem to give advice but I am just interested in other people's experience especially of similar age/fitness. It made sense to state it though as it can't be ignored; it's the reason I'm more aware of HR. I have regular checkups with the GP practice. I've not had any cardiac tests for a few years because I was discharged with no meds or need for followup unless anything changed, and it hasn't. My perception is the frequency I have perceptible flutters has reduced since starting cycling and being generally a bit fitter. I'm a big bloke at 6'3" and 15 stone, so overweight but not massively. I'm about 1.5 stone lighter than I was when I had all the tests. Trying to shift some of the rest now, hence my buying an e-roadbike to motivate me to get out more and go further. Now I have the option to whack it in max assist mode, change down to an easier gear if there is one and take it easier.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (28 Nov 2022)

Dadam said:


> I just wanted to understand what sort of rate should be avoided at all costs,



If fit and healthy then there’s no particular heart rate to be avoided other than zero. Though frequent high heart rates (for the individual) are not recommended for long term health as it causes chronic stress which leads to the problems. But as you’ve stated, you have AF; your GP is best placed to advise on whether any heart rate ranges should be avoided.


----------

