Is it worth getting a heart rate monitor

[nosherduke996]

Can anybody explain if it worth getting a hrm for some one that just wants to be fitter and loose a stone in weight.

 

[SimonRoberts0204]

That depends on whether you have done much exercise before, and so whether you can automatically feel if you're working in your training zone.

I dont really benefit from them as i'm quite a good judge of how hard im pushing it, but then, they are quite cheap these days...

 

[Jim_Noir]

Depends if you want to burn fat fast, then I'd say yes to the HRM so you can stick to training at 65% of your max (the fat burning zone). However I think why not just go flat out, sure it's not going to burn fat as well, but you will still burn fat and get fitter at the same time.
I use one so I can see how long I can stay above 90% of my max and how quick my HR comes down.

 

[SimonRoberts0204]

Is that true? So if I ride for an hour at 65 percent , il burn more fat than if im at 85 percent? Why is that? (for someone without a sports science degree!)

 

[Jim_Noir]

http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/hrzones.php

They say it's true, hence why they say walking is great to lose weight as it's not heart pumping

I have not used my HRM on a cycle, but I assume most people are working in the 70% to 80% zone, hence why cyclying tones you up so well

 

[PK99]

Depends if you want to burn fat fast, then I'd say yes to the HRM so you can stick to training at 65% of your max (the fat burning zone). .

Fat burning zone does NOT mean weight loss zone.

At higher intensities, more fat is burned but as a lower % of total energy expended.

Weight loss depends on Total calories in - Total calories out

http://exercise.about.com/cs/cardioworkouts/l/aa022601a.htm

 

[Jim_Noir]

BTW I have 2 HRM, a timex Iron man and a tescos own. the Tescos own is far better, as the timex one I have had to replace the HRM unit 3 times in a year, the salt gets in an wreaks it. But the Tesco one is fine... though it doesn' seem to work with treadmills in the gym. Cost 14 quid or sumit so worth a try

 

[I am Spartacus]

Is that true? So if I ride for an hour at 65 percent , il burn more fat than if im at 85 percent? Why is that? (for someone without a sports science degree!)

The body will use different 'energy systems' to fuel work at different intensities.

HOWEVER, it is NOT conclusive AT ALL that exercising at a single level will induce more so called weight loss than at another level.
The jury is out and will probably remain out as even more more research is done piled on the huge amount of research done up to this point.

If you are interested in 'mapping' your intensities to a certain HR then get one.. otherwise don't bother...

HR is only a single factor in fitness and to use it in isolation is a 'false economy'

 

[HLaB]

Some people get very good use out of them; mine just sits on top of my PC case. I like to cycle how I feel rather than by a number.

 

[PK99]

HOWEVER, it is NOT conclusive AT ALL that exercising at a single level will induce more so called weight loss than at another level.'

I have in fact read a suggestion that exercising in the Fat Burning Zone followed by a recovery drink might actually lay down fat as the new calories find the muscle stores full and they go to the next best option

 

[garrilla]

http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/hrzones.php

They say it's true, hence why they say walking is great to lose weight as it's not heart pumping

I have not used my HRM on a cycle, but I assume most people are working in the 70% to 80% zone, hence why cyclying tones you up so well

Ironically, a link at the bottom of the page you linked to suggests there is no fat burning zone

http://www.runningforfitness.org/faq/weightloss.php

 

[sheddy]

only if you are trying to land in a boulder field on the Sea of Tranquility

 

[I am Spartacus]

I have in fact read a suggestion that exercising in the Fat Burning Zone followed by a recovery drink might actually lay down fat as the new calories find the muscle stores full and they go to the next best option

tis true.. another theory.. like pebbles on a beach..

mine is
pay me a huge wadge of money and I'll let you
eat big breakkie ... nice lunch.... delicious dinner

50 miles in the morning at moderate pace

50 miles in the afternoon at moderate/hard/race/moderate paces

45 gentle spin in the evening + upper body resistance training 20 mins

7 days

more or less guarantee you will weigh less at the finish than at the start

 

[yello]

At higher intensities, more fat is burned but as a lower % of total energy expended.

That is my understanding to.

As to whether it is 'worth' getting an HRM, only really the OP can decide that. I personally would say yes, since they cost very little and give you useful info.

I keep an eye on my maximum rate rather than zones but if you do want to try and stay at 65% (or whatever) then an HRM has to be a darn site simpler than gauging how you feel (though I do accept you can do it that way too).

I say "try and stay at 65%" because the terrain may not always allow you to have that much control over your heart rate! I'm damned sure I'm not getting off and pushing just to stop my heart rate pinging!

 

[yenrod]

Can anybody explain if it worth getting a hrm for some one that just wants to be fitter and loose a stone in weight.

No, ive had them over the years and have one now which aint much good as the signal dont get to the watch.

Ok for recovery.

To be honest - if your into losing weight - then just put the bike in an easy gear and ride for about 2hrs gearing to easier, on the hills.

Its the quicker riding that uses your more immediate energy stores !