Cardio Confusion . . . any pointers?

[taf1968]

Struggling a bit with target heart rate vs perceived effort . . . especially with regard to low & moderate intensity sessions. Here's why:

At 40 yrs old, my MHR would be 180. OK, easy enough. And I understand from many sources that staying at or just under 70% is the recommended goal for moderate intensity cardio--so if I do the calculation, that puts me at a target of 125 - 130 bpm.

The confusing thing to me is that this does not seem to match with what I would call my "perceived effort" at that same level. I mean, if I do 45 minutes at 125 bpm (using a Polar chest strap & monitor), I don't even break a sweat--not even close. Instead of a perceived effort of what I would think should be a "7" (70% of max) it feels more like a 3 or 4 tops.

So what do you guys go by for moderate intensity cardio? Do you go with "how you feel" and perceived effort more than actual heart rate? I suppose the answer is "experiment with it and see what works best for you" but I am curious what everyone else does?

[shuriwud]

Tom, I normally go with how I feel. I'm no expert, but I would think that the percentages are not the 'end all to be all'. I say that because if 2 individuals of the same age get their heart rate to 126bpm, yet one person has a resting heart rate of 70bpm while the other has a heart rate of 60bpm,are they both working at the same intensity? I don't think so. I use the heart rate monitor more to see how fast/long it takes my heart rate to decrease after an interval. Other than that it's all how I feel.

Then again, I could be completely wrong. LOL.

[taf1968]

Thanks, bro . . . nice to see another Colorado representative on here!

[DeathtoToasters]

Same situation here... I would love to hear some insight on this.

[taf1968]

Bump

Anyone . . . anyone . . . Bueller??

[sluge]

Depends On What I Am Trying To Accomplish. If Fat Burning Is My Goal Then I Tend To Keep It To The Lower Side, Meaning Around 117 To 120. If Trying To Increase My Cardiovascular Performance I Bump It Up To About 150 And Keep It There.

[Marius_Ursus]

Not for nothin', I don't sweat the details. Whether I'm boxing, running, or working the heavy bag, if I break a sweat, I consider it a good session.

[rpaul11]

I know we've talked about this in your journal some and I question this also. when I am in the "target fat burn zone" I don't feel like I'm accomplishing much.

Looking to hear some input from others more experienced than me

[ironwill2008]

If your goal is to burn bodyfat, stay at a pace where you can just barely carry on a conversation. This will put you right at your maximum aerobic capacity. As long as you don't go higher, and start huffing and puffing, your body will have no choice but to burn bodyfat, after about 20 minutes at this pace.

[snoack]

Not for nothin', I don't sweat the details. Whether I'm boxing, running, or working the heavy bag, if I break a sweat, I consider it a good session.

that's all I'm ever looking for for. I think people get way to hung up on the details at times.

[joed]

Struggling a bit with target heart rate vs perceived effort . . . especially with regard to low & moderate intensity sessions...So what do you guys go by for moderate intensity cardio? Do you go with "how you feel" and perceived effort more than actual heart rate?...

All good replies here, but I think this is a question that everyone might answer differently. The variables you begin to look at add up quickly, and each one brings more complexity. In my case, and that of other heart patients, when you factor in the medications, how you slept last night, what and when you ate today, etc., the possibilities seem endless. Also, we need to remember that the 'target heart rate' for fat burning, etc., is a wide range that can be applied to the average man, and I'm positive it's not accurate for most of us. Here's how I've decided to look at the issue, after many years of doing some cardio most everyday.

I juggle my heart rate (HR) with my perceived level of intensity. Most often there's a pretty close correlation, and when I try to guess my HR by my exertion I'm usually within 5 beats. But this is after a very long time of watching these two things: HR and effort. There are some days when I just can't 'get it up' so to speak, and I just slog along without much intensity - it's just not there. I keep a casual log of the time I spend, how may calories I burned, and the level of incline and speed, for example, on the treadmill or elliptical. Despite the off days, I keep making progress each week although the fat is not dropping off me; I blame my diet mistakes.

The idea of using HR when you're cooling down is a good measure of your level of cardio-pulmonary fitness. The faster your HR returns to a near resting pace the better condition you're in.

After that long-winded reply, I'd suggest you experiment on yourself and keep a log. As has been said, what are your goals? Cardiovascular fitness? Keep track of your recovery HR across time, that will reflect your progress. Lose weight by burning calories? Keep track of the burnt calories, your food calorie intake, and your weight. Keep it simple at first until you get the hang of what you're doing, then you can focus more on the specifics of what else might be involved.

Good to see more Colorado guys here; I'm in SW Littleton in the foothills.

[taf1968]

Thanks to everyone for the replies thus far . . . keep them coming as I know this is of interest to a lot of folks here.

I like joed's suggestion of logging this and seeing if I can come up with some correlations bewteen HR/Effort and results. So maybe I will give that a try for a little while and see where it goes. Will make some notes in my journal that I just started.

My plan is to mix things up with a couple days of higher intensity interval training and a couple days of longer, low-to-moderate cardio to complement my weight training.

EDIT: On recharge, so will get back to those I owe reps to here.

[SP1966]

Not for nothin', I don't sweat the details. Whether I'm boxing, running, or working the heavy bag, if I break a sweat, I consider it a good session.

that's all I'm ever looking for for. I think people get way to hung up on the details at times.

I agree with the two posts quoted, I would drive myself crazy(er?) if got that detailed with cardio. If when I am done I feel tired and am soaked, I hit my target!!

[beancntr]

that's all I'm ever looking for for. I think people get way to hung up on the details at times.

Couldn't agree more. I got way too hung up on all this stuff when I first started. I would read an article that said HIIT was the best, then another article that totally contradicted it and said moderate intensity was the way to go. I tried both for several weeks and didn't notice a ton of difference either way. So I finally decided to just go with what felt right to me. I prefer to be drenched and dragging when I'm done with cardio. Feels like I slacked when I just do moderate.