Matters of the Heart

Getting me to a gym is not a problem. Getting to the gym and doing a workout which leaves me satisfied and makes me feel like I've pushed myself to the limit is another story. Most people struggle to get to the gym at the best of times. I dont have a problem with getting there, and beginning the workout. But after about 15 mins of activity, boredom sets in and I look for excuses to get out of the cardio area and into the weights room. Sure, resistance training is good for me, but I am not spending enough time with my heart rate high enough to be in the right "phase".

http://www.heartratemonitorsusa.com/Pages/TZ-2004-Pages/HRM/HRM-model/timex/HRM/timex-exercise-zones.html

This is a basic "training zone" graph, which anyone who wishes to make their exercise worthwhile uses as a guide. By looking at this guide, I can see that I am reasonably fit.

My maximum heart rate is 195 bpm (220 bpm - my age (25) = max bpm).

I have a "resting heart rate" of around 50-60 bpm. Before, my resting heart rate would have been about 70 bpm. An athlete has their resting heart rate in the 40's. Lance Armstrong, one of the fittest athletes in the world has a crazy resting heart rate of 32 bpm.

I have an "ambient heart rate" of around 70-80 bpm (ie. standing still, while awake). Before, my ambient heart rate would have been around 80 - 90 bpm. An athlete has their ambient heart rate in the 40's or 50's. I imagine Lance Armstrong's ambient heart rate would barely rise above 40 bpm.

When performing "lite activity", my heart rate goes to around 116 bpm.

To burn fat, I need to have my heart rate at approximately 60%-70% of my maximum heart rate, which should be around 116 - 137 bpm for atleast 30 mins.

To increase stamina aerobic endurance, I should really have my heart rate at approximately 70%-80% of my maximum heart rate. For fitness (not weight loss), having my heart rate hover around 156 - 166 bpm is good for me.

Here is my predicament - While my goal is to lose weight, its not really my goal at the gym. My goal at the gym is to increase my aerobic endurance. It would be perfectly fine if I could jump on a bike each day and begin peddling and keep my heart rate at under 137 bpm, and lose weight.

However now that I've become fitter, hovering under 137 bpm bores me. Walking or biking at a slow pace bores me. I cant keep that up for 30 mins because I risk falling asleep or losing interest.

In order to remain interested, I more or less get my heart rate up into stamina aerobic endurance range. I have to run on the treadmill or get on a bike and ride like I'm riding a 1000m sprint at the Olympics - and to do any good I have to keep it going for 30 mins, and keep ensuring that I linger at around 80% of my maximum heart rate. Today, I ran and held a constant bpm of 152 - 165 bpm which is around 80% bpm. This is definately where I want to be at the gym.

So is this really that good for me? For fitness and performance, yes. For fat burning, no.

My fitness book, "The Everything Total Fitness Book", Karpay, E 2000 at page 41 says:

"You are exercising at a level that builds fitness and performance. Your perceived exertion feels somewhat hard to hard and, althought it is challenging, you could talk if you had to. You are still aerobic but are flirting with being anaerobic. Since fat can only burn in the presence of oxygen, you won't burn as high a percentage of fat as in the lower zones, but you are burning lots of calories and they add up fast."

So is Zone 4 a good idea?

If I dont get into Zone 4, I walk away feeling like I havent really pushed myself hard enough.

I'm confused.

If anyone knows about this stuff, please let me know.

Or, if you are interested, next time you are doing exercise, check out your different bpm in the different zones and see how fit you are (or arent!).

Or, you could completely ignore this post (if you are feeling guilty or if you have been had over Xmas!).