Hi

I use a heart rate monitor when I go to the gym and have been using it on my runs.

I am trying to lose weight mainly but obviously want to get fit at the same time.

I have been talking to someone about my heartrate and I said what my averate heart rate is and what my max is.

Average 130-140
Max 170 180

I've been told I am working to hard and that rather then being in an 'Aerobic Zone' when I workout or run I am in an 'Anaerobic Zone' and burning glycogen and not fat (which is not what I want).

Is this right. I want to get fit and lose weight at the same time.

Any help would be great

Cheers

The Minx

p.s. do you like my new avatar?? (thats what I am going to look like when I am fit and slim) I wish!!! :eek:

__________________
Sing like you think no ones listening!!!
Dance like there's no-one around!!

Minxie, I'll leave others to answer your heart rate stuff, since starting running two years ago I've just tracked my average times on training runs to guage progress. But I do like your avatar -are you really planning on growing a tail !

__________________
Don

Hi LITTLE MINXIE
Think of short and fast when you think of anaerobic
Heavy weight lifting sprinting and any rapid burst of hard exercise is anaerobic.
These types of exercise cannot last long because oxygen is not used for energy and a by product lactic acid is produced
It's for this reason you should have easy sessions as well as hard

idon't know how old you are with regard to your upper and lower heart rate but the principal is the same across the age range

60-70%of your maximumheart rate is classed as light
benefits Helps in weight management,improves your basic endurance and is good for recovery exercise

feels like- Comfortable easy breathing light sweating low loading for muscles

70-80% is moderate
benefits improves aerobic fitness
feels like- good easy breathingmoderate sweating

recommended for everybody for sessions of moderate length.

80-90% maximizes perfomance capacity.

feels like-heavy breathing intense sweating and tiredness in the muscles.

recommended for fit persons and for short exercise sessions

I hope this makes it clear for you

cheriton


Nice avatar does it mean when you get slim and fit you're going to turn into a cartoon character? ROAD RUNNER maybe

I'd have to agree with Calton here. Everyone seems to be getting hung-up on the facts and figures. Running is a basic and pure form of exercise: it doesn't need cluttering-up with HRM's and stuff. Really, it's only the running that matters.
BTW, I have actually used a HRM. I didn't see it as anything more than a gimmick, really. Just something else to note down in my diary. The novelty soon wore off, too... and when the battery packed in I just put the thing away and never used it again.
Now I'm not trying to deter people from using all of these gadgets: I'm just showing that there is another "side of the coin". I don't know; perhaps beginners see so many people using these gizmos at gyms and stuff, that they believe that this is how it must be done.

__________________
GONE RUNNING

I have to agree with pedestrian on this one minxie but as you asked the question i thought i'd oblige .

It's then up to you what you do with it

take it easy

i think they're actually a pretty good idea for beginners & perhaps improvers.

after a certain stage you get to know very well from perceived exertion how hard you're working.

but initially its easy to go off too hard/easy and end up doing a session at the wrong level, not get the benefits expected and not see the improvement you wanted.

__________________

I'm a gadget guy, I like to know how far I've gone, where I've gone, how fast I'm going and what my heart rate is. True it's not all needed to be able to just get out and run, but I like to understand what my body's doing and all the science behind it.

I know it's not a tremendous feat, but allowing me to look at my training in this way I feel helps me get the best out of myself. In the 3 years I've been running now, my local half marathon time has gone from 1:40:01 at the first attempt, to 1:36:32 last year, yet this year, where I've paid most attention to all my distances, times, heart rates, paced workouts etc. I'll be expecting a finish time of around 1:25:00 in April, a fairly substantial improvement I'd say compared to the difference between years 1-2.

That's my circumstances though, and I just wanted to iterate the point that these gadgets can serve a great purpose. Yet I also have great respect for pedestrians point of view; it's pointless in just buying all these bits and bobs just because lots of runners do - if you want to get the most out of them you really need to research and understand what they do, and how you can use them to benefit your running, otherwise they are just another almost meaningless statistic to write down.

I can't imagine being able to change my pace enough whilst running to be able to change my heart-rate. I do remember though from when I used to use a HRM for cycling that perceived effort often bore little resemblence to actual effort. I could ride on the flat at 60% of max and then just the smallest of inclines used to make it jump to 90%.

Not sure why I felt that was relevant.

Would you have taken up running had there been no gadgets and gizmos and treadmills and all that other paraphernalia? :eek:

BTW Richard, I'm also a gadget kind of guy... have a house full of them ... but none of them are connected to the running.

__________________
GONE RUNNING

I did take up running without all the gadget and gizmos but then you start getting curious about stats and such like, they are by no means a neccisity.

If I think my run isn't going to go well I simply don't wear it like you say ignorance is bliss...

__________________
In spite of the cost of living, it's still popular.

Bird in Boots