Are you a runner or a jogger? Setting target heart rate ...

[Lsbcal]

I don't know where the dividing line is between running and jogging so I would not know the answer. Go ahead and suggest a definition if you like.

But I have looked into how to set your target heart rate. I got an Apple Watch a few weeks ago and after decades of running without analytics, I'm trying to learn a few new things.

Some people use the formula for maximum heart rate as 220 - age. But according to the NIH this is not as accurate as using max heart rate = 208 - 0.7*age. See this article for details: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3935487/ . Your minimum heart rate is just your resting heart rate after you wake up and have sat up for a bit.

Once you have your max and min heart rates you are ready to calculate your vigorous workout heart rate. This source suggests how to calculate your vigorous workout heart rate target: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/fitness/in-depth/exercise-intensity/art-20046887

Here is an example using my data:
min heart rate = 49 .....as measured when sitting for awhile
max heart rate = 208 - 0.7 * 71 = 158 .....for 71 year old

min vigorous target = 49 + 0.7 * (158 - 49) = 126
max vigorous target = 49 + 0.85 * (158 - 49) = 142

So when I run (or jog) I should have a heart rate between 126 to 142 when up to speed, on slopes, etc. Whew!


And here is an article about runner vs. jogger:
https://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifestyle/how-to-know-if-youre-a-jogger-or-a-runner.html

The difference between a jogger and runner is very subtle. And the essence of the distinction lies, not in the speed at which one is able to undertake the exercise, but in the enjoyment with which one chooses to undertake it. “No pain, no gain”? So be it! We runners would rather chant, “no fun, no run”!

 

[RunningBum]

Rather than an age-based heart rate, what I've heard advised is to actually find your actual max HR and then run a % of that. I don't recall the details on how to do this or what % to run. Supposedly this is much more accurate than using age, though using the age formula is probably close enough for general fitness. If one is really trying to get the most out of their running and go for their best times, it's worth figuring out your actual max. I agree in principle that heart rate training is a good thing, though I just don't like wearing a HR monitor. I have a good feel for how much I'm pushing from 50 years of running.

I can't put my finger on runner vs. jogger but I don't think that lifehack article got it.

 

[RunningBum]

Then there's the joke I tell:

How do you know if someone is a runner?

Don't worry, we'll tell you.

When people start asking me about my running, I often warn them that they may not want to go down this path, and they might have to walk away to stop hearing about it. I won't be offended if they do. I may not even notice. But I'll keep talking.

 

[Lsbcal]

With the numbers I'm seeing on my Apple Watch, it looks like max HR calculation is reasonable for me. I guess to get a max heart rate experimentally one might go to a track and then warm up well before pushing all out for a lap or two.

 

[HadEnuff]

neither.

 

[Lsbcal]

neither.

There is always one in the crowd.

 

[Aerides]

By your math my target high is 156 which is about right. I usually "sprint" the last ~45 seconds of my longer runs and hit 160 for a minute, but a majority of the time I'm in the 140's for the first half of my run, creeping into to the 150s toward the end or sooner if it's a very hot day.

I think the difference technically between running and jogging is +/- 12 minute miles.

I don't use a monitor, but my fitbit has one. I know that given it's a wrist-only device it's not exactly going to be 100% accurate, but it gives me a baseline and seems to be consistent. So if it's consistently off by 5 bpm I don't care, as long as it's off the same all the time. You also just get a feel.

Oh yeah and by the speed definition I'm a jogger mostly.

 

[MuirWannabe]

https://images.app.goo.gl/tMPnfGbSmb5URP5X6

 

[RE2Boys]

Been a runner/jogger since I was 16........53 years. I remember the smooth effortless flow, swiftly touch down on heel, smooth rolling flow to the toes with a slight push-off, all synchronized with my breathing pattern for mile after mile. A the joy of being a well timed, smooth machine after warming up the first 1/4 to half mile. And the occasional runner high feeling like I can go on forever!

Don't need no electronic gadget or formula to tell me I'm now a jogger.

 

[stepford]

Rather than an age-based heart rate, what I've heard advised is to actually find your actual max HR and then run a % of that.

That's what I do. Over the last couple of years I noticed that I'd really peg my HR when mountain biking up extended steep grades. Eventually I got a heart rate monitor to wear while riding and found that I would consistently hit around 175 bpm when the "nominal" target heart rate for my age was 162.

Out of an abundance of caution I eventually saw a cardiologist who had me do a stress EKG. No problems and cleared to keep riding and hitting my max HR. Though if you believe in heart rate zone training it'd probably be better training for me to keep it in the 80-90% of max range.

 

[Ronstar]

I never tracked heart rate while running until this year, and then only for about a month. I was doing HIIT, sprints up to 150 bpm, walk until 130 bpm, sprints up to 150, etc.

Then I decided that I didn't know how accurate my Garmin watch was for heart rate, so I figured why track it.

So now I just do 2 miles of HIIT, alternating 1 minute long segments of sprints and walking.

 

[gerntz]

Slow jogger here.

 

[nash031]

Runner!

I test Lactate Threshold HR with a 30 min track protocol. 10 min working HR up at max pace I think I can sustain for 30 min. LTHR is the HR avg for the final 20 min. Then I base my training zones off of that. At 41, my LTHR last season was 184. I did my long Sustained runs between 157 and 163.

Max HR tests also work better than 220-age. My max is way above 179. I recently hit 191 in a max aerobic power test on my bike, and I can usually go 6-7 bpm higher running, so 195+ at 42... fast ticker!

 

[bingybear]

No way could I do the NIH method. The pacemaker just can't track that high. My next one should be able to pace to those numbers.

 

[FlaGator]

That's what I do. Over the last couple of years I noticed that I'd really peg my HR when mountain biking up extended steep grades. Eventually I got a heart rate monitor to wear while riding and found that I would consistently hit around 175 bpm when the "nominal" target heart rate for my age was 162.

Out of an abundance of caution I eventually saw a cardiologist who had me do a stress EKG. No problems and cleared to keep riding and hitting my max HR. Though if you believe in heart rate zone training it'd probably be better training for me to keep it in the 80-90% of max range.

I'm also a cyclist, not a runner, and have similar numbers above the textbook recommendation (220-59=161 for me). Mine peaks at 172-174 depending on the day, and there is a distinct difference between the 160-165 that I can sustain for several minutes before fading, and anything above that. Once I hit 170+, I have to to slow down until I'm back under 155.

When I ignore the numbers, I shut it down below 160. HR monitor has been very useful.

 

[haha]

I used to be into this nerd version of exercise. Then I asked myself, who lives almost forever? Some decidedly non-nerd women.

I am always active, not because I made some schedule because I read an article in Runner's World, but because If I like to go around and I don't have a car, I will be active. I also believe in "Heavy -Hands", Dr. Leonard Schwartz's plan to walk around, swinging or pumping hand-weights.

I'm 2 years from 80, and I can go up and down Seattle Hills as needed or desired. I expect and want that this will continue for a good while. I do admit that it was easier in my 20s than it is now. People in big cities walk fast, and I have had to admit that not just tall young guys, but all but fat young guys and a good many young women will pass me on the uphill. The sort of 60-70 yo woman who is 5'4" and about 120 is often very fast too!

Ha

 

[braumeister]

Rather than an age-based heart rate, what I've heard advised is to actually find your actual max HR and then run a % of that. I don't recall the details on how to do this or what % to run. Supposedly this is much more accurate than using age, though using the age formula is probably close enough for general fitness.

I completely agree. The calculators or formulas for doing this are way off for many people (like me).

Here's a way to do it that will give you something like the real number:
​How To Calculate Your Max Heart Rate (You're Probably Doing It Wrong)

Note: Definitely not something to try if you're out of shape -- it could be fatal. But for those in reasonably good aerobic condition it can be very valuable.

 

[RunningBum]

When I'm seriously training for my best time in a marathon, I use a Pfitzinger plan from his book Advanced Marathoning. He has training runs at various paces:

• Interval Runs--5K pace, with recovery walk/light jog between intervals. My guide is that I'm breathing very hard, almost, but not quite, to the point of wheezing.
• Tempo Runs--somewhere between a pace you can hold for an hour and half marathon pace. I'm breathing too hard to talk more than a few words but not as hard as the interval runs
• Marathon pace. Just slow enough to be able to hold a conversation. I also have a good idea at what pace I can run a marathon so I'll use my watch too, but Pfitz stresses that you base pacing on your current fitness level, not goal pace.
• Medium/Long Runs. 10-20% slower than marathon pace. I usually look at my watch pace to make sure I'm keeping my pace slow enough.
• Recovery runs. Very easy pace, should not feel like any real effort, but rather just loosening muscles. At the risk of using a vague term, jogging.

Another check on all this is if I can't keep up with the weekly plans. If I'm finding I'm regularly struggling to keep up with the runs, it usually means I've been doing runs too hard. I'm sure one can figure out HR targets for each of these runs, and Pfitz may even list them, but I go by the above.



I have a lot of friends who run marathons or longer and see almost as many different training strategies. People figure out what works for them. Pfitz is the one for me.

 

[mystang52]

Then there's the joke I tell:

How do you know if someone is a runner?

Don't worry, we'll tell you.

When people start asking me about my running, I often warn them that they may not want to go down this path, and they might have to walk away to stop hearing about it. I won't be offended if they do. I may not even notice. But I'll keep talking.

This definitely is not me:

I'm a runner. If someone asks me about my "jogging" I don't correct them. I really don't care what tag others use. Due to injuries and illnesses, I haven't done a nonstop 3 mile run in 18 months; I have to do a systematic run-walk. But I still call myself a runner. It's a lifestyle, I do it regularly, and most importantly I look forward to it (vs doing it just for the health benefit).

 

[RunningBum]

Not me either!

I'll rarely correct anyone who says they saw me jogging, unless it's a friend that I'll hear it often from. Then I'll find a way to explain the difference. For example, if it were someone from this board, I'd say the equivalent is saying that you play/dabble in the stock market.

 

[candrew]

Former runner here. Gave it up due to pain in both knees from osteoarthritis. Switched to cycling for cardio exercise. I love cycling but do miss running.

 

[MRG]

Not sure the difference but I consider myself a jogger. Interesting discussion as my heartrate can run a little hot. At 62 I found myself jogging with my heart in the upper 160s. They did a holter monitor for a week, nothing was said about my jogging.

A few weeks ago I discovered different breathing techniques, my heartrate seldom goes above 145 now.

 

[Running_Man]

Over 8 minutes a mile - you are a jogger. 8 minutes a mile and under - you are a runner.

 

[RunningBum]

Over 8 minutes a mile - you are a jogger. 8 minutes a mile and under - you are a runner.

Nope, that's not it.

 

[Lsbcal]

...
I'm a runner. If someone asks me about my "jogging" I don't correct them. I really don;t care what tag others use. Due to injuries and illnesses, I haven't done a nonstop 3 mile run in 18 months I have to do a systematic run-walk. But I still call myself a runner. It's a lifestyle, I do it regularly, and most importantly I look forward to it (vs doing it just for the health benefit).

Enjoyed that video LOL. I never did anything more then about a 10k. One can always pick up the pace for a more challenging workout.

These days it's all about enjoying the run and avoiding injury. In my age group people generally have given up running if they ever did it. The questions are of the form "and you don't have any knee problems?".

Heading out for a 4.4 mile run. That Apple Watch stole some miles from me as my non-GPS watch told me the run was 5.7 miles. Ugh. It does have the benefit of allowing me to make a pair of running shoes last awhile longer.