Author: Sorting Last Post on Top ↓ Message:
RANNADANNA's Photo RANNADANNA Posts: 2,026
4/24/09 2:18 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
sorry I didn't respond sooner - for some reason, my email alert wasn't set for this thread.

I was keeping a pretty close eye throughout the workout, and it seemed like it was registering the proper level of exertion: it went up when I went up hill/faster, it went down when I slowed down. My average heart rate for the entire run was 139, which comes out to about 74% of my max (I'm 33 yrs old). I weigh 122.

The workout did feel pretty easy - I couldn't seem to focus or find my groove. I'm kind of new to running (I just finished my 4th week of continuous running. I had been running for 1.5 months a few months ago but stopped because I dislocated my knee. I'm back to it now.), so I don't have a ton of experience. I typically push harder, or run hills, so my heart rate is usually higher. It sounds about right for me though, hence the debacle of whether it's my HRM or just that I'm not burning that many calories.

Thanks so much, everyone, for your feedback!


 current weight: 134.0 
 
134
128
122
116
110
RHYNIC's Photo RHYNIC Posts: 19,646
4/22/09 5:52 P

Send Private Message
Reply
I was wondering what your heart rate stats were for that run?

Is it showing an elevated heart rate?

250 calories for 5 miles is half of what you would expect it to be.

Is that a typical calorie burned reading for you? Can it be that your monitor malfunction in this run?

"Dead Last Finish is greater than Did Not Finish which greatly trumps Did Not Start."

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMGatR8SNns

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SbXgQq
bOoU


 Pounds lost: 4.4 
 
0
3.85
7.7
11.55
15.4
SEEBEES3's Photo SEEBEES3 Posts: 1,229
4/22/09 4:58 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I use a Polar F6. And, yes, if everything checks out mechanically you might just be one of the ones where your body is very efficient.

In my case have a low resting heart rate and really struggle to get my heart rate above 85%. I am usually between 200 to 300 calories for a 45 minute normal run (avg HR 110-120) of 5 miles. I've got to do sprints, hills and plyometerics to get my body to work hard and I'm dragging around an extra 40 lbs. I've got pretty detailed logs on Spark. If you want to check, I started using the HRM in October of '08.

As an aside, the HRM actually helped me get things in perspective and understand what was going on with me. Before I got one I just couldn't understand why my friends who were eating and working out the same as me were able to lose weight so much more quickly.

Edited by: SEEBEES3 at: 4/22/2009 (19:53)
~CB

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. "
-Albert Einstein


 current weight: 152.0 
 
172
160.25
148.5
136.75
125
ALISONANDIE Posts: 289
4/22/09 11:51 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
So I am wondering, as I read through this thread, what your heartrate was averaging? Was it relatively low throughout your run? That could make your calorie count lower.

 Pounds lost: 8.0 
 
0
3.75
7.5
11.25
15
RAINRUN's Photo RAINRUN Posts: 6,675
4/22/09 10:43 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I love my Polar and I have never had a problem with it.
That said I am training my neighbor to run and I told her to go buy the same thing Polar as I have and she did.
We didn't interfere with each others HR. But I did realize that she didn't wear her strap as high as I wear mine and her HR wasn't showing some times.
It showed when we started and when she looked at it but when her arm went down the connection wasn't as strong because the strap was looser. Then of course it couldn't read as accurately.
I don't know if this will help you but I thought the more information the better =)

BTW I burn about 650 calories an hour or 6+ miles.That is with a 5 minute warm up walk and 3-4 cool down walk. I am 5'7" and weigh around 136.

Edited by: RAINRUN at: 4/22/2009 (10:45)
¸.·*´¨) YOU CAN LAUGH or CRY
¸.·´ YOU DECIDE ¸.·*´¨)

my healthy lifestyle blog
http://coachhurt.blogspot.com/

SWEATONCEADAY's Photo SWEATONCEADAY Posts: 4,907
4/22/09 10:26 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
you run faster than me. most of my runs are at a 930-1030 min/mile pace. 830 is my 5 k - 8k race pace!

Jen

upcoming races:
8km 5 peaks trail race april 23
seatlle r&r half june 26
PERRYR's Photo PERRYR Posts: 668
4/22/09 8:39 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply


One more point - I read that light poles can be another source of interference. Might be that you're getting zeroed out part way through the run. More reason to run more tests to determine the cause.

I never watch calories burned but was in a spin class a few years ago and it was a nightly discussion. This was the toughest spin class possible. My heart rate remained above 170 for most of the class and peaked at 190 many times.
The highest calories burned that I remember for that hour long class was 500. She was ecstatic that she finally met that.

PHOEBE1028's Photo PHOEBE1028 Posts: 3,090
4/22/09 8:23 A

Send Private Message
Reply
I use a Polar chest strap and a Nike HRM watch, the Nike attachment broke on the strap. It works great. I've found that sometimes my bra will slip under the strap screwing up the read. I double check my bra and the read all the time.

"The pain of discipline is less than that of regret"

"Strength is the capacity to break a chocolate bar into 4 pieces with your bare hands, and then eat just one..."
Judith Viorst

"Politics benefit few, good government benefits all"
-Mark Leyva-

“Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.”
-Dr. Seuss_


 Pounds lost: 0.0 
 
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
COOPSM's Photo COOPSM Posts: 24,881
4/22/09 8:23 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I wish the HRM would be 100%......626 seems high for my 4.5 with my cooldown....but I am huffing and puffing...who knows....

~Beth~

~Look me up on facebook
www.facebook.com/bethglair

~Follow me at www.facebook.com/bethglairfit?ref=hl

Runners just do it - they run for the finish line even if someone else has reached it first. ~Author Unknown


SP_COACH_NANCY SparkPoints: (158,833)
Fitness Minutes: (112,042)
Posts: 46,222
4/22/09 8:18 A

Send Private Message
Reply
I still think even being a more efficient runner you are going to burn more than 260 calories per 5 miles. Maybe you need to have your monitored checked out. You do not need to be around any buildings for your heart rate monitor to get wacky readings...like I mentioned earlier, there are tons of radio waves (cell phones, ham radios, airplanes overhead, etc) that can lead to interference, even other heart rate monitors.

Nancy

COOPSM's Photo COOPSM Posts: 24,881
4/22/09 8:11 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
On my run yesterday, wearing my Polar HRM....Run 4.5 miles----50:07..with my cool down for 60 total time,I burned 626 calories....

~Beth~

~Look me up on facebook
www.facebook.com/bethglair

~Follow me at www.facebook.com/bethglairfit?ref=hl

Runners just do it - they run for the finish line even if someone else has reached it first. ~Author Unknown


PERRYR's Photo PERRYR Posts: 668
4/22/09 6:58 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I am NO expert but interested in this thread.

Suspect that you are a very efficient runner - great shape, light weight, low heart rate = fewer calories required.

Suggest that you try the same run again, then compare to a couple of harder runs to see the difference.

RANNADANNA's Photo RANNADANNA Posts: 2,026
4/22/09 3:23 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thanks so much for all your responses!

I do think that the heart rate function itself is accurate. Having several different HRMs and having used several different others over the years, I have a pretty good idea of where my heart rate is, based on my level of exertion. I can only assume maybe the calories burned function is off somehow? It's the kind of HRM with a strap that keeps a constant reading, no need to touch fingers to it. Also, as 99% of my running is outdoors, I'm typically well away from buildings and whatnot before I turn it on. And typically, I'm only wearing the chest strap and some kind of jogging tank top or bra, so there's no fabric/ static interference thing that I know of.

Jen - what pace are you running at to burn 90 cal/ mile? (Maybe I'm running significantly slower?) I'm in pretty good shape, but not crazy-competitive-athlete shape.

All your responses have definitely made me feel better. I'm not usually one to fixate on numbers, but I was beginning to get a complex! Thanks again!

Edited by: RANNADANNA at: 4/22/2009 (03:26)
 current weight: 134.0 
 
134
128
122
116
110
TRICOTINE's Photo TRICOTINE SparkPoints: (80,996)
Fitness Minutes: (81,031)
Posts: 6,050
4/21/09 9:11 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
As a matter of fact statics did happen during a cold weather run and I was wearing a wind breaker over my hi-tech shirt.

I had read about this into the Garmin Owner's manual but I have never experienced statics with my Garmin. However, when I experienced statics the first time it was nice to be aware that it could be happening.

♦ Green Belt at Shaolin Kempo Karate and Jiu-Jitsu ♦

~ Co-Leader of RUNNER GIRLS UNITED Team ~

"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." – Samuel Johnson


 current weight: 201.0 
 
201
184.25
167.5
150.75
134
SWEATONCEADAY's Photo SWEATONCEADAY Posts: 4,907
4/21/09 9:07 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
i have that sometimes with my polar and it might get "stuck" on a number that is obviously too high or too low. i usually have to wiggle a bit though.

running out side i burn about 90 calories a mile (i weigh 129 lbs) but on the treadmill according to my polar it is closer to only 75. however, that is still more than what you were getting.

does yours track continuously or only when you put your finger on it?

you could also be in really good shape.

Jen

upcoming races:
8km 5 peaks trail race april 23
seatlle r&r half june 26
FREEDOMSTAR's Photo FREEDOMSTAR Posts: 13,801
4/21/09 9:04 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Nancy- Yes I forgot to tell you - LoL
now its my turn / something I knew

static especially during the winter when youre wearing technical fiber cause static /interferance with HRM, however in the summer thats not the case

John

C0-Team leader of Change is Good and Half Marathon Team, Support panel of The Best Life Diet


 current weight: 189.5 
 
222
212.5
203
193.5
184
SP_COACH_NANCY SparkPoints: (158,833)
Fitness Minutes: (112,042)
Posts: 46,222
4/21/09 8:58 P

Send Private Message
Reply
Isa,

Hmmm, that is very interesting. I never thought about static interfering with your HRM transmission...very interesting! Thanks for sharing.

Nancy

TRICOTINE's Photo TRICOTINE SparkPoints: (80,996)
Fitness Minutes: (81,031)
Posts: 6,050
4/21/09 8:55 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I love my Polar F6 but I once had trouble with statics. My HRM was showing a heart rate of 58 bpm as I was running up hills, and when I stopped (the rubbing of my hi-tech shirt stopping at the same time) then my heart rate was showned as to be 150 bpm (which is more what I am use to while running up hills)

I never had this problem with my Garmin but you might want to check with your HRM.


Edited by: TRICOTINE at: 4/21/2009 (20:57)
♦ Green Belt at Shaolin Kempo Karate and Jiu-Jitsu ♦

~ Co-Leader of RUNNER GIRLS UNITED Team ~

"Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome." – Samuel Johnson


 current weight: 201.0 
 
201
184.25
167.5
150.75
134
SP_COACH_NANCY SparkPoints: (158,833)
Fitness Minutes: (112,042)
Posts: 46,222
4/21/09 6:59 P

Send Private Message
Reply
That doesn't sound right to me...The standard is 90-100 calories per mile on average. That being said, some monitors can pick up interference from all the radio waves that pass through the atmosphere (even other HRM can interfere your readout). While my Polar is a GREAT HRM (very little interference) I can't say the same about my Garmin. The Garmin is less precise as a HRM but I love the GPS functionality.

Calorie burn is based on heart rate, muscle mass involvement, oxygen consumption and CO2 expulsion, but even the best HRM only goes by an estimation. You may want to make sure you do not activate your HRM inside where lots of frequencies within the house can have an effect on your monitor.

I wish you well!
Nancy

Edited by: SP_COACH_NANCY at: 4/21/2009 (19:00)
FREEDOMSTAR's Photo FREEDOMSTAR Posts: 13,801
4/21/09 6:49 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Im interested in hearing your replies
I heard that Polar is best for HRM .
Im just using the"can I still talk" method for heart rate, and using my distance/weight/time to calculate calories on websites also if its hills will burn more

JOHN

Edited by: FREEDOMSTAR at: 4/21/2009 (18:52)
C0-Team leader of Change is Good and Half Marathon Team, Support panel of The Best Life Diet


 current weight: 189.5 
 
222
212.5
203
193.5
184
RANNADANNA's Photo RANNADANNA Posts: 2,026
4/21/09 6:43 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I have a Nike heart rate monitor that I think is pretty accurate. (I base this on the fact that I've taken my heart rate with my Polar HRM, the treadmill HRM, and DH's Garmin HRM at the same time, and they were all within 2 beats of each other.) I prefer the Nike just because it's really comfortable for me.

So, I've heard/ read/ repeated the fact that running 1 mile burns something like 90-100 calories, right? I've entered all my personal information: age, weight, etc, into the HRM, so it can give me my Calories Burned information after a workout. Today, after the first 5 miles of my run, I checked it. At 8:30/ mile pace (a little shy of 43 min), it shows that I burned 260 calories. Really? I get that it's not crazy fast or anything, but really, only 260 calories? I weigh 122 right now, so I now that I won't burn as much as if I weighed more, but still, can that be right? If Heart Rate is the most accurate way to calculate calories burned, and this is correct, I'm in trouble! 5 miles, 43 minutes, 260 calories sound right to anyone?

Any feedback? Thanks in advance!


Edited by: RANNADANNA at: 4/21/2009 (18:51)
 current weight: 134.0 
 
134
128
122
116
110
Page: 1 of (1)  

Report Innappropriate Post

Other Road Runners Nutrition For Runners Posts

Topics: Last Post:
Nutrition for Runners 11/6/2013 10:02:37 AM
1,000 Calories before a race? Really?! 7/1/2013 11:37:58 PM
Running to Lose Weight - 2011 8/1/2013 10:15:54 AM
Recipes for Runners 6/2/2013 2:48:57 PM

Thread URL: http://www.sparkpeople.com/myspark/team_messageboard_thread.asp?board=2018x123x24910070

Review our Community Guidelines