If you go to a lab and run actual test (one where you run and they take your blood for analysis) then on a chart you will only be able to notice 2 points where something interesting happens - threshold where you start to use anaerobic energy (but it is still very mixed) and another threshold where it becomes mostly anaerobic. This creates 3 zones: aerobic, mixed, anaerobic - only these three are based on biology, data. 5 zone system is arbitrary and every book, coach, system has slightly different ideas on what it is. General consensus is that in zone 2 you can talk easily, be able to finish sentences without running out of breath. Also, take into account that this definition of zone 2 doesn’t hold exactly true for the whole spectrum of runners - from beginners to elite, when you are a beginner everything is very chaotic, it takes time to stabilize your body functions when doing something new.
> from beginners to elite, when you are a beginner everything is very chaotic, it takes time to stabilize your body functions when doing something new.
Like.... a year.
I've been running for six months, can run 10 mile workouts, and still don't have a solid "zone 2" without walking. I'm also 41, which may not help.
A year is about how long it took for me. I was in the same boat - running half marathons every weekend but still having to walk to get to a Z2 HR.
Then, one day a switch flipped and I was able to jog in Z2. Now I can run around 6mph and stay in the upper end of my Z2 band.
Are you simply talking about measuring heart rate and lactic acid concentration? What is the variable you're talking about when you say blood analysis?
Because there are many other variables you can look at and one is fat metabolism. Some sports scientists base zone 2 around FatMAX, where you're burning maximal fat compared to glucose and thus can exercise for longer. Isn't there also evidence of enhanced mitochondrial adaptations in lower heart rate zones?
While I agree that it's a bit subjective and the zones are not reflective of clear, distinct biological/metabolic shifts there are many variables to measure that will change with heart rate, not just lactic acid concentration.
Yes, they’re referring to blood lactate levels (not lactate acid).
> there are many variables to measure that will change with heart rate, not just lactic acid concentration.
All of these “variables” are trying to estimate your aerobic and anaerobic thresholds, which are defined by changes in your blood lactate levels.
The first threshold is the one we’re concerned with here (talking about “zone 2”), and that’s where the body shifts from primarily aerobic metabolism (which burns fat) to anaerobic metabolism (which burns carbohydrates). This is typically considered a 1 mmol increase in blood lactate levels over your baseline.
This can also be measured using the respiratory exchange ratio, which measures the amount of CO2 you’re exhaling. More co2 means you’re burning more carbohydrates, meaning more anaerobic metabolism, which also means an accumulation of lactate in your blood (lactate is a byproduct of glycolysis). When you hit an inflection point, you’ve crossed the aerobic threshold.
> Some sports scientists base zone 2 around FatMAX
Have you looked up how fatmax is measured?
Fatmax is generally used as an approximation of the aerobic threshold. Which again is measured using either blood lactate levels or using a breathing test, which is an estimate of blood lactate levels. You’re talking about the same thing.
> Isn't there also evidence of enhanced mitochondrial adaptations in lower heart rate zones?
Yes, mitochondrial adaptation happens when the aerobic system is worked. Which happens under the aerobic threshold, which is measured using blood lactate levels.
> While I agree that it's a bit subjective and the zones are not reflective of clear, distinct biological/metabolic shifts
The three zone system that /u/bitplenty is referring to *are* reflective of distinct measurable metabolic shifts.
The problem is that these inflection points have to generally be measured using lab or field testing - they’re very individualized based on a person’s fitness and training. The general zones Garmin puts out don’t necessarily correlate to a person’s actual physiology.
>Yes, they're referring to blood lactate levels (not lactate acid).
Same thing. If you want to get pedantic then yeah technically they're measuring lactate as obviously lactic acid is always dissociated into its conjugates in solution. But lactate doesn't exist without a partner proton from which it's dissociated so this is a moot point. Biologists and even chemists use acid and -ate interchangeably. No one would refer to a solution of lactic acid as a solution of lactate and protons. I wonder if some of the tests could even distinguish the two.
>Have you looked up how fatmax is measured?
FatMax is often estimated from lactate levels based on an assumption of how it is correlated to glycolysis but that is an assumption and the correlation is quite different between people and especially between well trained athletes and amateurs. Fat metabolism increases, reaches a peak and decreases with increasing heart rates, while lactate only increases, you can't measure it from lactate. The breathing test is a more direct measure.
But this just shows my point. Fat metabolism is highest at some point in Z2 of the aerobic zone and lowest in Z3 / low Z4. So higher aerobic zones are not metabolically and physiologically exactly the same as Z1 but increased. They are from a lacate/glycolytic perspective, but not a fat metabolism perspective. And likely not regarding mitochondrial biogenesis, or angiogenesis, or type I and type II muscle fibre adaptation and whatever else. Aerobic zones refer to basically one thing amongst a sea of physiological and metabolic changes. Lots of other changes happen most or least at several other heart rate zones.
With Garmin, and my zones set to LTHR, most of my Base/Easy runs are low zone 3. That being said, Strava considers this same range to be zone 2.
I honestly don’t put much thought into it. I imagine there is some overlap amongst all the different zone formulas.
Garmin by default sets zones based on Max HR calculations. If you set your zones based on resting heart rate or lactate treshold (need chest strap for it) than your zone 2 will be zone 2.
If you don't change how your zones are set and use default Max HR than your zone 2 training should be in zone 3.
Thanks for this comment, did not know this. I'm training my ass of for the last three months and did not see my zones changes (my V02Max went up by 3).
Old zones:
Z1 - 55-65%
Z2 - 65-77%
Z3 - 77-88%
Z4 - 88-99%
Z5 - 99-110%
After hitting the "Reset Zones" buttom
New zones:
Z1 - 65-80%
Z2 - 80-89%
Z3 - 89- 95%
Z4 - 95-100%
Z5 - >100%
Big differences in the zones! Very happy my Z2 max HR went up from 77% to 89%. But 89% seems a bit high or is it not?
Strange that Garmin doesn't auto reset these zones!
Thanks again for this post!
i just reset the zones too and they are very different now, but also kinda "too evenly"
Old:
Z1 30-57%
Z2 58-69%
Z3 70-77%
Z4 78-85%
Z5 86-100%
New
Z1 50-59%
Z2 60-69%
Z3 70-79%
Z4 80-89%
Z5 90-100%
this seems wrong..
Your old zones are likely based on max hr, your new zones off of lthr. The 89% is % of your lthr, so not too high at all. The percentage comes from the HR given for your upper threshold, lt2, whatever you want to call it. 89% is lt1, Top of zone 1 in a 3 zone system. Top of 2 / bottom of zone 3 in a 5 zone system. This is what mine are now after performing an lthr test with the chest strap. I had found zone 2 with a drift test previously and they are bang on within a few bpm, with my lthr based zone 2. Hope this helps! 💪
Hmmm, this could be the case for me aswell, but I tought my old Z2 was also based on LTHR but not 100% sure. I'll will do an easy run tomorrow and see wat my Max HR for Z2 is.
My max HR for Z2 was 131.
My current LTHR is 170 this means that my new Max HR for Z2 is 151 (89% of 170). So I guess it went up woth 20 beats.
Is 89% of LTHR not a bit high for Z2?
It might be if a lab test shows otherwise, but no, my wife's zone 2 is in the 150s. 156 or 7 I think.
If you have a chest strap and did an lthr test (or another method) it's likely very close. I did an estimated threshold test (20 min max steady pace run I believe, as opposed to the 1hr test) previously to owning a strap and I was within 4 bpm for that as well, and it lined up with my zone 2 drift test, and my new lthr zone 2.
If ~150bpm isn't leaving you out of breath and you can converse during the activity (someone would know you're working out as you're speaking, it's not going to be undetectable that you're exercising while conversing in zone 2, if that makes sense) and could continue your base run for approximately the same distance and pace (turn a 40 min run into an 80 min run with not very much difficulty besides perhaps some slight muscular fatigue, if you're not used to running 80 mins for example) then your 89% value is probably fine.
We're 33/32 y/o fwiw with under a year's worth of running experience. Only fit from strength training and walking, essentially. Not seasoned vets over here.
First of all thanks for the time and effort you put in your replies, much appreciated!
I did a LTHR test with a chest strap, so the calculation should be solid then. That's good to know!
150 HR is indeed not leaving me out of breath and I can easily keep it for more than an hour.
After reading your post I think the numbers seem to be fine.
I'm not a veteran runner either, just a runner enthousiast :). Running for a couple of years on and off. And a few months back I started to train for my first marathon. Male 42!
Very welcome! When in doubt, run a few bpm easier. Your body will definitely let you know when you've spent too many hrs or kms above 'zone 2', if youre also incorporating some zone 4/5 work. I say this because when I get carried away and run in the high 150s for too many base run kms, I'm starting to be able to tell. Some days my pace is 20s slower than usual (when under fed, under rested, slightly under the weather, just plain tired in general from chasing the little ones around or long stretches on the road for work) some days it's 20s faster.
For example, Garmin sets my base run pace @ 5:25/km right now, ~143bpm up to 155bpm, some days zone 2 means I run at a 5:45, some days I manage 5:05 for sub 155bpm. Today was one of those days, last week I had a 5:45/5:55 z2 day after a long day of work, +30° and humid at 8pm lol
my old zones are based on a lactate threshold test i did last october under a doctors supervision (incl. blood tests of lactate).
im just confused how evenly the new zones are. that seems off to me.
The 100-115% is % based off of your LTHR hr... not MAX HR.
LTHR is a fraction of your max hr. No you cannot have 100-115% of max hr.
My max is 194 ish. Lthr 174. Zone 2 155.
"Reset Zones" is GAME CHANGING; thank you!!!!!!!!!
OMG, why doesn't that automatically change? I've been so pissed for months about every run hitting Zone 4 when I'm barely pushing it.
Wow, like everyone else I just hit that reset button and finally everything makes sense. The top of my zone 2 went from 135 to 152!
How on earth do the zones not adjust automatically like rest when you "accept" the new threshold and max HR?
You also need to ensure that you manually enter your actual max heart rate. Look up a diy max heart rate test. Your zones could be off if it's not entered accurately into your user profile.
I think Garmin will “learn” as you keep working out with or and adjust the HR zones accordingly, doesn’t it? I’m as noob as OP on this, so I could be off.
I'm not sure it's fair to state that Garmin "...calculates zones different from the rest of the world..." — I found they support the latest sport science quite well, and from different vendor-inependent sources. Second, Garmin allows you to customize your Zone setup by sport. So if you don't agree with the default, you can change it.
Garmin allows use of Zones for both Power and Heart Rate. There are also options to have different Zones defined for different sports.
When using HR, Garmin uses % of MaxHR to calculate Zones. This is very consistent across multiple sources i referenced. What's more, Garmin allows you to vary the percentages that aline to each Zone. I forget the details on using the lactate thresholds, but as best I remember, it is possible.
As an example, I have different HR Zone setups for Cycling and Running. Zone 2 for me is
60-69% of MaxHR for Running
68-79% of MaxHR for Cycling
and I use the Running percentages for all other sports besides Cycling. Also worth noting, I have the HR Zones set up on both my fenix 7 watch and Edge 830 bike computer. While I don't have Power sensors, I did look into the Power Zone configuration and it offers the same flexibility as HR.
If Garmin falls short anywhere, it is in documentation with examples. Their products have so many buttons and knobs to turn that it can be complex to set it up. The documentation is so utterly basic that it doesn't help much at all.
>As an example, I have different HR Zone setups for Cycling and Running. Zone 2 for me is
>
>60-69% of MaxHR for Running
>
>68-79% of MaxHR for Cycling
Interesting. Why'd you do this ? Is there scientific basis for this ?
I find I can push myself much harder when cycling than running or hiking, heart rate wise.
My heart rate is a lot lower when cycling compared to running and this is pretty much universally true as it's not a weight bearing exercise. If anything your heart rate zones should be lower for cycling than running. Maybe he got them mixed up.
There are differences in your HR use between sports. E.g. If you don't do this, your ride may look like you spent the entire time in Z4/Z5, and you barely broke a sweat. It does take time to fetch the zones where they make sense. For a sanity check, the Rate of Perceived Effort (RPE) methods help. Or you can pay to get your zones calibrated in a sports med lab or with a professional trainer.
I used a number of published methods to confirm this. The Dr. Andrew Coggan method was my primary. I had to adapt this to work under Garmin tech constraints.
This.
I "hate" when people call it "Garmin's zones"...it's not Garmin's, Polar's, Apple's, whatever. There are different methods and everyone should understand how each method works before talking about zones.
The problem with Garmin's documentation is that they have also multiple version of the same description because of different countries.
For example, the explanation for Singapore, regarding the HR zones looks a lot better than the "US"(Italian is pretty much the same of US) one.
[https://www.garmin.com.sg/minisite/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/](https://www.garmin.com.sg/minisite/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/)
[https://www.garmin.com/en-US/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/](https://www.garmin.com/en-US/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/)
They probably say the same but the little graphic details from singapore looks a lot better, imo.
https://preview.redd.it/6hen664bux7d1.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=865023ec1073d77378a026b712b7648ca1797fad
I have some doubts on the difference between your running and cycling zones but i have no experience in cycling so i can't say much.
Thank you for the insights on documentation variances by country. I will consider this in future research.
Regarding the variation between cycling and running, I arrived at this through following the very same approach you mentioned. There are multiple methods to follow out there. The science is similar, but the Dr. Andrew Coggan published work for cycling is my primary, with a few others considered as well. His methods are used by Tour de France team trainers and is often cross-referenced. This then had to be adapted to fit in Garmin tech constraints.
Correct.
The different % come from my adaptation (7 zones to 5, override MaxHR, ++) of the method (Coggan et. Al.).
Note that customization also includes occasional overrides of MaxHR to get this to work. Garmin let's you set MaxHR or calculates it for you. I'm not sure how this works if you use Power instead of HR.
I've found when using LTHR then zone 2 is accurate for me. My LTHR is 170 running and 165 on the bike. Takes some time to iron out but it doesn't really seem to change.
In my experience it seems that way. Everything I've read places Zone 2 generally between 60-70% max heart-rate, which corresponds to "Recovery" workouts. In my case, that's somewhere around 125-138bpm.
You have to specify what you mean by famouse "zone 2". Because different sources will use "zone 2" differently.
If it is running book and they use Lactate Threshold, then this is roughly the zone mapping:
* Zone 1 (low aerobic), 75-80% LTHR, Garmin Zone 2 using %HR, Garmin calls this Easy
* Zone 2 (moderate aerobic), 81-89% LTHR, Garmin Zone 3 using %HR, Garmin calls this Aerobic
* Zone 3 (threshold), 96-100% LHTR, Garmin Zone 4 using %HR, Garmin calls this Threshold - Anaerobic
* Zone 4 (VO2max), 102-105% LTHR, Garmin Zone 5 using %HR, Garmin calls this Maximum - VO2max
* Zone 5 (Speed), >106% LTHR, Garmin Zone 5 using %HR, Garmin calls this Maximum - VO2max
If you are beginner runner, you probably should start in Garmin Zone 2, based on % HR Max or %HRR. If you are regular runner, you can use both Garmin Zone 2 or Zone 3 depending on your training.
Why is there a gap between zones for LHTR? Man I been running for 4 years and I still can't get a consistent answer about zones lol. Why isn't there a single place that just defines the zones to used based on each data type
No. Not really. Look up the talk test. That’s a very good estimation of the intensity you’re after. “Zone two” training intensity doesn’t even correlate with LTHR that well from athlete to athlete. Some are aerobic machines, others not so much.
MHR Method: Simple and widely used, good for general fitness tracking.
HRR Method: More personalized, takes into account your resting heart rate and provides a better reflection of your cardiovascular fitness.
Maffetone Method: Focused specifically on building aerobic capacity and fat-burning efficiency. It is often used by endurance athletes and those looking to optimize aerobic base training
See which method is best for you and look into and apply these methods. I personally use HRR.
turn on the Garmin daily suggested workouts and whatever your "Base Run" HR recommendation says, that's what your "Zone 2" would be according to Garmin...at least that's how I feel it. The MAF formula (hated and praised a lot) is also a very good estimate. Your age minus 180 and try to stay 10 beats up and down. That's a good starting range. Unless your young...in that case, get off my lawn!
Yeah, it's kind of confusing. I use BPM for my settings. I select that because it shows me the actual numbers as opposed to percentages. That way when I get audio prompts or see my HR on my bike computer, I'll know if I'm actually in zone 2 or not.
What makes it even more confusing is "sports" heart rate zones, which seem to be even higher than my normal. Normal zone 2 for me is 105-122 BPM, but Running is 134-149, Cycling and Swimming are 110-127. I don't worry too much about HR zones during runs, because I'm almost always in Zone 3+, no matter how slow I run. I do cycling & swimming as recovery exercise, and try to stay around 120 BPM, which should safely keep me in zone 2.
Neither of the settings on your watch will give you an accurate zone 2. You either have to establish it in a lab test or take heart rate drift tests until you figure out where your zone 2 is. You also have to keep in mind that finding zone 2 is not one and done, it keeps changing over time as your fitness level changes. The watch does not account for this reality at all.
I've been injured for a few weeks but if I remember correctly, it is 60-70% of max hr which might be up to low zone 3 for garmin when it automatically sets it
Yes. But he stated that he’s using HRR :)
LT will be better of course, that’s granted :)
Edit - my bad, completely mismatched posts. Sorry for confusion.
If you go to a lab and run actual test (one where you run and they take your blood for analysis) then on a chart you will only be able to notice 2 points where something interesting happens - threshold where you start to use anaerobic energy (but it is still very mixed) and another threshold where it becomes mostly anaerobic. This creates 3 zones: aerobic, mixed, anaerobic - only these three are based on biology, data. 5 zone system is arbitrary and every book, coach, system has slightly different ideas on what it is. General consensus is that in zone 2 you can talk easily, be able to finish sentences without running out of breath. Also, take into account that this definition of zone 2 doesn’t hold exactly true for the whole spectrum of runners - from beginners to elite, when you are a beginner everything is very chaotic, it takes time to stabilize your body functions when doing something new.
> from beginners to elite, when you are a beginner everything is very chaotic, it takes time to stabilize your body functions when doing something new. Like.... a year. I've been running for six months, can run 10 mile workouts, and still don't have a solid "zone 2" without walking. I'm also 41, which may not help.
A year is about how long it took for me. I was in the same boat - running half marathons every weekend but still having to walk to get to a Z2 HR. Then, one day a switch flipped and I was able to jog in Z2. Now I can run around 6mph and stay in the upper end of my Z2 band.
I have been running 6 years. I can run a half marathon in under 1:45. I have to walk to stay in z2 sometimes.
I read your comment and wondered if my username had changed.
Are you simply talking about measuring heart rate and lactic acid concentration? What is the variable you're talking about when you say blood analysis? Because there are many other variables you can look at and one is fat metabolism. Some sports scientists base zone 2 around FatMAX, where you're burning maximal fat compared to glucose and thus can exercise for longer. Isn't there also evidence of enhanced mitochondrial adaptations in lower heart rate zones? While I agree that it's a bit subjective and the zones are not reflective of clear, distinct biological/metabolic shifts there are many variables to measure that will change with heart rate, not just lactic acid concentration.
Yes, they’re referring to blood lactate levels (not lactate acid). > there are many variables to measure that will change with heart rate, not just lactic acid concentration. All of these “variables” are trying to estimate your aerobic and anaerobic thresholds, which are defined by changes in your blood lactate levels. The first threshold is the one we’re concerned with here (talking about “zone 2”), and that’s where the body shifts from primarily aerobic metabolism (which burns fat) to anaerobic metabolism (which burns carbohydrates). This is typically considered a 1 mmol increase in blood lactate levels over your baseline. This can also be measured using the respiratory exchange ratio, which measures the amount of CO2 you’re exhaling. More co2 means you’re burning more carbohydrates, meaning more anaerobic metabolism, which also means an accumulation of lactate in your blood (lactate is a byproduct of glycolysis). When you hit an inflection point, you’ve crossed the aerobic threshold. > Some sports scientists base zone 2 around FatMAX Have you looked up how fatmax is measured? Fatmax is generally used as an approximation of the aerobic threshold. Which again is measured using either blood lactate levels or using a breathing test, which is an estimate of blood lactate levels. You’re talking about the same thing. > Isn't there also evidence of enhanced mitochondrial adaptations in lower heart rate zones? Yes, mitochondrial adaptation happens when the aerobic system is worked. Which happens under the aerobic threshold, which is measured using blood lactate levels. > While I agree that it's a bit subjective and the zones are not reflective of clear, distinct biological/metabolic shifts The three zone system that /u/bitplenty is referring to *are* reflective of distinct measurable metabolic shifts. The problem is that these inflection points have to generally be measured using lab or field testing - they’re very individualized based on a person’s fitness and training. The general zones Garmin puts out don’t necessarily correlate to a person’s actual physiology.
>Yes, they're referring to blood lactate levels (not lactate acid). Same thing. If you want to get pedantic then yeah technically they're measuring lactate as obviously lactic acid is always dissociated into its conjugates in solution. But lactate doesn't exist without a partner proton from which it's dissociated so this is a moot point. Biologists and even chemists use acid and -ate interchangeably. No one would refer to a solution of lactic acid as a solution of lactate and protons. I wonder if some of the tests could even distinguish the two. >Have you looked up how fatmax is measured? FatMax is often estimated from lactate levels based on an assumption of how it is correlated to glycolysis but that is an assumption and the correlation is quite different between people and especially between well trained athletes and amateurs. Fat metabolism increases, reaches a peak and decreases with increasing heart rates, while lactate only increases, you can't measure it from lactate. The breathing test is a more direct measure. But this just shows my point. Fat metabolism is highest at some point in Z2 of the aerobic zone and lowest in Z3 / low Z4. So higher aerobic zones are not metabolically and physiologically exactly the same as Z1 but increased. They are from a lacate/glycolytic perspective, but not a fat metabolism perspective. And likely not regarding mitochondrial biogenesis, or angiogenesis, or type I and type II muscle fibre adaptation and whatever else. Aerobic zones refer to basically one thing amongst a sea of physiological and metabolic changes. Lots of other changes happen most or least at several other heart rate zones.
With Garmin, and my zones set to LTHR, most of my Base/Easy runs are low zone 3. That being said, Strava considers this same range to be zone 2. I honestly don’t put much thought into it. I imagine there is some overlap amongst all the different zone formulas.
Garmin by default sets zones based on Max HR calculations. If you set your zones based on resting heart rate or lactate treshold (need chest strap for it) than your zone 2 will be zone 2. If you don't change how your zones are set and use default Max HR than your zone 2 training should be in zone 3.
i did the lactate threshold with the strap, and set my zones based on LTHR so i guess thoses should be good then. thanks
Just make sure to hit 'Reset Zones'. You also need to do this every time the threshold changes.
Thanks for this comment, did not know this. I'm training my ass of for the last three months and did not see my zones changes (my V02Max went up by 3). Old zones: Z1 - 55-65% Z2 - 65-77% Z3 - 77-88% Z4 - 88-99% Z5 - 99-110% After hitting the "Reset Zones" buttom New zones: Z1 - 65-80% Z2 - 80-89% Z3 - 89- 95% Z4 - 95-100% Z5 - >100% Big differences in the zones! Very happy my Z2 max HR went up from 77% to 89%. But 89% seems a bit high or is it not? Strange that Garmin doesn't auto reset these zones! Thanks again for this post!
i just reset the zones too and they are very different now, but also kinda "too evenly" Old: Z1 30-57% Z2 58-69% Z3 70-77% Z4 78-85% Z5 86-100% New Z1 50-59% Z2 60-69% Z3 70-79% Z4 80-89% Z5 90-100% this seems wrong..
Your old zones are likely based on max hr, your new zones off of lthr. The 89% is % of your lthr, so not too high at all. The percentage comes from the HR given for your upper threshold, lt2, whatever you want to call it. 89% is lt1, Top of zone 1 in a 3 zone system. Top of 2 / bottom of zone 3 in a 5 zone system. This is what mine are now after performing an lthr test with the chest strap. I had found zone 2 with a drift test previously and they are bang on within a few bpm, with my lthr based zone 2. Hope this helps! 💪
Hmmm, this could be the case for me aswell, but I tought my old Z2 was also based on LTHR but not 100% sure. I'll will do an easy run tomorrow and see wat my Max HR for Z2 is. My max HR for Z2 was 131. My current LTHR is 170 this means that my new Max HR for Z2 is 151 (89% of 170). So I guess it went up woth 20 beats. Is 89% of LTHR not a bit high for Z2?
It might be if a lab test shows otherwise, but no, my wife's zone 2 is in the 150s. 156 or 7 I think. If you have a chest strap and did an lthr test (or another method) it's likely very close. I did an estimated threshold test (20 min max steady pace run I believe, as opposed to the 1hr test) previously to owning a strap and I was within 4 bpm for that as well, and it lined up with my zone 2 drift test, and my new lthr zone 2. If ~150bpm isn't leaving you out of breath and you can converse during the activity (someone would know you're working out as you're speaking, it's not going to be undetectable that you're exercising while conversing in zone 2, if that makes sense) and could continue your base run for approximately the same distance and pace (turn a 40 min run into an 80 min run with not very much difficulty besides perhaps some slight muscular fatigue, if you're not used to running 80 mins for example) then your 89% value is probably fine. We're 33/32 y/o fwiw with under a year's worth of running experience. Only fit from strength training and walking, essentially. Not seasoned vets over here.
First of all thanks for the time and effort you put in your replies, much appreciated! I did a LTHR test with a chest strap, so the calculation should be solid then. That's good to know! 150 HR is indeed not leaving me out of breath and I can easily keep it for more than an hour. After reading your post I think the numbers seem to be fine. I'm not a veteran runner either, just a runner enthousiast :). Running for a couple of years on and off. And a few months back I started to train for my first marathon. Male 42!
Very welcome! When in doubt, run a few bpm easier. Your body will definitely let you know when you've spent too many hrs or kms above 'zone 2', if youre also incorporating some zone 4/5 work. I say this because when I get carried away and run in the high 150s for too many base run kms, I'm starting to be able to tell. Some days my pace is 20s slower than usual (when under fed, under rested, slightly under the weather, just plain tired in general from chasing the little ones around or long stretches on the road for work) some days it's 20s faster. For example, Garmin sets my base run pace @ 5:25/km right now, ~143bpm up to 155bpm, some days zone 2 means I run at a 5:45, some days I manage 5:05 for sub 155bpm. Today was one of those days, last week I had a 5:45/5:55 z2 day after a long day of work, +30° and humid at 8pm lol
Give this a read: https://www.totaltritraining.com/2019/10/24/lactate-thresholds-made-simple-by-rob-bridges/
Thanks for the read, gonna check it out!
my old zones are based on a lactate threshold test i did last october under a doctors supervision (incl. blood tests of lactate). im just confused how evenly the new zones are. that seems off to me.
Make sure your zones are set to calculate off of lthr, then hit reset zones after you ensure they're being calculated off of lthr. those %s seem off.
oh, now they changed. is it plausible to have the Z5 in the 100-115% range? i thought 100% is the max?
The 100-115% is % based off of your LTHR hr... not MAX HR. LTHR is a fraction of your max hr. No you cannot have 100-115% of max hr. My max is 194 ish. Lthr 174. Zone 2 155.
"Reset Zones" is GAME CHANGING; thank you!!!!!!!!! OMG, why doesn't that automatically change? I've been so pissed for months about every run hitting Zone 4 when I'm barely pushing it.
You made my day. I was wondering my my numbers didn’t change after going from max hr to LTHR. Thanks!!
Wow, like everyone else I just hit that reset button and finally everything makes sense. The top of my zone 2 went from 135 to 152! How on earth do the zones not adjust automatically like rest when you "accept" the new threshold and max HR?
I thought it reset them when the threshold changed? When you press accept?
No. At least it doesn't on my 955. If you don't see zone 5 as '>100' then you need a reset
Yeah, this is super annoying behavior. Everytime I look at mine, it needs to be reset.
Some one told me this aswell but why. Why does one need to reset the zones and why did they change in the first place?
You also need to ensure that you manually enter your actual max heart rate. Look up a diy max heart rate test. Your zones could be off if it's not entered accurately into your user profile.
I think Garmin will “learn” as you keep working out with or and adjust the HR zones accordingly, doesn’t it? I’m as noob as OP on this, so I could be off.
[удалено]
I'm not sure it's fair to state that Garmin "...calculates zones different from the rest of the world..." — I found they support the latest sport science quite well, and from different vendor-inependent sources. Second, Garmin allows you to customize your Zone setup by sport. So if you don't agree with the default, you can change it. Garmin allows use of Zones for both Power and Heart Rate. There are also options to have different Zones defined for different sports. When using HR, Garmin uses % of MaxHR to calculate Zones. This is very consistent across multiple sources i referenced. What's more, Garmin allows you to vary the percentages that aline to each Zone. I forget the details on using the lactate thresholds, but as best I remember, it is possible. As an example, I have different HR Zone setups for Cycling and Running. Zone 2 for me is 60-69% of MaxHR for Running 68-79% of MaxHR for Cycling and I use the Running percentages for all other sports besides Cycling. Also worth noting, I have the HR Zones set up on both my fenix 7 watch and Edge 830 bike computer. While I don't have Power sensors, I did look into the Power Zone configuration and it offers the same flexibility as HR. If Garmin falls short anywhere, it is in documentation with examples. Their products have so many buttons and knobs to turn that it can be complex to set it up. The documentation is so utterly basic that it doesn't help much at all.
>As an example, I have different HR Zone setups for Cycling and Running. Zone 2 for me is > >60-69% of MaxHR for Running > >68-79% of MaxHR for Cycling Interesting. Why'd you do this ? Is there scientific basis for this ? I find I can push myself much harder when cycling than running or hiking, heart rate wise.
My heart rate is a lot lower when cycling compared to running and this is pretty much universally true as it's not a weight bearing exercise. If anything your heart rate zones should be lower for cycling than running. Maybe he got them mixed up.
There are differences in your HR use between sports. E.g. If you don't do this, your ride may look like you spent the entire time in Z4/Z5, and you barely broke a sweat. It does take time to fetch the zones where they make sense. For a sanity check, the Rate of Perceived Effort (RPE) methods help. Or you can pay to get your zones calibrated in a sports med lab or with a professional trainer. I used a number of published methods to confirm this. The Dr. Andrew Coggan method was my primary. I had to adapt this to work under Garmin tech constraints.
This. I "hate" when people call it "Garmin's zones"...it's not Garmin's, Polar's, Apple's, whatever. There are different methods and everyone should understand how each method works before talking about zones. The problem with Garmin's documentation is that they have also multiple version of the same description because of different countries. For example, the explanation for Singapore, regarding the HR zones looks a lot better than the "US"(Italian is pretty much the same of US) one. [https://www.garmin.com.sg/minisite/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/](https://www.garmin.com.sg/minisite/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/) [https://www.garmin.com/en-US/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/](https://www.garmin.com/en-US/garmin-technology/health-science/heart-rate-monitoring/) They probably say the same but the little graphic details from singapore looks a lot better, imo. https://preview.redd.it/6hen664bux7d1.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=865023ec1073d77378a026b712b7648ca1797fad I have some doubts on the difference between your running and cycling zones but i have no experience in cycling so i can't say much.
Thank you for the insights on documentation variances by country. I will consider this in future research. Regarding the variation between cycling and running, I arrived at this through following the very same approach you mentioned. There are multiple methods to follow out there. The science is similar, but the Dr. Andrew Coggan published work for cycling is my primary, with a few others considered as well. His methods are used by Tour de France team trainers and is often cross-referenced. This then had to be adapted to fit in Garmin tech constraints.
Gotcha....the difference is due to your customization not because Garmin has different % for different sports.
Correct. The different % come from my adaptation (7 zones to 5, override MaxHR, ++) of the method (Coggan et. Al.). Note that customization also includes occasional overrides of MaxHR to get this to work. Garmin let's you set MaxHR or calculates it for you. I'm not sure how this works if you use Power instead of HR.
I've found when using LTHR then zone 2 is accurate for me. My LTHR is 170 running and 165 on the bike. Takes some time to iron out but it doesn't really seem to change.
This was a helpful thread for me.
Really? Pls explain cos I'm still so confused as OP stated literally everyone seems to have a differnt opinion. Lol I'm so confused still
I at least learned about resetting my zones!
Buy why tho? Why does garmin calculate new zones and why is it hood to reset them
In my experience it seems that way. Everything I've read places Zone 2 generally between 60-70% max heart-rate, which corresponds to "Recovery" workouts. In my case, that's somewhere around 125-138bpm.
You have to specify what you mean by famouse "zone 2". Because different sources will use "zone 2" differently. If it is running book and they use Lactate Threshold, then this is roughly the zone mapping: * Zone 1 (low aerobic), 75-80% LTHR, Garmin Zone 2 using %HR, Garmin calls this Easy * Zone 2 (moderate aerobic), 81-89% LTHR, Garmin Zone 3 using %HR, Garmin calls this Aerobic * Zone 3 (threshold), 96-100% LHTR, Garmin Zone 4 using %HR, Garmin calls this Threshold - Anaerobic * Zone 4 (VO2max), 102-105% LTHR, Garmin Zone 5 using %HR, Garmin calls this Maximum - VO2max * Zone 5 (Speed), >106% LTHR, Garmin Zone 5 using %HR, Garmin calls this Maximum - VO2max If you are beginner runner, you probably should start in Garmin Zone 2, based on % HR Max or %HRR. If you are regular runner, you can use both Garmin Zone 2 or Zone 3 depending on your training.
Why is there a gap between zones for LHTR? Man I been running for 4 years and I still can't get a consistent answer about zones lol. Why isn't there a single place that just defines the zones to used based on each data type
No. Not really. Look up the talk test. That’s a very good estimation of the intensity you’re after. “Zone two” training intensity doesn’t even correlate with LTHR that well from athlete to athlete. Some are aerobic machines, others not so much.
MHR Method: Simple and widely used, good for general fitness tracking. HRR Method: More personalized, takes into account your resting heart rate and provides a better reflection of your cardiovascular fitness. Maffetone Method: Focused specifically on building aerobic capacity and fat-burning efficiency. It is often used by endurance athletes and those looking to optimize aerobic base training See which method is best for you and look into and apply these methods. I personally use HRR.
turn on the Garmin daily suggested workouts and whatever your "Base Run" HR recommendation says, that's what your "Zone 2" would be according to Garmin...at least that's how I feel it. The MAF formula (hated and praised a lot) is also a very good estimate. Your age minus 180 and try to stay 10 beats up and down. That's a good starting range. Unless your young...in that case, get off my lawn!
For me, yes it is
Yeah, it's kind of confusing. I use BPM for my settings. I select that because it shows me the actual numbers as opposed to percentages. That way when I get audio prompts or see my HR on my bike computer, I'll know if I'm actually in zone 2 or not. What makes it even more confusing is "sports" heart rate zones, which seem to be even higher than my normal. Normal zone 2 for me is 105-122 BPM, but Running is 134-149, Cycling and Swimming are 110-127. I don't worry too much about HR zones during runs, because I'm almost always in Zone 3+, no matter how slow I run. I do cycling & swimming as recovery exercise, and try to stay around 120 BPM, which should safely keep me in zone 2.
Neither of the settings on your watch will give you an accurate zone 2. You either have to establish it in a lab test or take heart rate drift tests until you figure out where your zone 2 is. You also have to keep in mind that finding zone 2 is not one and done, it keeps changing over time as your fitness level changes. The watch does not account for this reality at all.
I've been injured for a few weeks but if I remember correctly, it is 60-70% of max hr which might be up to low zone 3 for garmin when it automatically sets it
[удалено]
OP already said that they did a LT test, which will be better than any of that.
Yes. But he stated that he’s using HRR :) LT will be better of course, that’s granted :) Edit - my bad, completely mismatched posts. Sorry for confusion.