Heart Rate Watch??

giguer · 06-17-2008, 01:32 AM

Just start to look that to buy one.

Don't know a lot of thing about that and don't know wich one is good. So I went on Amazon.com: Online Shopping for Electronics, Apparel, Computers, Books, DVDs & more and found this one.
Amazon.com: Bell Fitness Heart Rate Monitor: Sports & Outdoors
Do you think is good? I don't want to paid 100$ for one so.

Just found this one too. Look very better and good review on it.
Amazon.com: Omron HR-100C Heart Rate Monitor: Sports & Outdoors
If you have other, just let me know. Thx.

texmo · 06-17-2008, 03:45 AM

Just curious why buy one?

Crashsti · 06-17-2008, 06:59 AM

Here you go.
Product - Polar F6

This one has alot of features but it also costs alot more than the ones you linked to. Aside from monitoring heart rate it also tracks calories burned which is very useful.

To answer Texmo's question. Heart rate monitors give you additional information regarding how your training is progressing. You can find out your max heart rate, find out how much you can recover between rounds in a fight or between exercise circuits. You can test you resting heart rate. Very useful to find out if you're overtraining, since the HR monitor will give you a higher resting heart rate than normal. Some can count calories. Its just another tool but a very useful one for trainers and athletes who like to know how thier body is responding to training.

texmo · 06-17-2008, 07:33 PM

How will it let you know if you are over training? I just find it so hard to use mine while training that I never use it.

Crashsti · 06-17-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texmo

How will it let you know if you are over training? I just find it so hard to use mine while training that I never use it.

Most athletes check thier heart rate as soon as they wake up. Before they even get out of bed they will get a reading, and record it so that over time they have a baseline for future reference. For example, say that everyday for the last few months you wake, check your heart rate and its always been 50-55. Then one morning after a really hard training cycle you wake up and its 60 or 65, 10 beats above your normal. You wake the next day and its still higher than normal. What this usually means is that your currently overtraining and could use a break.

texmo · 06-17-2008, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crashsti

Most athletes check thier heart rate as soon as they wake up. Before they even get out of bed they will get a reading, and record it so that over time they have a baseline for future reference. For example, say that everyday for the last few months you wake, check your heart rate and its always been 50-55. Then one morning after a really hard training cycle you wake up and its 60 or 65, 10 beats above your normal. You wake the next day and its still higher than normal. What this usually means is that your currently overtraining and could use a break.

True I did not know that. I am gonna get my HR monitor back off my mate and start doing this.

SmashingMachine · 06-17-2008, 09:56 PM

I use mine to help me better determine if I'm in an aerobic or anerobic zone for fat burning.

Crashsti · 06-18-2008, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmashingMachine

I use mine to help me better determine if I'm in an aerobic or anerobic zone for fat burning.

I just listened to an audio seminar related to this. The speaker was asked about the the fat burning zone versus simply going as hard as you can for an hour or so. The answer was simple. Yes you'll burn more calories as fat when wokring in the zone. But you'll burn far more total calories when working above it, which will also mean more fat. His answer was based on percentages and i don't remember them off the top of my head. However it was along the lines of would you rather burn 40%fat out of 800calories when goin all out or 60% fat from 400 calories working in the zone? It was an interesting look at why some people, like fighters or really energetic folks might want to pass on working out in the fat burning zone.

SmashingMachine · 06-18-2008, 07:01 PM

Yeah, I recently read something similar to that too. I don't put as much emphasis on it but I do pay attention to it. My thoughts are this...I'd rather go longer in the fat burning zone to burn the calories as opposed to shorter in an aerobic zone because while it may burn more calories off...it also breaks your muscle mass down harder in the aerobic zone. That's why you never see a fat or muscular marathon runner and why sprinters are always muscular.