Heart Rate Maximum = 220-Age Is Wrong

We take a dive into the research surrounding the 220-age equation. It is 'surpsiring', with flaws and poor science. However, recent research still uses age alone as a single predictor of heart rate maximum, although they are making more population-specific equations, they still have quite large prediction errors.

Thanks to the scientists that spent the enduring hours doing this research.

Video suggestions in the comments will be read!

References:
Robergs, R.A. and Landwehr, R., 2002. The surprising history of the" HRmax= 220-age" equation. Journal of Exercise Physiology Online, 5(2), pp.1-10.

Verschuren, O., Maltais, D.B. and Takken, T.I.M., 2011. The 220‐age equation does not predict maximum heart rate in children and adolescents. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 53(9), pp.861-864.

Shargal, E., Kislev-Cohen, R., Zigel, L., Epstein, S., Pilz-Burstein, R. and Tenenbaum, G., 2015. Age-related maximal heart rate: examination and refinement of prediction equations. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 55(10), pp.1207-18.

Machado, F.A., Kravchychyn, A.C.P., Peserico, C.S., Silva, D.F.D. and Mezzaroba, P.V., 2018. A new age-based equation for predicting maximum heart rate in endurance-trained runners. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, 40(1), pp.100-105.

[philiphookham]

I'm 62 years old and have a maximum heart rate of 186 bpm. This is tested regularly while trying for PB's when cycling hard up hills climbs. 220-age would estimate my max heart rate to be 158 bpm. Even adding the possible error estimate of 11 bpm would only make my max 169 bpm. Either I'm a freak or any attempt to estimate maximum heart rate based on age is misleading and shouldn't be used.

[MidsierramusingBlogspot]

Dr Cooper said in his aerobics book that 205-1/2 your age was a better measure for fit people. Endurance athletes generally have a resting HR in the 40s or low 50s. The medical community would diagnose this as bradycardia and they would be wrong.

[krabn]

220-age is yikes and I'm educating anyone who tells me about it. I've been running for 7 years now, surprisingly never injured. Ran 6 marathons, and lots of half marathons. My max HR from my watch and chest strap is 211, my resting is 51. I can run around and between zone 4-5 for 2-3 hours and I never had a problem. I always check every 6 months to my cardiologist and yea, I'm fitter than ever. It all depends mainly on GENES, gender, and age. Everyone is just different.

[anthonyclarke]

the equation and error at 10:00 218-(0.8age) +/- 8bpm seems most accurate to me. I've long suspected 220-age to be a rule of thumb for couch potatoes but not people who run / cycle regularly etc. 36 here and max HR around 194/195bpm. Half marathon 1:39 and 10k 42:20

[stefan]

Finally some facts, the STD deviation is such that you simply can forget a simple formula. I am 56 and my HRmax is 195 (and it was on the high end 30 years ago).

[KeisariEurobeat]

My max heartrate is 218 and I'm an athlete. Knew the 220-age wasn't a "law".

[ClashOfLings]

Come now, 3:23, an r^2 = 1 in real data: that's a straw man. No one would expect that. Even in most applications in physics, where you can nicely isolate variables, much less so in biology. Of course, there was bound to be an error on that estimate, and it is certainly helpful to have an estimate of the error (11bpm). Even just looking at the data variation at any given age, it would be crazy to try and target training after a calculated maximum heart rate. That's not serious.

[Karovaldas]

This is the first I’ve heard of Max HR being lower for endurance athletes. Seems like HR ceiling is mostly genetically set and, if anything, can be increased closer to genetic potential with exercise. Is there a reference for this observation?

[christrickett]

My max HR is supposed to be 171, I get over that regularly and easily, often over 180 which is hard, but doable and recovery is rapid as far down as 100, slower down to 60 again. My point is, if I train based on this 220- thing I don't think I would get much in the way of results.

[mad.finance]

I think for the data they had, they propose a good approximation. Actually we can test if any intercept is equal to 220, by doing a hypothesis test. Would be a good question for research! ;)
And thinking about what you said on the video, it would be interesting to test a quadratic form for this function too...

[TheyCalledMeT]

220 - age is a rough approximation and very easy to instantly calculate in your head.
it's definitively not precise, especialy when looking at single measurements going beyond +/-11 of that number.

[pavlovskyyp]

Hi! I have a question, is this normal that my heart rate is very low when resting, and when running heartbeat goes up quickly, i have minimum 150 bpm when running slow 6min/km, and it only increases to 160-165 when running at pace @min/km? im 20yo, thanks for advice

[hyperscepthical-end]

I’m 9 years old, and my heart rate was once 227. I was just sitting in bed when my chest started to suck in, I went to my parents and told them what was happening, and next thing you know I’m in the doctors office. Not the hospital.

[Cmustang]

What is the exact definition of HRmax, is it the ultimate value that you could reach? Or that you sould not overpass?

[anvdoc]

Cardiac output is calculated as heart rate x stroke volume (of your heart). Intuitively, one would think that as you age, your cardiac output would decrease unless your stroke volume increased. As you get older, your heart is likely to stiffen (diastolic dysfunction), limiting the amount of stroke volume you can have. Does this imply that as you get older, your ability to work (watts) decreases because of this? If it is a maximum, it means you cannot train to improve your heart rate.  The presenter  also noted that as you train, your maximum heart rate decreases, implying that your stroke volume improves. Other factors must be at work, such as your circulatory system and its ability to clear exercise metabolites (such as lactate) efficiently.

[hornet]

The Formula 220-Age works good for me. Mine is 142. Riding a bicycle for 75 minutes @ 17.6 Kmh my HRM is 124 bpm maximum and my average is 99.

[kjlkathandjohn]

Age 70, HRmax 187.
With the low cost of HR monitors, to me the prediction of a max is not valuable, but for me the value is the HRzone percentages.
They seem to work for me in relation to my HRmax (not in relation to a fictional HRmax). I do use these zones as a guide for a run's intensity goal. (A guide for a JOG's intensity - I am slow)

[evan]

200 - age has a moderate correlation with actual HRmax. By definition, it is not "wrong". It should not be used rigidly for training, but it's a good starting point for many who haven't or can't do a max HR test.

[bjornalm]

3:15 The sport watches use HRmax, this is why they get it so wrong for individuals.

[reddrift]

In just a normal fast paced run, i have hit just over 200 bpm, im 21. If i did an all out sprint, i reckon it would be 220+ easily.