Differences in heart rate zones between different models

Training
1

Hello,
I am writing this thread because I am a bit confused about the different models of heart rate zones.

The zones marked by polar, are based on 5 zone model:

  • zone 5 90%-100% HR max
  • zone 4 80%-90% HR max
  • zone 3 70%-80% * zone 2
  • zone 2 60%-70% * zone 1
  • zone 1 50%-60% zone 1

In my case,
imagen

Adapting it to Seiler’s three-phase model:

  • zone 3 above 90% FCmax. In my case above 176 bpm
  • zone 2 between 70-90%. In my case between 137 and 176bpm
  • zone 1 below 70% below 137bpm.

According to the polarized model, I should do 80% of the sessions in zone 1 and 20% intervals in zone 3.

In all my years of running I confess that I almost never run below 140bpm. I have a very hard time staying under 140 (very very slowly). I usually run between 145 - 160 (comfortably) and when I do intervals I run above 178 bpm.

However, if I use the Joel Friel Running model, the aerobic zone is between 151 and 159 bpm.
imagen

La z1 (aerobica) de Joel Frield corresponde con la zona 3 de Polar (por encima del umbral aerobico).

Entonces, ¿a qué zona le tengo que hacer caso?
¿Existe algún método casero para calcular el umbral aerobico (VT1) y el umbral anaerobico (VT2)?

Thanks :slight_smile:

1 Like
2

Hello, I have the same issue. Any resolution?

3

This is about the worst ‘adaptation’ that I have ever seen…

Zone 1 is below VT1 (AeT), Z3 is above VT2 (AT) and Z2 sits in between the two physiological anchor points.
I do see that you have the 80% sessions correct. Those are below VT1.
The other 20% sessions are simply above VT1 and if you do them in Z2 or Z3 (Seiler system) depends on your goals and the training phase you’re in.

Intervals can’t set the three zone system correctly because the zone system is strongly ingrained in the code and based on the most widely used 5 zone HR system (like Polar, Garmin and most others). Intervals uses an approximation as Z1+Z2, Z3+Z4 and anything above Z4.

1 Like