Something like a MaxHR = 220-age is only if you don't have any other points of reference.
If you've got another point of reference, such as having an HRM and seeing your HR at a higher number than that, then that's your new MHR.
220 - age is the best fit for a population wide model. Individuals will vary.
The point of it is that any other number than 220 results in a worse fit if you take everyone into account.
There are better models that offer a better population wide fit with higher order polynomials but most people lack the brains to be able to calculate them.
But everyone is an individual.
FWIW I can get my HR up to >200bpm and I'm not far off 50. I can only get it over 200 playing 5-a-side for some reason, just that combination of walk/sprint/run/stop/sprint/walk/etc. Steady state running I top out at 190bpm and cycling maxes at about 185bpm (but I tend not to do sprinty stuff when cycling).
Something like a
MaxHR = 220-age
is only if you don't have any other points of reference.If you've got another point of reference, such as having an HRM and seeing your HR at a higher number than that, then that's your new MHR.
220 - age
is the best fit for a population wide model. Individuals will vary.The point of it is that any other number than
220
results in a worse fit if you take everyone into account.There are better models that offer a better population wide fit with higher order polynomials but most people lack the brains to be able to calculate them.
But everyone is an individual.
FWIW I can get my HR up to >200bpm and I'm not far off 50. I can only get it over 200 playing 5-a-side for some reason, just that combination of walk/sprint/run/stop/sprint/walk/etc. Steady state running I top out at 190bpm and cycling maxes at about 185bpm (but I tend not to do sprinty stuff when cycling).