What race are you most likely to hit your Max HR in?

I only ever really hit max HR in the last repeat of a 5x200m session at 400m pace, 5 min rest. Therefore I'm guessing 400 might be the most likely.

62 upvotes and 3 downvotes for a completely incorrect answer with ridiculous logic! LOL people must have stopped reading books.

1) It is simply false that 800 and 1000m is not long enough to reach max heart rate.
Most credible sources claim you can reach your max heart rate in 60-90 seconds!

S. Canaday (Whom I thought was Rojo because of the moranity) and almost every other poster go against all textbooks/running books I have read. Both standard sports physiology and books by Lydiard and Daniels say that they recommend something like an all out 2 minute effort to test your max heart rate (followed by one more after a longer break - if you couldn't run as far the second time, then you know, that you hit your max the first time)

yes you can keep your vo2 max for about 8 minutes and "that means 3k is the race where you'll most likely hit mhr"?? err no. that means that it is the race where you'll run most of the race around vo2 max , but perhaps you run the first 6 laps at 90-95 % of mhr and are too tired to really hit your max hr in the last 1,5.

2) Well-trained athletes can maintain mhr for 2-4 minutes

that 800, 1000 and 1500 is more anaerobic than 3 and 5k is exactly the reason that they are more likely to be the races where you hit your max hr.
Think about it like this: The higher the speed you are running, the faster hr will increase. 90 seconds is enough to get it as high as your body demands, so if you run 1 k in 2.30 then you'll probably hit mhr in 90 seconds and your body will tell your hr to increase really hard the last minute because of the pace, but it just can't because it is already maxed out.

TLDR: You can hit max heart rate in less than 2 minutes and running anaerobically really tells your hr to go up => 800 to 1500m more likely than longer stuff to hit max hr.

For the record one should theoretically hit max hr in any race from 800m to 10k at some point if you go all out, and it should not be too difficult as it is possible to hold for a little while

that's only because vo2max is arbitrarily defined as the peak of an incrementally increasing test.

you reach a higher O2 usage during shorter, more intense workouts because the muscle pH drops lower than it can during that longer term test. That low muscle pH is where the highest O2 unloading into muscle occurs.

answer for OP is the 800m. But the HR isn't necesarily because of the O2 - the heart has to beat faster due to the skeletal muscle pump. Calves working at sprint paces push blood back to the heart very fast, if it doesn't speed up it will be damaged severely. Possibly HR would get just as fast or faster in a 100 or 200 as 800.

Clearly you people don't like this answer, but the average American male (who is 39 years old and weighs 200 lbs) could not complete a 3000m race, and probably couldn't finish a 1500m run without stopping to walk.

i don't think you can ever hit your max in a distance race, or if you do, that's the end of you.

somewhere between 400 M and 800 M would probably be the max. for a young runner with decent anaerobic ability, and some endurance.

of course max heart rate depends on the athlete, if you're not properly trained anaerobically, and more an LSD guy then you would seem to have a max heart rate with the longer distance but actually, you can't get to your true max heart rate, it's artifically governed minus five percent, as a survival mechanism

max heart rate is red lining after all, and the organism does not want that, except in a perceived life and death emergency.

as another poster said, repeat intervals with shorter recovery time is the best way to find out your max heart rate.

and this is subject to change with anaerobic stress and adaptation.

but NOT longer middle distance work, that is after you achieve significant aerobic abilityu.

If i said something incorrect please correct me (I suppose I could be wrong, sometimes I am)....but instead of simply calling me "incorrect" you're going to have to cite something scientific that directly contradicts what I'm about to write:

Ever had a Vo2max test done in a lab with a correct ramp protocol? There's a reason they shoot for a progressive increase in intensity and want the test to last at least 8 minutes usually.

Here's the issue with a single, all out 2-min effort (let's say an 800m all-out): Because of the high relative anaerobic component and rush of lactate/blood Ph drop those can be limiting factors before 100% max HR is reached. Sure it's super intense and you are trying 100% (much like in a 300m-400m sprint all out)...but there's a good chance you're going to "lock up" with your leg muscles before you hit 100% max HR let alone Vo2max. So no, " 90-seconds is not enough to get [your HR] as high as it demands". You don't want a high anaerobic contribution! Sure, you might get up to 97-98% of HR max though. We want 100% for minutes on end.

When we hit Vo2max in a *well paced* 3km though, we won't flood ourselves with lactate as much and go anaerobic as fast...so the HR can slowly climb that last few % and we can actually hit Vo2max (as well as 100% max HR) and even hold it there for several minutes.

The key point is even pacing ( a progressive load of intensity and ramp) at around velocity at Vo2max (again back to 3km race pace or even 5km race pace for an elite) is going to be the best bet to actually reach 100% max HR and Vo2max accurately before your legs "lock up" (which generally happens in short distances like 800m). Flood yourself with lactate too fast and it's going to be harder to reach true Vo2max:

.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

VO2max, protocol duration, and the VO2 plateau - PubMed

The protocol duration of tests to VO2max should be between 8 and 10 min for healthy, moderately to highly trained subjects.

Link:pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17596788/#:~:t...

Correct, when we are doing scientific lab research and VO2Max Tests, the Maximum Oxygen Uptake (ml/kg/min) peaks at a level, even if it holds for several seconds to minutes, the pace may increase or incline % may increase, but the Max (ml/kg/min) remains, however the body needs to compensate for the increased in physiological strain/load/demand, and thus respiratory rate and lactate gradually and exponentially increases. Depending on training status and predisposed ability, lactate may peak at 10 to 11 up to 13 mmol/L before lactate increases, 400m-800m-1500m-3000m is not uncommon to see lactate increase to 3-15-20-25+ in which it even maxes out the lactate meter for high CNS load. BTW: for Imperial users, non metric, Kg is 0.4535 thereabouts from lbs. so 100 lbs/2.205=45.35 Kg.

The question and many of the answers don't take pre-race warm up into account. If you are thinking about how long it takes to get from a warmed up resting or recovery HR up to max HR, then the "lag" in HR response to catch up to race effort load probably means 1500 is about the shortest race distance for the HR to adjust to the load being placed on it. When I was running the 400 in college, I wanted to be in the blocks with an HR already up to support maximum effort, which for me meant 140-150. I would hit a 195-200 HR by the finish.

You are completely conflating heart rate and vo2 max for some reason. I would have thought YOU knew the difference, but max hr is just the max amount of beats your heart can do a minute, whilst vo2 max is your maximal oxygen uptake.

The article you linked just says you reach a higher vo2max in an 8-minutes test rather than a 5, 12, or 16 min test. Old news. It does NOT say that you will reach a higher mhr at 8 minutes.

You can argue with whatever theory about how the right side of the mitochondria actually needs 6.5 minutes of stimulus to really signal your heart to reach max or whatever bs you let out, but it does not make it true. Almost everyone can reach max hr in less than 2 minutes and it is not a problem that you are running anaerobically. Running anaerobically will certainly tell your heart to speed up because the legs would like more oxygen. You are writing all your crap because you conflate it with the fact that yes, we are more efficient at utilizing oxygen when we do not run hard anaerobically => higher vo2 max =/= higher heart rate.

But I am willing to change my mind if you link a study saying otherwise. Until then I will believe what I have read in sports physiology and Jack Daniels book

Often and I called you a moran. Still disappointed about the gel scam support of yours.

I thought I did correct you in my post, but maybe you didn't get it. You said that 3k-5k was the correct answer and I argued it wasn't.

Now you're saying that in order to call your first post incorrect I have to "directly contradict" your second post? Your second post is just a bunch of claims and handwaving with some fancy words and the only evidence you bring forth has next to nothing to do with our discussion and is a ridiculous trick to seem more credible.

If you show a study that proves that you can't reach your max heart rate in less than 5 minutes and/or that you really don't want to be running anaerobically to reach it, then I will be corrected and say sorry for being an a-hole

I'm in the camp that says that the time that you can maintain your Vo2max or your max heart rate (two different things) is not the same as the most likely event in which you will hit your max heart rate. It's also not the same as the event in which you can most quickly hit your max heart rate. So we're talking about four different things:

1. The event in which you are most likely to hit your max heart rate (OP question);

2. The shortest event in which you can hit your max heart rate;

3. The longest distance that you can maintain your max heart rate;

4. The longest distance that you can maintain your Vo2max.

The OP's question was "what rare your you *most likely* to hit max HR in"...I'm still saying 3km-5km. That is not to say you might hit max HR in an event as short at 1500m/Mile.

My second post is only supporting all of what I already said in my first post:

When you are at 100% max HR for minutes on end you should also be at 100% Vo2max. So it is more likely you can actually achieve 100% max HR in something where you are hitting 100% Vo2max for extended minutes at a time (hence 3km-5km) or something around 8-min +.

In shorter events under 800m (under 2-min). There is too much anaerobic component and tie up from high lactate levels. It's basically a half sprint! I don't believe a lot of people will necessarily hit 100% max HR in something that short and intense....Just like I wouldn't expect them to hit it in a 200m or 400m sprint.

I don't know what evidence you are citing exactly because you are just saying "sport physiology and Jack Daniels". I read Jack Daniels as a young teen like 25 years ago. What are you citing exactly?

Lighten up, Francis.

Furthermore, you write: "higher vo2 max =/= higher heart rate"....uh what the heck is that supposed to mean? When one is progressively reaching actual Vo2max they are also approaching 100% max Heartrate....

We aren't talking about a "higher Vo2max"....we're talking about 100% Vo2max. And we're not talking about a "higher heart rate"....we are talking about 100% maximum Heartrate.

I actually think many people fail to reach their true 100% max HR (even in a race or Vo2max test) or scientific study. It's very, very hard and requires excellent pacing and an appropriate ramp protocol (if a Vo2max test). People think they are going hard, and their effort may feel like 100% (it's a 100% RPE), but often the pacing has to be perfect to pull out those final few percent imo. Mentally it's very very hard.

Since you mention "Jack Daniels book" let's look at page 46 in his 4th edition:

One protocol to try to achieve max HR is *Several* hard 2-min repeats...or 4 x 800m. Much like a Vo2max workout that is progressive with minimal rest we are looking to spike the HR progressively and not flood the system with lactate too quickly like a *Single* all-out 800m Race would. Hence the volume of the workout and repeating efforts over 6-8min worth of work.

We could also say that 4 x 800m (about a 3200m worth of velocity at Vo2max work) on a short rest (less than 2-min between each rep to allow HR not to drop too much) is very similar to racing an all-out evenly paced 3km or 2-mile at Velocity at Vo2max. After about 5-6min (1600m to 2km in for many) you start getting up over 95-98% of max HR and then for the final few minutes you can accelerate with a "kick" and spike that up to 100%..

This makes plenty of sense in theory, and I don't doubt that it works out in practice too for a very fit elite athlete. I wonder how this works out in practice for a normal nowhere-near-elite runner who is fit enough to push themselves pretty hard by general population standards (e.g., somebody who is reliably in the top 10% but not close to winning a typical Turkey Trot) but is probably nowhere near fit nor experienced enough to execute a perfectly-paced 3K and doesn't have access to a lab and professionals to guide them through the VO2 max testing protocol. My hunch, admittedly based on nothing, is that in a normal race setting (not lab), most normal people are probably get as close as they'll ever get to their true max HR in about a mile or so. They might be able to hit a higher hr in a lab with the help of professionals guiding them through a detailed protocol, but the vast majority won't have the combination of fitness, confidence, and discipline to do it in a 3K race.

My hunch is that such people are going out too fast, unless you mean the first mile of a 3K.

every race you'll hit it the 100-400meters if you race correctly , even the marathon . Fundamentals of training. You shouldnt be in max heart rate the entire race , however , by the end you should be

try and drive your heart to the max and report back.

i did squat reps as a test and took short breathers when fatigued and hit it again, to max out to the point where there was extreme effort and poundage moving, but close red lining for sure, danger of collapse with heart racing and legs screaming.

i feel that i could have driven the heart rate higher with a bit more development of fast twitch in the quads, to make the effort more extreme.

it is somewhat of controlled extreme violence. versus long slow death.