Heart Rate Zones Calculator

Yes, at the population level. The old 220 − age rule traces back to an unreviewed 1970s table and overestimates max heart rate for older adults. Modern regressions fitted to lab-measured maxima — Tanaka's 208 − 0.7 × age, Gellish's 207 − 0.7 × age, and similar equations like the 206.9 − 0.67 × age used here — track real maxima far better across ages. But any equation still carries an individual spread of roughly ±10 bpm: the estimate is a starting point, and a max measured in a lab or a truly all-out effort always wins.

The Karvonen method measures intensity from the span between your resting and maximal heart rate, which is the part that actually does the work. Using % of max directly puts a 60–70% zone at 112–131 bpm for the 30-year-old example above; using % of reserve puts it at 136–149 bpm. Physiologically, effort scales with how much reserve you are using, so reserve-based zones line up better with ventilatory thresholds and perceived effort — especially for people with low resting heart rates.

Take it in the morning, right after waking and before getting out of bed: count your pulse for 60 seconds (or 30 seconds × 2), and repeat for a few days to average out noise. A wearable's 7-day resting figure works too. Typical adults land between 60 and 80 bpm; well-trained endurance athletes often sit in the 40s or 50s. If your resting rate is above your max estimate — or medication such as beta-blockers affects your heart rate — enter both numbers manually.