Fitness Level | Resting Heart Rate (bpm) |
---|---|
Athlete | 51–56 |
Excellent | 57–61 |
Good | 62–67 |
Average | 72–75 |
Poor | Over 82 |
Understanding a significant piece of research on accurately estimating maximum heart rate.
The Hunt Fitness Study was conducted by the Cardiac Exercise Research Group (CERG) at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). A primary goal was to develop a more precise age-based formula for predicting maximum heart rate (HRmax) due to known limitations of the traditional "220 - age" formula.
Researchers recognized that the "220 - age" formula could significantly underestimate HRmax, especially in older adults (by up to 40 beats per minute) and showed inaccuracies even for individuals in their 30s and 40s. Accurate HRmax estimation is crucial for effective exercise prescription, interpreting stress tests, and guiding training intensity.
The study involved a large cohort of 3,320 healthy adults (both men and women) across a broad age range from 19 to 89 years.
A key aspect of its robust methodology was the direct measurement of HRmax. Participants underwent maximal-effort exercise tests on treadmills, during which their maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) was also measured to confirm they had reached true maximal exertion.
Based on the data collected, the Hunt Fitness Study proposed the following formula:
HRmax = 211 - (0.64 × age)
Despite offering an improved estimation, the researchers acknowledge that considerable individual variability exists in HRmax.
For the most precise determination of an individual's HRmax, a direct maximal exercise test (often supervised by a healthcare professional or exercise physiologist) is still considered the gold standard.
The Hunt Fitness Study provided a scientifically robust, evidence-based formula for estimating maximum heart rate. It highlighted inaccuracies in the older "220 - age" formula and offered a more reliable alternative for general use, while also emphasizing that individual testing yields the most precise HRmax values.