Methodology · hover any ? for a definition 方法學 · 將滑鼠指向任何 ? 即可看解釋
Every heart-rate zone table rests on one measured or guessed number. This page explains which number to use, how the guessing works, and how much of the answer is noise. 每一張心率 zone 表，都建立在一個量度出來或估算出來的數字之上。本頁說明應該用哪一個數字、估算是怎樣運作的，以及答案裡面有多少其實只是雜訊。
← Back to the calculator 返回計算機A training zone is never an absolute number. It is always a fraction of some reference heart rate — the anchor. Choose a different anchor and every boundary moves, sometimes by more than the width of a zone.
There are three anchors in serious use, and they are not equally good. They differ in what they measure, how hard they are to obtain, and how much of you they actually capture.
訓練 zone 從來不是一個絕對數字，它永遠是某個參考心率的百分比 — 我們稱之為錨值。換一個錨值，所有界線都會移位，有時移動幅度比一個 zone 本身的闊度還要大。
實際被認真使用的錨值有三個，而它們的質素並不相同。三者的分別在於：量度的是什麼、取得的難度，以及究竟捕捉到你多少個人特性。
The calculator works down this chain and stops at the first line you can satisfy. It is ordered by quality, not by convenience. 計算機會沿這條鏈往下走，停在第一個你能夠滿足的條件。排序依據是質素，不是方便程度。
Nothing stops you from switching tabs and reading all three. You should — the gap between them is the most informative number on the calculator page.
你當然可以切換分頁把三種都看一遍。事實上你應該這樣做 — 它們之間的差距，是整個計算機頁面上資訊量最高的一個數字。
Anchoring on the lactate threshold is the strongest of the three, for a reason that has nothing to do with precision and everything to do with what the number means.
HRmax barely changes with training. Threshold changes a great deal. A year of good work might move your HRmax by nothing at all, while moving your threshold up by 10 bpm or more. Anchoring on a fixed number to measure a moving one is backwards. Anchor on the thing that moves, and your zones move with your fitness instead of going stale.
Friel publishes separate tables for running and cycling, because threshold HR genuinely differs between the two — cycling LTHR typically sits 5–10 bpm below running LTHR, largely a consequence of muscle mass recruited and body position. Test each sport separately; do not carry one number across.
以乳酸閾值做錨，是三者中最強的一個。理由與「準不準」無關，而是與這個數字代表什麼有關。
HRmax 幾乎不會因訓練而改變，但閾值會大幅改變。一年扎實訓練可能令你的 HRmax 完全不動，卻能把閾值推高 10 bpm 或更多。用一個不會動的數字，去量度一樣會動的東西，本身就是倒轉了。改用會動的那一個做錨，你的 zone 就會隨體能一起移動，而不是逐漸過時。
Friel 為跑步和單車分別發表了不同的表，因為兩者的閾值心率確實有差異 — 單車的 LTHR 通常比跑步低 5–10 bpm，主要源於動用的肌肉量與身體姿勢不同。兩項運動必須分開測試，不可把一個數字直接搬過去。
Heart rate reserve is HRmax minus resting HR: the range your heart actually has to work in. Zones are placed inside that range rather than on the raw scale:
心率儲備 = HRmax 減靜止心率，即心臟實際可以運作的範圍。Zone 是放在這個範圍之內，而不是放在原始刻度上：
The ACSM recommends this for exercise prescription, and the reason is physiological rather than aesthetic: %HRR corresponds to %VO2 reserve, whereas %HRmax does not correspond nearly as well to %VO2max. You are getting closer to prescribing oxygen uptake, which is what actually drives the adaptation.
It also individualises. Two athletes with an identical HRmax of 185 but resting heart rates of 42 and 72 have reserves of 143 and 113 bpm. On %HRmax they get identical zones, which is plainly wrong. On %HRR they do not.
The cost: it needs an honest resting heart rate — lying down, before you get out of bed, averaged over several mornings. A number taken sitting at a desk is not a resting heart rate and will quietly distort every zone.
ACSM 推薦用這個方法開運動處方，理由是生理上的，不是美觀上的：%HRR 對應的是 %VO2 reserve，而 %HRmax 對應 %VO2max 的吻合程度差得多。換言之，你更接近於直接處方攝氧量，而攝氧量才是真正驅動適應的因素。
它同時具備個人化能力。兩名運動員 HRmax 同樣是 185，但靜止心率分別是 42 與 72，儲備就分別是 143 與 113 bpm。用 %HRmax 他們會得到完全相同的 zone，這顯然不對；用 %HRR 就不會。
代價是：它需要一個誠實的靜止心率 — 平臥、未起床前量度，取數個早上的平均值。坐在辦公桌前量到的數字不是靜止心率，它會悄悄扭曲你每一個 zone。
The classic 50/60/70/80/90/100% split is the one printed on gym posters. It is the weakest of the three because it throws away the only piece of individual information most people already have: their resting heart rate.
Use it when you have nothing else. Do not use it because it is familiar.
健身室海報上印的 50/60/70/80/90/100% 就是這一個。它是三者中最弱的，因為它把大多數人本來已經擁有的唯一一項個人化資料丟掉了：靜止心率。
沒有其他選擇時才用它。不要因為熟悉就用它。
Each anchor buys you something and costs you something. Read the cost before you choose. 每個錨值都有得著，也有代價。選之前先看代價。
Pros優點
Cons缺點
Use when何時使用 You train seriously and will actually do the test. 你認真訓練，而且真的會去做那個測試。
Pros優點
Cons缺點
Use when何時使用 You have a reliable HRmax and resting HR, but no LTHR yet. 你有可靠的 HRmax 與靜止心率，但仍未有 LTHR。
Pros優點
Cons缺點
Use when何時使用 Nothing else is available, or you want a rough starting point. 沒有其他選擇，或者只想要一個粗略起點。
What heart rate does well心率的長處
Where it fails心率的短處
The sane answer is to use both. Govern long steady work and monitor cost with heart rate; govern intervals and pacing with pace or power. Where the two disagree on an easy day — pace says easy, heart rate says Zone 3 — believe the heart rate and slow down.
務實的做法是兩者並用。長時間穩定訓練與監察代價用心率；間歇與控速用配速或功率。若在輕鬆日兩者出現分歧 — 配速說輕鬆、心率說 Zone 3 — 相信心率，慢下來。
If you have not tested your HRmax, the calculator estimates it. Every one of these is a population regression: it predicts the average person of your age, and says nothing about you.
如果你未曾實測 HRmax，計算機會替你估算。以下每一條都是群體回歸：它預測的是與你同齡的「平均人」，對你本人毫無說明力。
This is the part other calculators leave out, and it is the reason this one exists. 這是其他計算機略過的一節，也是這一個存在的理由。
Age equations carry a standard deviation of roughly ±10 bpm. That is not a rounding detail — it means about one athlete in three sits further from the prediction than that. And the error does not stay in HRmax; it propagates into every boundary you derive from it. Take a 42-year-old using Tanaka, on the %HRmax model:
年齡公式的標準差約為 ±10 bpm。這不是四捨五入的小事 — 它代表大約每三名運動員就有一名偏離預測值比這更遠。而且誤差不會停留在 HRmax，它會傳遞到你由它推導出來的每一條界線。以一名 42 歲、使用 Tanaka、採 %HRmax 模型的人為例：
The uncertainty in where Zone 4 starts is almost as wide as Zone 4. Said plainly: an age-estimated Zone 4 boundary is barely a boundary at all. It is a suggestion with a 16 bpm error bar around it.
This is why the calculator shades those bands on the bpm scale rather than printing four confident-looking numbers, and why every boundary in the table carries its own ± figure while HRmax is estimated. Enter a tested HRmax and the bands disappear, because the error genuinely does.
「Zone 4 從哪裡開始」的不確定性，闊度幾乎等於整個 Zone 4。說白一點：由年齡估算出來的 Zone 4 界線，根本算不上是一條界線，它只是一個附帶 16 bpm 誤差範圍的建議。
所以本計算機會在 bpm 刻度上畫出陰影帶，而不是印四個看起來很肯定的數字；也所以在 HRmax 屬估算值時，表中每條界線都各自帶有自己的 ± 數值。一旦填入實測 HRmax，陰影帶就會消失，因為那時誤差確實不存在。
Blood flow without adding fatigue. It is not training, and treating it as training is the most common way athletes ruin the next hard session. Full sentences, nose breathing.
Where most of the week belongs. Fat oxidation, capillary and mitochondrial density, durability — the adaptations that raise threshold from below. Slow to arrive, and they need hours rather than effort.
Real aerobic stimulus, but it carries a recovery cost close to threshold work without the same return. Use it deliberately or not at all; drifting into Z3 on easy days is how a training week quietly becomes mediocre in both directions.
Right at the edge of metabolic steady state. This is what raises the ceiling on sustainable pace. Cruise intervals and steady blocks of 8–20 minutes; sustainable 40–60 minutes at absolute most.
Aerobic power, in intervals of 3–8 minutes with full recoveries. Note the floor: heart rate lags by 1–3 minutes, so for anything shorter the number on your wrist is still climbing when the repetition ends. Those sessions are governed by pace or power, not by this table.
Because one label was hiding three different sessions: 5a short threshold work, 5b VO2max intervals, 5c anaerobic capacity. Same zone on the chart, entirely different weeks.
增加血流而不增加疲勞。它不是訓練；把它當成訓練，是運動員毀掉下一課高強度訓練最常見的方式。可講完整句子，能用鼻呼吸。
一週訓練的大部分應該在這裡。脂肪氧化、微血管與粒線體密度、耐久力 — 這些是從下方把閾值頂上去的適應。它們來得慢，需要的是時數，不是用力。
有真實的有氧刺激，但恢復成本接近閾值訓練，回報卻不相同。要用就刻意去用，否則完全不用；輕鬆日不知不覺漂進 Z3，正是一週訓練在兩個方向上同時變得平庸的原因。
正好處於代謝穩態的邊緣。這是提升可持續配速上限的訓練。巡航間歇與穩定段落，每次 8–20 分鐘；最多只能維持 40–60 分鐘。
有氧功率，以 3–8 分鐘間歇搭配完整恢復進行。請留意下限：心率有 1–3 分鐘的滯後，任何比這更短的反覆，結束時手錶上的數字仍在上升。那類課節由配速或功率主導，不是由這張表主導。
因為單一個標籤其實掩蓋了三種不同課節：5a 短時間閾值訓練、5b VO2max 間歇、5c 無氧能力。圖上是同一個 zone，實際卻是完全不同的訓練週。
A zone table tells you where the boundaries are. It does not tell you how much time to spend on each side of them. That is the part that decides whether the training works. Zone 表告訴你界線在哪裡，但沒有告訴你應該在每條界線的兩邊各花多少時間。而後者才決定訓練有沒有效。
Distribution models group the five zones into three buckets: easy (Z1–Z2), moderate (Z3), and hard (Z4–Z5). These figures are approximate and describe time, not sessions.
分布模型把五個 zone 歸納為三組：輕鬆（Z1–Z2）、中等（Z3）、高強度（Z4–Z5）。以下數字為約數，指的是時間比例而非課節數目。
The third row is the one worth staring at. It is not a published model — it is the pattern coaches see over and over: easy days run too hard, hard days run too soft, and almost everything lands in the middle. It produces a training week that is simultaneously too tired to recover from and too soft to adapt to. The fix is not more effort; it is more difference between days.
值得盯著看的是第三行。它不是一個已發表的模型 — 它是教練反覆見到的模式：輕鬆日跑得太用力、高強度日又跑得不夠狠，結果幾乎所有時間都落在中間。這樣的一週既累得無法恢復，又軟得產生不了適應。解法不是更用力，而是讓不同日子之間的差距更大。
Seiler's observation that elite endurance athletes spend roughly 80% of their time at low intensity is well replicated. The precise split, and whether polarized beats pyramidal, is still argued over in the literature — the agreed part is that the bulk of volume belongs in the easy bucket.
Seiler 觀察到精英耐力運動員約 80% 時間處於低強度，這點已被反覆驗證。至於確切比例、以及極化是否優於金字塔，文獻上仍有爭論 — 有共識的部分是：訓練量的主體應該落在輕鬆那一組。
| Zone區間 | Typical session典型課節 | Time in zone區間內時間 |
|---|---|---|
| Z1 | Recovery jog or easy spin, the day after hard work. Warm-ups and cool-downs.高強度訓練翌日的恢復慢跑或輕鬆踩。以及熱身與緩和。 | 20–45 min |
| Z2 | The long run or ride, and most weekday aerobic volume. Conversational throughout.長課，以及平日大部分有氧訓練量。全程可對話。 | 45 min – 3 h+ |
| Z3 | A steady tempo block, or the final third of a progression run. Deliberate, never accidental.穩定的節奏段落，或漸進跑的最後三分之一。刻意安排，絕非誤入。 | 20–40 min |
| Z4 | 4 × 8 min with 2 min jog, or 2 × 20 min with 5 min. Cruise intervals.4 × 8 分鐘配 2 分鐘慢跑，或 2 × 20 分鐘配 5 分鐘。巡航間歇。 | 20–40 min total合計 |
| Z5 | 5 × 3 min with 3 min recovery, or 6 × 800 m. Governed by pace, not by HR.5 × 3 分鐘配 3 分鐘恢復，或 6 × 800 米。以配速主導，不是心率。 | 12–25 min total合計 |
Going out too hard is the usual failure. If your heart rate falls through the second half, the test is invalid — rest and redo it.
Do not do this test if you have any known cardiac condition, chest pain, uncontrolled hypertension, or have been sedentary and are over roughly 40 — get medical clearance first. Maximal exercise testing carries real, if small, cardiac risk.
最常見的失敗是頭段衝得太急。如果後半段心率持續下跌，測試無效 — 休息後重做。
不要進行這個測試，如果你有任何已知心臟疾病、胸痛、未受控制的高血壓，或長期缺乏運動而年齡約在 40 歲以上 — 請先取得醫生許可。最大運動測試帶有真實（雖然不大）的心臟風險。
Beta-blockers and other rate-controlling drugs suppress both resting and maximal heart rate, by amounts that vary with the drug and the dose. No equation on this site applies. Zones must come from a supervised test taken on your current medication, read by a clinician or a coach working with one.
One to three minutes behind a change in effort. Anything shorter than about three minutes is not a heart-rate session, whatever the watch displays afterwards.
Cardiac drift pushes heart rate upward through a long session at fixed pace. Heat, dehydration, altitude, caffeine, illness, poor sleep and accumulated fatigue all move it, sometimes by 10 bpm or more. A reading outside its zone on a given day is information about the day, not an error in the table.
It is free, needs no device, and it is individual to you. If the talk test and the table disagree consistently in the same direction, your anchor value is wrong. Retest it rather than forcing the sessions to fit.
β-受體阻斷劑及其他控制心率的藥物，會同時壓低靜止與最大心率，幅度視乎藥物與劑量。本網站所有公式均不適用。Zone 必須來自在現行用藥狀態下進行的監測測試，並由臨床醫生、或與醫生合作的教練判讀。
比強度改變慢一至三分鐘。任何短於約三分鐘的訓練都不是心率課節，無論手錶事後顯示什麼。
心血管漂移會令長課節在配速不變下心率持續上升。高溫、脫水、高海拔、咖啡因、生病、睡眠不足與累積疲勞都會令它移動，有時達 10 bpm 以上。某一天讀數落在 zone 之外，那是關於那一天的資訊，而不是表格出錯。
它免費、不需器材，而且完全因人而異。如果談話測試與表格長期在同一方向上不吻合，那是你的錨值錯了。應該重測錨值，而不是硬把訓練塞進表格。
Standard-deviation figures used by the calculator are approximate values drawn from these cohorts. They are shown to convey the scale of the uncertainty, not as precise published statistics — where a paper does not state its spread plainly, a conservative ±10 bpm is assumed.
計算機所用的標準差，是取自上述研究的約數。它們用以表達不確定性的量級，而非精確引用的統計量 — 若原文沒有明確交代離散程度，一律保守假設為 ±10 bpm。