REF-1342 · Zavorsky, 2000 · Sports Medicine · Paper · PubMed

Does training change my maximal heart rate?

Modestly: in this review HRmax can move 3-7%, down with aerobic training and up with tapering or detraining. Thin evidence, one author's pooling (C+, abstract).

Main caveat: Abstract only. The full text is behind the publisher's paywall, not in PubMed Central and not in any repository listed by OpenAlex.
thin evidenceMeasured on non-athletes to elite athletes

Zavorsky questions the general consensus that maximal heart rate is "relatively unaltered regardless of training status".

While aerobic training is known to lower submaximal heart rate at a given workload, several studies, he writes, report HRmax reduced after regular aerobic exercise in sedentary adults and endurance athletes and raised again when training stops, and tapering or detraining can increase it.

Across studies of training, tapering and detraining, the changes in VO2max and in HRmax correlated highly (r = −0.76, p < 0.0001, n = 314): as VO2max rises HRmax tends to fall, and when detraining sets in HRmax tends to rise. Effect sizes from several studies were −0.48 for training and +0.54 for detraining, a moderate effect, so that HRmax "can be altered by 3 to 7%".

Proposed mechanisms are autonomic (plasma volume expansion, enhanced baroreflex function) and intrinsic (changed electrophysiology of the sinoatrial node, fewer and less dense beta-adrenergic receptors).

Because research on the question is limited, the author asks for cautious interpretation until better studies confirm it, and suggests monitoring HRmax directly through the year, perhaps every 3 to 6 weeks.

Our reading: the base's other within-person source is detraining in endurance athletes, where maximal heart rate rose 2-9 beats per minute once training stopped (REF-1133, full text), the direction this review reports; it does not contradict REF-1082, where HRmax did not differ with habitual activity between people — a cross-sectional comparison of different people, not the same person before and after training — but it means a measured HRmax is a moving target, by a few beats, in a big training change.

Protocol

Design: narrative review; the pooled correlation and effect sizes come from studies the abstract does not list, with no search strategy, inclusion rules or appraisal described.
Pooled correlation: changes in VO2max against changes in HRmax across training, tapering and detraining studies, n = 314 (the abstract does not say whether the unit is the person or the study group).
Effect sizes: calculated "based on several studies"; the number of studies is not given.
Not given in the abstract: the training programmes, durations, populations, how HRmax was tested, funding or conflicts.

Key Results

PointNumber in the abstract
Correlation of changes in VO2max and HRmax (training, tapering, detraining)r = −0.76, p < 0.0001, n = 314
Effect size, aerobic training on HRmax−0.48
Effect size, detraining on HRmax+0.54
Size of the changeHRmax "can be altered by 3 to 7%" with aerobic training or detraining
Suggested retest intervalevery macrocycle, 3 to 6 weeks (the author's suggestion, not tested)
Direction: HRmax reduced after regular aerobic training in sedentary adults and endurance athletes; increased with tapering or detraining (abstract).
Submaximal heart rate: aerobic training lowers it at a given absolute workload (stated as known).

Mechanisms

Authors' interpretation (abstract): autonomic (extrinsic) factors — plasma volume expansion, enhanced baroreflex function — and non-autonomic (intrinsic) factors — altered electrophysiology of the sinoatrial node, decreased beta-adrenergic receptor number and density — may lower HRmax with training; the same mechanisms that lower resting and submaximal heart rate may act on the maximum.
The author's caution: the mechanisms are proposed, not confirmed, and the reader should "remain speculative".
Inference: blood and plasma volume fall within 2-4 weeks of stopping training in endurance athletes (REF-1133, citing Coyle 1986), which fits the abstract's direction for detraining; the link is not tested in the abstract.

Practical Application

Does training change my maximal heart rate? Modestly: in this review HRmax can move 3-7%, down with aerobic training and up with tapering or detraining. Thin evidence, one author's pooling (C+, abstract).
What it is good for as a source: that HRmax is not fixed within a person — a few per cent with a large change in training — as the author's informal pooling. It does not give the time course, does not separate taper from detraining in its numbers, and cannot set anyone's HRmax.
For zones: if zones hang on a measured HRmax, retest it after a big change in training or a long break; better, anchor zones on a threshold heart rate from a field effort (SYNTH-38). Age formulas miss an individual by about 10 bpm anyway (REF-3494; REF-1082 gives the population line, not the individual error).
Peak heart rate lower after a heavy block can also be overreaching (REF-1341, abstract), so a fall in peak heart rate is not by itself proof of better fitness.
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: a measured HRmax is a maximal ramp or the highest value in a hard race or hill effort, taken for each sport separately (SYNTH-38); this review adds that it is worth re-taking after a large change in training.

Limitations

Abstract only. The full text is behind the publisher's paywall, not in PubMed Central and not in any repository listed by OpenAlex; which studies were pooled, how HRmax was tested and the author's funding and conflicts could not be read.
Informal pooling. No systematic search is described; a correlation of changes across 314 cases (unit unclear) and effect sizes from "several studies" can reflect which studies were chosen.
Training, tapering and detraining pooled. The correlation mixes the three; the abstract's 3 to 7% covers training and detraining together.
2000, single author, with the author's own warning that the evidence is limited.
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level

single-author narrative review without systematic method; the pooled numbers come from a selection of studies whose search and inclusion the abstract does not describe, and the author himself urges that the reader "remain speculative"; read from the abstract only