For that exact reason I quit using my HR monitor after being a slave to it for the last year and a half.

Sounds like she had irregular contact to her heart rate strap. If you're getting 400 bpm, and you're swimming, would you really think that your heart is actually beating that fast. I guess they've never heard of Occam's Razor.

^Unless you're making excuses on a windy day :)

mostly i look at my hrm when i'm done
also on those days if i think i need to be preserving my body for later...

The HR monitor really helped me. I think this is because of my lack of fitness and lack of experience.
When I started out, I had no concept of perceived exertion. Looking back anything faster than a quick walk was a Zone 4 workout. Once I got the HR monitor and a book to teach me about zones I was able to feel better about working out at slower speeds. I was confident that even though it was slow, over time it was going to improve.
I don't use it while swimming.
I do use it on the bike trainer.
I can see how you can eventually know your body well enough not to need it any longer.

For me, it was a great investment.
Just my 2 cents.

PS: I read the NYTimes Health section quite often. I'm usually disappointed by the lack of facts. All too often it's just studies with speculation. Which is nice if you are having a casual conversation about a topic but I would prefer something more "useable".

I've been a runner a majority of my life from distance early in HS to the 400 for years to the 400 H in college. I never used a HRM. I'm not up to date with what/how and all that with them and I don't know if I'll ever want to use one. Should I at some point? Possibly but that takes me onto learning more about them and taking that effort since all my life (only 24) have never used 'em.

RV- I agree with what you stated above on them.

The real knock on HR is that it is subjective. I trained by HR for a couple years. I still wear mine, but I don't reference it during a workout - I track it on my Garmin 305 and look at it afterwards. Just cuz I like to look at data no different than checking out what the grade was on a hill, or elevation changes.
Your HR can be influenced by so many things, stress, hydration, time of day, how you fuel up etc. It is just not the best tool to base your training zones on.

I think that you are better off running by pace than HR.
To establish your training zones you do a 10K TT. Put that time into the Jack Daniels' forumlas and it gives you your paces for: Long Run Pace(Z1), Marathon Pace(Z2), Half Marathon Pace(Z3), Threshold Pace(Z4) and Interval Pace(Z5). So when your plan calls for whatever training zone you run that specific pace and stay on that pace - even when it feels too easy. This approach just has you getting the work done.
Then every 4 weeks or so retest and adjust for new paces.

Gotta say that I trained for a long time wtihout one. Also thinking the HRM stuff was complete bunk. So I bought one at the start of this year. Have been training or tracking my workouts with it and noticing that if I stay out of that 85+% range on all of my workouts that I am actually gaining speed.

So my wife got one and she has been notoriously slow when running. To the point that it actually hurts my knees to stay with her and my walking when she is running insults her. But that is another point, she is always running out of breath and stopping. So today I asked how her HRM runs had been working she said that she cut 3 mins off her 4 mile time and felt like she was running slower than before. For the first few runs she just ran and tracked information. She was pegging 190 bpm's or so on all of them, thinking that because she was slow she should be running at a faster pace. With the HRM she is targetting 165-175 and running faster.

So I guess if you are finely tuned to your body then you know your exertion level if you are a little less in tune the HRM is the way to go.

The same author's follow-up to this article lists the benefits:

(sorry, I couldn't get the complete link to work - I'm technically-challeneged)

http://thetriathlonbook.blogspot.com/2008/04/listen-to-your-heart-answer...

Here's the link from above

i still can't get past the fact that the blog posts are somewhat contradictory (ie "stop using your HRM" & "HRM's are useful training tools")...which is it?

I personally find the HRM useful, though I've weaned myself from clock-watching while I'm working out. So I may check it during active recovery for intervals, but not during intervals themselves. I think it screws with your mind a little to keep eyeballing the monitor (causing me self-doubt about my effort). I do check HR when I'm done and put it in my log.

maybe I'm reacting to the forcefulness of the initial blogpost. it seems such a minor point to get all worked up about. You've got to admit these are not exactly clear thesis statements...

from post 1:
"It all comes from the myth that listening to your body means listening to your heart (the anthropological ramifications of this myth are also interesting). From this central myth, comes the common misconception that heart rate is an accurate measure of exercise intensity."

from post 2:
"Heart rate is of great importance to teach athletes about the benefits of varying training intensities. Coupling training tasks to different heart rate zones encourages the athlete not to train at the same intensity all the time. It also serves as a guide to learn how to accurately determine perceived exertion. "