An Unexpected Result

[old] mbshick · Post by **[old] mbshick** » April 22nd, 2005, 11:18 am

Hi, everyone:<br /><br />I've recently begun training with a heart rate monitor and over the last two days I've noticed something that surprised me. I've been trying to keep my heart rate in the 135-140 range and one way that I've tried to bring it down when it exceeds 140 is to lower my stroke rate. The thing that has surprised me a bit, is that it seems that all other things being equal, for a given heart rate I can row harder at a pace between 25 and 27 strokes-per-minute than I can at 23-25 strokes-per-minute. <br /><br />So, yesterday I was keeping my stroke rate in the lower range and for a one-hour row, I covered 12922 m at a 2:19.3 pace. I noticed during that piece that it seemed like when I let my stroke rate creep up that I was able to go faster without having my heart rate increase, so today I tested that theory. Rowing mainly at a 26-27 stroke-per-minute pace, I covered 13174 m at a 2:16.6 pace. It just felt much more comfortable than the slower paced workout, and I actually exceeded the upper end of my target range much less frequently today than I did yesterday.<br /><br />I have a couple of theories about why this might be the case:<br /><br />Theory 1) The faster pace makes better use of the flywheel's momentum. At the slower pace the flywheel has more time to spin down, so I'm working harder to re-accelerate it on each stroke, and over the course of an hour that's more tiring.<br /><br />Theory 2) Since I tend to exhale on each stroke, the higher stroke rate is closer to my natural respiration rate for my level of effort. The slower rate tends to make my breathing feel awkward and uncomfortable, and my oxygen uptake may be less efficient, forcing my heart to work harder.<br /><br />Theory 3) Both 1 and 2 are contributing.<br /><br />Theory 4) This isn't really enough data points to draw a conclusion from and tomorrow's result will throw a wrench into the whole thing. However, prior to using the heart rate monitor, I often felt that a higher stroke rate was more comfortable and sustainable than a slower one, I just didn't have any empirical data to confirm that feeling.<br /><br />Thoughts?<br /><br />Matt Hicks

[old] MarcusLL · Post by **[old] MarcusLL** » April 22nd, 2005, 11:35 am

I find exactly the same - but I guess its not really that surprising: 30 minutes free-rating at 6s/500 slower than my 30 minute pb pace is a pretty easy workout, that same pace at 20 spm is at my absolute limit, I'll hardly be able to breathe and I'll be totally wiped out afterwards - I know which one I'd expect to produce a higher hr!<br />

[old] Dickie · Post by **[old] Dickie** » April 22nd, 2005, 1:23 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mbshick @ Apr 22 2005, 11:18 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Hi, everyone:<br /><br />I've recently begun training with a heart rate monitor and over the last two days I've noticed something that surprised me. I've been trying to keep my heart rate in the 135-140 range and one way that I've tried to bring it down when it exceeds 140 is to lower my stroke rate. The thing that has surprised me a bit, is that it seems that all other things being equal, for a given heart rate I can row harder at a pace between 25 and 27 strokes-per-minute than I can at 23-25 strokes-per-minute. <br /><br />So, yesterday I was keeping my stroke rate in the lower range and for a one-hour row, I covered 12922 m at a 2:19.3 pace. I noticed during that piece that it seemed like when I let my stroke rate creep up that I was able to go faster without having my heart rate increase, so today I tested that theory. Rowing mainly at a 26-27 stroke-per-minute pace, I covered 13174 m at a 2:16.6 pace. It just felt much more comfortable than the slower paced workout, and I actually exceeded the upper end of my target range much less frequently today than I did yesterday.<br /><br />I have a couple of theories about why this might be the case:<br /><br />Theory 1) The faster pace makes better use of the flywheel's momentum. At the slower pace the flywheel has more time to spin down, so I'm working harder to re-accelerate it on each stroke, and over the course of an hour that's more tiring.<br /><br />Theory 2) Since I tend to exhale on each stroke, the higher stroke rate is closer to my natural respiration rate for my level of effort. The slower rate tends to make my breathing feel awkward and uncomfortable, and my oxygen uptake may be less efficient, forcing my heart to work harder.<br /><br />Theory 3) Both 1 and 2 are contributing.<br /><br />Theory 4) This isn't really enough data points to draw a conclusion from and tomorrow's result will throw a wrench into the whole thing. However, prior to using the heart rate monitor, I often felt that a higher stroke rate was more comfortable and sustainable than a slower one, I just didn't have any empirical data to confirm that feeling.<br /><br />Thoughts?<br /><br />Matt Hicks <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Its definitely Theory 4 and not likely to change as drawing conclusions from heartrate is never better than a crapshoot. You can use heartrate to keep yourself in training bands and over the long haul you may be able to establish some trends, but there are to many other factors that creep in such as how you feel today, is it sunny outside, did you have breakfast today, did you get to bed early last night, etc etc. to let you draw conclusions from day to day on whether a particular stroke rate or drag factor or anything else affects your heart rate. Its just as likely that you felt better today and were able to up the stroke rate and not have it affect your heart rate. You may have a bad day tomorrow and everything will be reversed.<br /><br /><br /><br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » April 22nd, 2005, 1:45 pm

I agree with observation (theory) #3.

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » April 22nd, 2005, 4:35 pm

You're closest with #1, and it's a pretty obvious case of "trading rate for pace".<br /><br />The other point to realise is that "training bands" are really exertion levels, and though correlated with HR for convenience, do not have a causal relationship. i.e. just because your HR goes to 90% Max (even the 90% being somewhat of a guesstimate, unless you determined it by a step test, and went the whole 9 yards on that), doesn't mean you are doing anaerobic threshold training.<br /><br />By keeping the flywheel at a more constant speed, you not having to exert as much peak effort per stroke, and this eases the load on your system. IT's nto a problem to deal with, simply give yourself a faster target pace.<br /><br />My suggestion, of course, would be to go strapless and try to cover 10 meters per stroke, (aka S10PS). This ties your stroke rate directly to a pace and will help in establishing some ratio in your stroke, and instead of looking like a whirling dervish on a rowing machine, come more in line with what a rower would actually do in a boat. <br /><br />Cheers!<br />

[old] tomhz · Post by **[old] tomhz** » April 22nd, 2005, 5:42 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 22 2005, 08:35 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />My suggestion, of course, would be to go strapless and try to cover 10 meters per stroke, (aka S10PS). This ties your stroke rate directly to a pace and will help in establishing some ratio in your stroke, and instead of looking like a whirling dervish on a rowing machine, come more in line with what a rower would actually do in a boat. <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Allright, but note that Matt did 8.3 MPS at SR 26-27 and 8.9 MPS at SR 23-25 so his stroke rate need to go further down quite a bit for 10MPS or alternatively he need to pull harder to reach 10MPS and this might raise his HR to undesirable levels. So the advise is: go back to SR 22 or so and try to do 13200 in an hour.<br /><br />Tom<br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » April 22nd, 2005, 6:36 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tomhz @ Apr 22 2005, 01:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 22 2005, 08:35 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />My suggestion, of course, would be to go strapless and try to cover 10 meters per stroke, (aka S10PS). This ties your stroke rate directly to a pace and will help in establishing some ratio in your stroke, and instead of looking like a whirling dervish on a rowing machine, come more in line with what a rower would actually do in a boat. <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Allright, but note that Matt did 8.3 MPS at SR 26-27 and 8.9 MPS at SR 23-25 so his stroke rate need to go further down quite a bit for 10MPS or alternatively he need to pull harder to reach 10MPS and this might raise his HR to undesirable levels. So the advise is: go back to SR 22 or so and try to do 13200 in an hour.<br /><br />Tom <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Noted! But yes, Matt could approach the transition in any way that he would like. I't no surprise that he discovered trading rate for pace quickly, some even decide that is the only way to train and continue with it until they run out of rate to trade and then we find the machine for sale, since they stopped their "fast progress".<br /><br />The next thing he may even try is changing the damper and noting that it's easier to get fast paces on high damper settings AND high rates. This could keep the ERg off the market fora few more weeks, but in the end it's the same story.<br /><br />I'd mention something about SPI here, but it might send Fred into another tizzy about how "meaningless" SPI is, and surely that time could be better spent training or drinking or whatever suits your fancy.

[old] holm188 · Post by **[old] holm188** » April 22nd, 2005, 11:09 pm

Hi,<br />I would not draw so fast conclusions without knowing more about the rower (ergo-rower). How old, weight, height, how long since started erging. If he recently started erging long distances, progress can be surprisingly fast for a few days/weeks.<br /><br />I can during an endurance piece (one hour or so) row at HR 135 and just by thinking of the sprint in a 2k (keeping the endurance pace constant) my HR goes up to 145. Also just by staring at the monitor and looking at the HR can affect the reading.<br /><br />A combination of Fred's and Paul's replies covers probably the possibilities. JR's...well it fits his way no need to question anything then!!!! <br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />Holm

[old] ergeek · Post by **[old] ergeek** » April 23rd, 2005, 9:09 pm

I have had the exact same experience and I have concluded that the reason my HR is lower for the same work at lower stroke rate is that my body just works more efficiently at this loading. I mean, take it to the extreme, and imagine trying to do all the work of a 10 minute piece during one stroke (ultra-high loading). You may be able to do it (probably not) but you would be working awfully hard. Not very scientific, but there's my two cents (Canadian!)<br /><br />I've read all kinds of posts on this site about "trading rate for pace", and basically put it down to a lot of dogma. If I can go faster at a higher rate, then I'm all for it, and will not argue with the better results on the grounds of some kind of principle that I've "traded rate for pace". With all due respect to PaulS<br /><br />Cheers<br />Hans

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » April 23rd, 2005, 9:22 pm

ergeek,<br /><br />Whatsup? haven't seen you round these parts in a while, hope all is well. <br /><br />Not "dogma", trainingma! I couldn't care less if someone wants to trade rate for pace when going for a PB attempt, but if you are doing it in training, it's likely to be cheating yourself out of the training that you may need the most, i.e. how to generate a bit more power on the drive, after all, simply fitting more drives in has a ceiling somewhere and I've never ever heard of a way to make the flywheel speed up during the recovery it MUST be done on the drive.<br /><br />Cheers!

[old] mbshick · Post by **[old] mbshick** » April 24th, 2005, 1:58 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 22 2005, 04:36 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tomhz @ Apr 22 2005, 01:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 22 2005, 08:35 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />My suggestion, of course, would be to go strapless and try to cover 10 meters per stroke, (aka S10PS). This ties your stroke rate directly to a pace and will help in establishing some ratio in your stroke, and instead of looking like a whirling dervish on a rowing machine, come more in line with what a rower would actually do in a boat. <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Allright, but note that Matt did 8.3 MPS at SR 26-27 and 8.9 MPS at SR 23-25 so his stroke rate need to go further down quite a bit for 10MPS or alternatively he need to pull harder to reach 10MPS and this might raise his HR to undesirable levels. So the advise is: go back to SR 22 or so and try to do 13200 in an hour.<br /><br />Tom <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Noted! But yes, Matt could approach the transition in any way that he would like. I't no surprise that he discovered trading rate for pace quickly, some even decide that is the only way to train and continue with it until they run out of rate to trade and then we find the machine for sale, since they stopped their "fast progress".<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Whoa! While I'm just getting back into the sport after 20+ years, I've been rowing ~5 days/week for the last 6 months (excepting March, when I just couldn't get to the gym consistently). I should finish this rowing season with about 800k meters. <br /><br />Prior to starting to use the HRM, I was just trying to improve my times and generally stayed in the 25 SPM range, no matter how hard I was pulling. Now with the HRM, I'm rowing a much slower pace to stay in my zone and it bugs me. But I'm not about to go closer to 30 spm, partly because I think my HR will go higher again. 26-27 spm seems like the sweet spot to me right now and I'm just going to be trying to increase my pace while staying in my zone.<br /><br />Looking at the information at <a href='http://www.concept2.com/05/training/tra ... ptrain.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.concept2.com/05/training/tra ... ain.asp</a>, I see 27 spm referred to as a moderate pace, so I'm not sure why I've earned your disdain. When I rowed sweeps in college, I recall training at stroke rates in the mid 30s -- what's the standard range for on-water rowing?<br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 22 2005, 04:36 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>The next thing he may even try is changing the damper and noting that it's easier to get fast paces on high damper settings AND high rates. This could keep the ERg off the market fora few more weeks, but in the end it's the same story.<br /> </td></tr></table><br />I've been at 3.5 since a week or two after I started rowing, thanks. It seems like you're being pretty judgmental and I'm not sure what I said to merit it.<br /><br />-Matt<br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » April 24th, 2005, 9:10 am

Sorry Matt. No disdain, and no judgement being directed at you. <br /><br />Class of '85 here, you must be close, but took an even longer break away than I did (17 years), hopefully it was for a different reason (choice rather than injury).<br /><br />SR on its own is not a measure of effort level, but when combined with a PACE it begins to mean something.<br /><br />Quick suggestion: Set a pace goal for your workout, hold it steady for the entire time/distance. When you feel like making it a bit tougher, make the target 1 second in pace faster and give that a go. Keep track of HR Data, but don't row by it.<br /><br />Welcome back to the sport!<br /><br />Cheers!

[old] Byron Drachman · Post by **[old] Byron Drachman** » April 24th, 2005, 11:27 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I have had the exact same experience and I have concluded that the reason my HR is lower for the same work at lower stroke rate is that my body just works more efficiently at this loading. </td></tr></table> <br /><br />This is just a wild guess on my part. I have no scientific evidence to back this up:<br /><br />Your breathing tends to follow your stroke rate. For example, you might do one breath on the drive and two on the recovery, or maybe one and one if you're going fast. The heart wants to do a phase locking with the breathing and stroke rates. If you do a small decrease in the stroke rate, the heart rate will try to follow along until it is forced to jump to some other multiples of the breathing and stroke rates. This is completely made-up stuff, so don't take it too seriously.<br /><br />Byron

[old] ergeek · Post by **[old] ergeek** » April 26th, 2005, 9:57 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 23 2005, 08:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>ergeek,<br /><br />Whatsup? haven't seen you round these parts in a while, hope all is well. <br /><br />Not "dogma", trainingma! I couldn't care less if someone wants to trade rate for pace when going for a PB attempt, but if you are doing it in training, it's likely to be cheating yourself out of the training that you may need the most, i.e. how to generate a bit more power on the drive, after all, simply fitting more drives in has a ceiling somewhere and I've never ever heard of a way to make the flywheel speed up during the recovery it MUST be done on the drive.<br /><br />Cheers! <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Hey Paul - I thought this might get a response from you! I am fine thanks. Just haven't spent a whole lot of time on the forum (maybe that's why I'm fine !!???) <br /><br />Your comment is noted. But wait!! It was you who steered me to 10 MPS (thought I must admit I'm still not a strapless convert), and in so doing, I realized that it was about the most efficient ratio for me, regardless of power level. So I do all my training around the there. <br /><br />Aren't you kinda suckin' and blowin' at the same time????<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />Hans<br /><br />ps whatever happened to Ranger? I haven't seen him here for ages. Has he retired?

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » April 27th, 2005, 10:42 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ergeek @ Apr 26 2005, 05:57 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Apr 23 2005, 08:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>ergeek,<br /><br />Whatsup? haven't seen you round these parts in a while, hope all is well. <br /><br />Not "dogma", trainingma! I couldn't care less if someone wants to trade rate for pace when going for a PB attempt, but if you are doing it in training, it's likely to be cheating yourself out of the training that you may need the most, i.e. how to generate a bit more power on the drive, after all, simply fitting more drives in has a ceiling somewhere and I've never ever heard of a way to make the flywheel speed up during the recovery it MUST be done on the drive.<br /><br />Cheers! <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Hey Paul - I thought this might get a response from you! I am fine thanks. Just haven't spent a whole lot of time on the forum (maybe that's why I'm fine !!???) <br /><br />Your comment is noted. But wait!! It was you who steered me to 10 MPS (thought I must admit I'm still not a strapless convert), and in so doing, I realized that it was about the most efficient ratio for me, regardless of power level. So I do all my training around the there. <br /><br />Aren't you kinda suckin' and blowin' at the same time????<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />Hans<br /><br />ps whatever happened to Ranger? I haven't seen him here for ages. Has he retired? <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Nope, still the same old S10PS guy here... (training, training, training), just have nothing against the trading rate for pace during a race or PB, as long as it gets you a better pace and you can hold it, may as well go for it.<br /><br />Why am I not surprised that the ratio turned out to be "just about right"? <br /><br />Ranger is still posting plenty, but I think spending some time out in his boat also.<br /><br />Cheers!<br />

Concept2 Forum

An Unexpected Result

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training

Training