HR zone / workout question

[_PBH_]

I've been rowing since January 2018. I lost 22 pounds in the first 4-5 months, and have since hit a plateau and hover around 167lbs (6'0"). My pants fit again.

I wouldn't mind losing a little more belly fat. I know my diet needs work.

I've changed my workout routine the last few months. I row Mon, Wed, Fri. (typically 2 SS sessions and 1 interval). Tue/Thurs are reserved for situps, pushups, pullups, etc.

My question is directed towards the SS rows and the Anaerobic Threshold: am I pushing this workout? Should I back off and keep my heart rate lower?
Here is a typical 30' row:

Time Meters Pace Watts Cal S/M HR
30:00.0 6,942m 2:09.6 161 852 21 157
6:00.0 1,385m 2:09.9 159 848 21 147
12:00.0 1,390m 2:09.4 161 854 21 152
18:00.0 1,393m 2:09.2 162 858 21 158
24:00.0 1,380m 2:10.4 158 842 21 164
30:00.0 1,395m 2:09.0 163 860 22 167

If I try to keep my heart rate in the 140 - 150s, I just feel like I'm not working [hard]. Is this all just mental? Am I negating my workouts by hitting the 170s?

[lindsayh]

My question is directed towards the SS rows and the Anaerobic Threshold: am I pushing this workout? Should I back off and keep my heart rate lower?
Here is a typical 30' row:
If I try to keep my heart rate in the 140 - 150s, I just feel like I'm not working [hard]. Is this all just mental? Am I negating my workouts by hitting the 170s?

Brett the short answer is that you won't be burning fat if your heart rate is over the UT1 level. Exactly where this point lies will depend sorting out where your MHR lies and working back from there and this will require a maximum effort and a monitor to measure. If you assume MHR of 180 and resting of 60 then take say 70% of 120 (reserve) and add in resting = cap of 144 or thereabouts. Spending time at HRR<150 maybe boring but it is by far the most productive thing you can do for cardio fitness and weight loss.
(lots of good discussion threads here)

[_PBH_]

thanks for that info Lindsay.

I should have included that I think my max is ~187 (haven't ever seen it go higher than that with my HR monitor during interval or TTs).
My resting is somewhere around 55 - 60.

[Mark E]

I think Lindsay's advice is excellent, although I have one minor quibble: You'll always be burning some fat even at high output workouts, but the emphasis shifts dramatically toward glycogen consumption instead of fat burning as you move into higher intensities.

If weight loss is a primary goal the easiest thing to do with your routine is add another aerobic workout or two to the week. They can be very low intensity and you should still see improvements without much extra fatigue.

But keep in mind that most people overestimate the impact of exercise on calorie burn, and usually by a long ways. Even if you are exercising hard and regularly it's still very important to keep a check on portion sizes and eat healthy foods.

[sdr2017]

I should have included that I think my max is ~187 (haven't ever seen it go higher than that with my HR monitor during interval or TTs).
My resting is somewhere around 55 - 60.

You can also calculate Watts. your best 2k time comes to about 224 Watts. Your pace time comes to 163 Watts, or about 73% of max. You might want this number to be more like 60% of max.

[jamesg]

I just feel like I'm not working

You're not working very hard, but hardly a problem; what's easy at 30 minutes may change it's spots well before 60 or if you increase the rating slightly. In any case fat loss has the same needs as endurance: good strokes and plenty of them, without compromising tomorrow's or next week's work.

Pace 2:10 = 160W at 75 kg is just over 2W/kg, and your stroke is worth about 8W-minutes. Both enough to get and stay fit, as demonstrated by your RHR.

At rating 28-32 in a 2k test, your stroke might be worth 9-10 W', so Power around 300W and time 7 minutes. So if you do want to train harder and maybe lose a gram or two of fat, not simply by increasing time aboard, try a 2k after a few weeks off weights, then base your new training levels on the new 2k Watt level: up to 80% of 300W = 240W at corresponding ratings.

[hjs]

In the end its not about burning fat or carbs during exercice, but over the whole day. To me you go to fast, hf is to to high, better do hard sessions, really hard and aerobic sessions much more controled.
If you don,t loose excess fat, its not your training but your eating. Or if you won,t change your eating your really need to up your training volume. Really is as simple as that.

[_PBH_]

thanks for the input.

I think I'll work on backing off on those SS sessions. It really is a mind game. That little guy on my shoulder is constantly yelling in my ear "faster! harder! push, push, push!".

thanks everyone.

[Gammmmo]

PBH - losing belly fat. If this is from an aesthetic perspective i.e. get a 4/6/8 pack, then obviously start treating your abs/obliques like any other muscle and start progressively hitting them so they get larger and can then "stand out" more at higher bodyfat percentages. This is what I did Sep/Oct and it did work before I got a slight injury but am about to return to this. I estimate my bodyfat to be around 13-14% but was definitely getting a 4-pack coming through, the lower abs though were still covered with a thickish layer of fat.

[iain]

I disagree on the relevance of the Fat Burning Zone especially for a 30 minute session. If I recall correctly, even at low intensity it takes some time for the body to adjust to burning fat so i would not expect significant fat burned in the first 20 mins or so whatever the pace. However, if you are burning the carbs you take in then you have to use fat the rest of the time (as HJS said) and this will constitute a much larger amount than that burned in exercise, so any cals burned at constant food will help. The key is continuing to train so pick workouts you enjoy. Personally I would recommend extending the sessions at a slightly slower rate to increase the calories burned. Backing off on the same number and length of sessions is going to reduce the fat burned. Finally, don't forget that you continue to burn extra calories after harder sessions have finished. Building and repairing muscles requires a lot of energy, so any calculation of calories burned during exercise will underestimate the benefit of harder sessions.

[hjs]

thanks for the input.

I think I'll work on backing off on those SS sessions. It really is a mind game. That little guy on my shoulder is constantly yelling in my ear "faster! harder! push, push, push!".

thanks everyone.

Few months ago met a guy who used to be very very obese. At some point he decided it was enough, he cut out the carbs from his diet and started to walk for hours a day. In 6 months he halved his weight. Has kept it off eversince, but still is scared as hell to fall back....

Training and weight are not the same. Training is aimed at getting better at Something. For your weight its mostly volume what you what matters. If you would go a bit slower but rowed 10 min longer you already burned more energy during the slower session.
Set the two apart, train what you like, don,t race all your training. And for your weight, watch intake and or do kore volume, of any kind of exercise. It really is no rocketscience.

[Allan Olesen]

Building and repairing muscles requires a lot of energy, so any calculation of calories burned during exercise will underestimate the benefit of harder sessions.

...and the calculation will not even try to estimate the additional calories the body will be screaming for afterwards because it needs materials for the repair work...

This effect should not be underestimated. In my experience, it is a lot easier to keep hunger away if you do a lot of low intensity training, compared to doing shorter high intensity sessions. For many of us, keeping hunger away is the greatest challenge when trying to lose weight.

I lost 28 kg in 8 months after discovering this. Only on a few occasions did I ever feel hunger during those 8 months.

(Admitted: I also cut away all fast carbs. This also helps fighting hunger, because the body learns to rely on the harder achieved calories from slow carbs and fat.)

[kini62]

30 minutes is much too short to worry about burning fat. Your body will use what is easiest to convert to energy (glucose) and that is the glycogen stores in the muscles. Only after that supply dwindles does the body start converting fat into glycogen.

IMO you should go as hard as you are comfortable with and that allows you to exercise on a regular basis. Burn as many calories as you can for those 30 minutes. You're far better off burning say 400 total calories than you would be by limiting your HR and burning 300 total calories in thinking that more of those calories are from burning fat.

Losing weight is all about calories in and calories out. Belly fat will decrease at the same rate as fat on the rest of your body. Apparently some people are more predisposed to having more fat cells around the mid section. It is what it is. But you need to continue to lose weight in general.

But given your height and your already somewhat low weight for your height it seems you might benefit quite a bit from a good strength training regimen.

Good luck with it.

[hjs]

30 minutes is much too short to worry about burning fat. Your body will use what is easiest to convert to energy (glucose) and that is the glycogen stores in the muscles. Only after that supply dwindles does the body start converting fat into glycogen.

IMO you should go as hard as you are comfortable with and that allows you to exercise on a regular basis. Burn as many calories as you can for those 30 minutes. You're far better off burning say 400 total calories than you would be by limiting your HR and burning 300 total calories in thinking that more of those calories are from burning fat.

Losing weight is all about calories in and calories out. Belly fat will decrease at the same rate as fat on the rest of your body. Apparently some people are more predisposed to having more fat cells around the mid section. It is what it is. But you need to continue to lose weight in general.

But given your height and your already somewhat low weight for your height it seems you might benefit quite a bit from a good strength training regimen.

Good luck with it.

This is really not true, depending on how well we are trained and what and what we eat, its very well possible to burn fat and even mostly fat. Only when we go anaerobic glycogen will be burned mostly.
For the rest I do agree, looking at height/weight you are not heavy, maybe you are slim build, but being undermuscled is also possible.

[ukaserex]

I am not an expert at rowing, but consider myself knowledgeable in the area of fat loss. Anecdotally, I was 250#s a year ago, and an now 205. I dialed my diet in - making a note of EVERY single thing that went into my gaping maw. Granted, the calorie counts were found on labels and on the internet - essentially guesses from values derived sometime in the late 30's & early 40's. That, combined with my Fitbit Charge HR giving me yet another estimate of calorie burn, I was able to determine what a calorie deficit would be. From there, I ensured I ate at least 50% protein in smaller portions through the day, lest I lose more muscle mass than necessary.

Slow Steady work on the rower, I've read here in these forums, is critical for building a solid cardio base. And there is something to the argument that it will aid in fat loss. That said - if PBH is more inclined to push harder, then I see no issues with this. He will burn more calories in a fast, high intensity row (Think Tabata style) than he would in an equal time of slow steady state on the rower. This is not conjecture, it's a conclusion based on studies. Also, Tabata done properly would definitely help improve VO2 max. (not to be confused with a cardio base)

If the desire is to get better at rowing - yes, do the steady state, in addition to intervals once or twice a week. But if it's simply losing the fat and keeping it off - my suggestion is high intensity intervals 2-3 times a week - and by all that's holy, continue to lift weights. It's the single best thing you can do for longevity, and increasing your metabolism in the long run.

Consider this, too: Cardio fitness only takes a number of months to say, prepare for a 5 to 10k race. (on foot) But strength takes years to develop. Nobody is going to go from squatting 200 pounds to 400 pounds in a number of months, not even a beginner. That will take at least a year, probably more. Focus on weights if your goal is fat loss. The added muscle will serve you well.

As for getting better at rowing - I am in the same figurative boat and would feel like a fraud to advise you. I would defer to HJS and others in that regard.