Will the correct average HR please stand up?

[Jerome]

Hi all,

Quick question:
Most of the time I use ErgData to sync my workouts. Somehow the the logbook and Ergdata report different average HRs after a workout.
For example, todays 7.5k row averaged at 145 according to ED and 148 in the concept2 log.

Anyone any idea what causes the difference?

Thanks!

[Tandstad]

Hi,

Just a theory, but I think ergdata just takes the average of the split heart rates, while the logbook might calculate the average of the whole session? From what I have seen, ergdata records the last current HR within a split. So if you do a 5k with 1250 meter split distance, ergdata records the end HR for each split distance from what I have seen.

[Dangerscouse]

I record my training using a HR monitor, and it's consistently circa 4-6 bpm less than the monitor / logbook shows.

I've just added up the HR for a recent session and it was just over 148bpm, but the logbook shows 146 and my Polar Beat app shows 141.

It might be notable that 146 (logbook average) is the median HR, rather than the 148 average which is the mean average.

Tbh, I don't pay much attention to it as I'm not convinced it's very reliable, particularly, for me at least, as it can all too easily peak at the end of an interval and quickly drop afterwards

[Jerome]

Thanks all,

I think that the answer indeed lies in the splits.
Both ED and the log report HR at the end of the split interval. Averaging these numbers give me the 148 mentioned above. However, ED seems to also report the true mean, which of course is slightly lower.

I’m with you, Stu. I only keep half an eye on the HR numbers, but I’m slightly interested in long term developments.

[Sakly]

It was already written, ergdata calculates the real average for the ergdata screen after your workout, but can only upload the HR at each end of the split for the logbook to stay consistent to the older standard. As typically the HR raises during the splits, the logbook value will always be higher. The more drift you have, the greater the difference will be.
Ergdata value and external e. g. Polar Beat value will match, if you start and stop measurement very closely to start and stop of the whole piece. Otherwise external measurement will give you even lower numbers, as HR drop after the piece is also measured and calculated into the average.

[gvcormac]

It was already written, ergdata calculates the real average for the ergdata screen after your workout, but can only upload the HR at each end of the split for the logbook to stay consistent to the older standard. As typically the HR raises during the splits, the logbook value will always be higher. The more drift you have, the greater the difference will be.
Ergdata value and external e. g. Polar Beat value will match, if you start and stop measurement very closely to start and stop of the whole piece. Otherwise external measurement will give you even lower numbers, as HR drop after the piece is also measured and calculated into the average.

The PM[345] itself records max HR per split. Presumably, the log averages those.

Ergdata records per-stroke data. But when you upload it to the logbook, I'm not sure how it calculates the average. It may do the same as the PM[345]. You can download the per-stroke data as a spreadsheet and calculate per-stroke average or even average over time. I haven't tried this yet, but it is on my list, because I'm trying to compile data on heart rate vs. intensity vs. duration.

[Jerome]

Ergdata records per-stroke data. But when you upload it to the logbook, I'm not sure how it calculates the average. It may do the same as the PM[345]. You can download the per-stroke data as a spreadsheet and calculate per-stroke average or even average over time. I haven't tried this yet, but it is on my list, because I'm trying to compile data on heart rate vs. intensity vs. duration.

Interesting, thanks. I’ve seen the option, but never bothered to download it. I’m going to give it a look.

[Jerome]

It was already written, ergdata calculates the real average for the ergdata screen after your workout, but can only upload the HR at each end of the split for the logbook to stay consistent to the older standard. As typically the HR raises during the splits, the logbook value will always be higher. The more drift you have, the greater the difference will be.
Ergdata value and external e. g. Polar Beat value will match, if you start and stop measurement very closely to start and stop of the whole piece. Otherwise external measurement will give you even lower numbers, as HR drop after the piece is also measured and calculated into the average.

Thanks! I must have missed that. But that clarifies it. “It was already written” gives it a nice, final sense of gravitas

[Dangerscouse]

I’m with you, Stu. I only keep half an eye on the HR numbers, but I’m slightly interested in long term developments.

I assume that for long term development, as long as you keep using the same source it will be alright. All you want to see is a downward trend, and the starting point isn't really relevant.

[Sakly]

It was already written, ergdata calculates the real average for the ergdata screen after your workout, but can only upload the HR at each end of the split for the logbook to stay consistent to the older standard. As typically the HR raises during the splits, the logbook value will always be higher. The more drift you have, the greater the difference will be.
Ergdata value and external e. g. Polar Beat value will match, if you start and stop measurement very closely to start and stop of the whole piece. Otherwise external measurementst will give you even lower numbers, as HR drop after the piece is also measured and calculated into the average.

The PM[345] itself records max HR per split. Presumably, the log averages those.

Ergdata records per-stroke data. But when you upload it to the logbook, I'm not sure how it calculates the average. It may do the same as the PM[345]. You can download the per-stroke data as a spreadsheet and calculate per-stroke average or even average over time. I haven't tried this yet, but it is on my list, because I'm trying to compile data on heart rate vs. intensity vs. duration.

The PM logs the last HR of the split, not the highest. If you go fast for the first 80%, then ramp down heavily for the last 20% of the split, you will get lower HR logged as ergdatas calculated average.
The logbook splits will get the same data, as PM shows and the average is calculated on the same flawed way, averaging the split end HR.

As said, if only the tendency is of interest, it doesn't matter. You only need to stick to the same data points.

[HornetMaX]

The PM logs the last HR of the split, not the highest. If you go fast for the first 80%, then ramp down heavily for the last 20% of the split, you will get lower HR logged as ergdatas calculated average.
The logbook splits will get the same data, as PM shows and the average is calculated on the same flawed way, averaging the split end HR.

That's my understanding too.

If there was one single thing to improve on the logbook & the PM5, I'd probably ask to fix that.
I understand the "let's do it as in the old days, for consistency reasons" position but hey, if we stick to that forever ...

Come on guys, it's 2024: any app (ErgZone, ErgData) can compute real avg HR for an interval/split.
But that shouldn't even be needed, as the logbook itself could compute the real average when the per-stroke data is uploaded.
Even the PM5 should be able to do that, it's very basic stuff.

Pretty please c2 ?

[Sakly]

The PM logs the last HR of the split, not the highest. If you go fast for the first 80%, then ramp down heavily for the last 20% of the split, you will get lower HR logged as ergdatas calculated average.
The logbook splits will get the same data, as PM shows and the average is calculated on the same flawed way, averaging the split end HR.

That's my understanding too.

If there was one single thing to improve on the logbook & the PM5, I'd probably ask to fix that.
I understand the "let's do it as in the old days, for consistency reasons" position but hey, if we stick to that forever ...

Come on guys, it's 2024: any app (ErgZone, ErgData) can compute real avg HR for an interval/split.
But that shouldn't even be needed, as the logbook itself could compute the real average when the per-stroke data is uploaded.
Even the PM5 should be able to do that, it's very basic stuff.

Pretty please c2 ?

I don't think it makes sense to do so. I would have implemented it the same way as it is.
Thoughts on this: what information do you get out of the average from a split? You get to know the average load to your cv system, but is it helpful? Typically it is much more helpful to know how your CVS is dealing with constant load or full load and what HR you get as peak level based on the work done in the split. And this point is typically reached at the end of the split (if you don't cheat like I described) and shows you how much "headroom" you have going on for the next splits (or intervals). Any average would be pretty useless.
Anyway, the new world gives you already both values, so no problem at all. And if you like to dig even deeper into it and calculate for splits, you can download stroke data and do all fancy stuff you like

[HornetMaX]

I don't think it makes sense to do so. I would have implemented it the same way as it is.
Thoughts on this: what information do you get out of the average from a split? You get to know the average load to your cv system, but is it helpful? Typically it is much more helpful to know how your CVS is dealing with constant load or full load and what HR you get as peak level based on the work done in the split. And this point is typically reached at the end of the split (if you don't cheat like I described) and shows you how much "headroom" you have going on for the next splits (or intervals). Any average would be pretty useless.
Anyway, the new world gives you already both values, so no problem at all. And if you like to dig even deeper into it and calculate for splits, you can download stroke data and do all fancy stuff you like

I disagree. When you do a steady state session week over week, you may not hold exactly the same target pace and it may vary a bit within the session.

And anyway, why bothering with a fake average HR ?
If you also want to have the peak HR (because in a high-intensity interval this makes sense), then let's have it properly: let's have the max HR in a interval, not the "last HR in the interval", which is just a proxy for both the real average and the peak HR.

Otherwise, why not instead of the avg pace don't we get the "pace on the last stroke of the session/interval/split" ?

[Sakly]

I don't think it makes sense to do so. I would have implemented it the same way as it is.
Thoughts on this: what information do you get out of the average from a split? You get to know the average load to your cv system, but is it helpful? Typically it is much more helpful to know how your CVS is dealing with constant load or full load and what HR you get as peak level based on the work done in the split. And this point is typically reached at the end of the split (if you don't cheat like I described) and shows you how much "headroom" you have going on for the next splits (or intervals). Any average would be pretty useless.
Anyway, the new world gives you already both values, so no problem at all. And if you like to dig even deeper into it and calculate for splits, you can download stroke data and do all fancy stuff you like

I disagree. When you do a steady state session week over week, you may not hold exactly the same target pace and it may vary a bit within the session.

And anyway, why bothering with a fake average HR ?
If you also want to have the peak HR (because in a high-intensity interval this makes sense), then let's have it properly: let's have the max HR in a interval, not the "last HR in the interval", which is just a proxy for both the real average and the peak HR.

Otherwise, why not instead of the avg pace don't we get the "pace on the last stroke of the session/interval/split" ?

I agree on the overall average HR - this is nonsense in the way it is calculated. I referred to the split HR and wasn't pointing out explicitly. In a steady state with varying pace the HR at the end of different splits could end up with higher or lower values, but for a steady state the HR during the piece has no big value at all, so don't bother. Variation shouldn't be high at all, if you do your steady right, you will see a slight HR drift, if any at all.

For the pace it's a different thing, this is a metric the sport is about and nothing for your personal information. So you want the specific metres (which is equivalent to average pace) you have covered to be able to compare to others.

[HornetMaX]

In a steady state with varying pace the HR at the end of different splits could end up with higher or lower values, but for a steady state the HR during the piece has no big value at all, so don't bother.

I don't get why you say so. I've done 1H and HMs at steady state for a while, each week.
If the PM5 gives me the real HR average, I can say things like:

• I held the same avg pace and my real avg HR was lower: I've progressed
• I went a bit faster and my real avg HR was a bit higher: maybe I'm on the same level as before.

The current fake avg essentially takes 10 samples (let's imagine the session had 10 splits) and averages them.
This can be thrown off in many ways: I may be drinking at the end of the split, or my mind went a bit astray and I was going too fast/slow at the end of the split. When I burp, my HR goes 5 beats down. Sometimes I change my breathing and this affects HR.
We have all the numbers for a real average, why taking the risk ?

If Polar/Garmin/"whoever has an HR app logging your HR" tells you "Here's your avg heart rate, computed slicing your workout in 5 and averaging the HR at these 5 points" everybody would be laughing hard at this.

Variation shouldn't be high at all, if you do your steady right, you will see a slight HR drift, if any at all.

Steady may not mean slow/zone 2. I may be doing an HM steady at my PB pace + 1-2 seconds. The drift would be more than slight.

For the pace it's a different thing, this is a metric the sport is about and nothing for your personal information. So you want the specific metres (which is equivalent to average pace) you have covered to be able to compare to others.

Yeah, the thing about pace was just a provocation
But the same could be said about power: would you like the real avg power or the power at the end of the interval ?
If you "do intervals right", the power at end of interval is more or less like the average in the interval ...

There's no real good reason to not have the real average HR (per interval/split and overall).
And if the "max HR in the split/interval/session" is useful too, let's have this too. Maybe even the min.