do we need a heart rate monitor for sure while rowing?

[Dino]

Interesting discussion on this on Cameron Buchans VLOG yesterday.
Rambles on a bit at the end; jump to 2:10 where he discusses merits of using HRM training with some of the Leander Club.

[lancecampeau]

When racing or testing hard hf is often more distracting than helpful. For easier, aerobic work it could be usefull

Completely agree with both of these points... I view the ability to see heart rate during a time trial as a distraction.

[gregsmith01748]

While I understand where people are coming from, I like to race with my heart rate in view.

My main thing is head races which take about 20 minutes in a single. I get very excited in these races, and tend to push the pace too hard in the first quarter of the race. This is especially challenging in an on the water environment where pace is greatly effected by wind, water conditions, temperature and current. I find that having my heart rate in view helps me ensure that I am optimally pacing the race. I know very well from my training how long I can hang on when I am near my maximum HR, knowing how close I am in a race helps me a lot.

I don't see the point in looking at it for 1K or 2k races though.

[johnlvs2run]

do we need to see our heart rate while rowing?

No. Whether you see your heart rate or not makes no difference.

I sometimes wear dense foam earplugs just so I can better hear my breathing and heart directly through bone conduction.

That's quite interesting. However, doesn't that cause heat to build up in your ears?

As a life long musician and sound editor, my ears are trained to listen for subtle audio clues. The cadence, volume and tone of the fan is something I lock onto while rowing. Along with carefully watching the performance monitor, I'm listening to the sound the air flow through the machine very carefully. This listening process has become an integral part of my rowing training.

I perhaps do that subconsciously with the fan, but primarily tune in with the feel of my movements. Likewise, I focus on the ease of my breathing, endeavoring to keep the sound absent or at least to a minimum, to remove all trace of resistance.

[Myopic Squirrel]

Hi shev - like you I'm rowing for health, using the Garmin HRM and C2 LogCard. Was doing exclusively steady state to build aerobic base and watched my split times decrease & watts increase, indicating progress. However I like the additional data the HRM provides, especially with cool down pieces (C2's PM is a "Swiss army knife" for data). A couple guys suggested to break up the monotony of the SS with some intervals every 2 weeks. The HRM has been invaluable further documenting increases in fitness. Most recently did 9 250m pieces with 60 sec rest. I'm easily entertained, but watching HR increase and recovery makes my rows more instructional by showing me how much more (or to cut back) I can do. Looking forward to repeating the same 9 in 2 weeks to compare the results.

[Carl Watts]

watching HR increase and recovery makes my rows more instructional

HR recovery is really interesting if you hit a stopwatch timer as soon as you put down the handle.

I used to time how long my HR took to get back to 120bpm, it was interesting.The faster the recovery, the fitter you are.

What would have been great is if Concept 2 did this in the monitor with the timer and decaying HR graph after entering some personal data to work out the cut off point for you. Just make it an option you can turn on or off. Certainly of more use than the games.

[Myopic Squirrel]

Carl,

I'm sloooowly learning the PM capabilities, but the first time I put in a custom interval/rest program and then watched my HR immediately when the rest segment appeared, made me appreciate even more the PM's "bells & whistles". Definitely gives you one more benchmark re: fitness improvements.

[Carl Watts]

There is enough grunt and memory in the PM5 now to run a full fitness test and simply score you out of 100.

Makes it a lot easier to keep track of your "Fitness".

You can use the rankings to get a similar result, if say your in the 92nd percentile just call that a score of 92.

Concept 2 could use the historic rankings over the last 10 years or more to get some better numbers, rather than just each season.

[roy649]

I strongly recommend buying something that talks both Ant and Bluetooth. If you get something that only talks one of those, I guarantee that at some point in the future you'll want to connect it to something which only talks the other. Then you'll be unhappy.

My experience is that the PM5 will connect faster and more reliably with Ant. On the other hand, most phones will only talk BT.

[Garyvrck]

Greg,
Were you able to compare your OH1 to a chest strap (something like the Polar H10)?

I'm trying to decide between the Polar H10 or the OH1 as my wrist base Garmin Vivoactive 3 performs very poorly while rowing …

Thanks in advance,
Gary

[Cyclingman1]

Not sure why I'm chiming in on this topic. I'm a very long time endurance athlete, mostly running and cycling and now in my old age an erger. I've never used a HRM for training. Yrs ago, used one a few times for amusement sake and to get a chest strap to rub a big sore on my chest.

I've always used pace [mins/mile; cadence,mph; mins/500m] on which to base my training intensity. Of course, one has to have filed away in the back of one's mind all of the subtleties and nuances of one's past in terms of speed and how to use that info in what one is now doing. I may say that I'm going to row at say 1:55/500m, but that is subject to revision pretty quickly on all of the feedback that I get.

Furthermore, one has to know what HR info means. Unless one has gone through some pretty rigorous lab testing, I would think that HR info could not be used well and may actually be a detriment in training, either over or under training. I had some very, very low RHR and MHR numbers when I was serious athlete. Pretty much ignored it all.

Also, when one wants to set a PB, do you say, today I will row at 160 HR? No, one says, I will row at a certain pace. A HRM would be a nuisance, not a help.

[KeithT]

Not sure why I'm chiming in on this topic. I'm a very long time endurance athlete, mostly running and cycling and now in my old age an erger. I've never used a HRM for training. Yrs ago, used one a few times for amusement sake and to get a chest strap to rub a big sore on my chest.

I've always used pace [mins/mile; cadence,mph; mins/500m] on which to base my training intensity. Of course, one has to have filed away in the back of one's mind all of the subtleties and nuances of one's past in terms of speed and how to use that info in what one is now doing. I may say that I'm going to row at say 1:55/500m, but that is subject to revision pretty quickly on all of the feedback that I get.

Furthermore, one has to know what HR info means. Unless one has gone through some pretty rigorous lab testing, I would think that HR info could not be used well and may actually be a detriment in training, either over or under training. I had some very, very low RHR and MHR numbers when I was serious athlete. Pretty much ignored it all.

Also, when one wants to set a PB, do you say, today I will row at 160 HR? No, one says, I will row at a certain pace. A HRM would be a nuisance, not a help.

I have never even tried a monitor and don't really plan to. I had a thought here and there that I might be missing out on something by not using it but I know what my paces are and what's hard, medium, easy and such - just never thought knowing my HR would make much difference.

[Dangerscouse]

I have never even tried a monitor and don't really plan to. I had a thought here and there that I might be missing out on something by not using it but I know what my paces are and what's hard, medium, easy and such - just never thought knowing my HR would make much difference.

I find them useful to make sure I slow down. I tend to get carried away when I should be keeping in a UT2 session but a HR capped session gives you another thing to focus on instead of letting your ego dictate the pace. Apart from that, I don't use it.

[nick rockliff]

It's a question where you are always going to get two answers. Those who wear a monitor will say yes and those who don't will say no not needed.

For me, I never used one for the first two years of training ion the erg 2003/04 but got stuck on 6.20 for the 2k. Decided to have a full physiological assessment which included blood lactate profile. I trained to strict HR zones based on the results and set all my PBs during that first year.

If you use HR properly it will pay dividends and probably saved my life at the same time You do get to know your body much better.

[Boomer]

I’m not very good with perceived effort which is all over the place with me so I find HR monitors useful as an objective measure of how I’m doing. For example an easy 10k 6 months ago at 2:10 was 65% MHR this week it was at 80% MHR (No surprise due to my lack of erging during the winter hockey season). From the notes in my log they felt the same but my HR said my cardiovascular system thought they were markedly different.