Pace-based vs. HR-based training comparison/question

[sizzlefuzz]

Earlier in the year, after doing the RowAlong 5k plan, I managed to put down a PR in the 5k (18:52) & 2k (6:58) moving through the plan as written, though "stretching" it slightly longer as I was only doing 3 ergs a week as opposed to 5, so slightly slower progression through the sessions.

One thing I noticed was that even the bottom tier (2k+20-22) sessions were quite hard for me to match pace a lower stroke ratings any by virtue of that my HR was routinely getting north of 80%.

Over the summer, I did the 500m plan and found success (also PR'd my 1k after that training) with that being a more polarized model based on Maffetone heart rate and high end sessions.

Here is my quandry... leading up to and during the holiday challenge, I focused on steady state erging and staying within the Maffetone HR range, though on Friday nights I would do some sort of mid-to-top tier session. In this case, I was doing on average 4-5 erg sessions per week as opposed to three in the 5k & 500m training.

Last Friday, I went for a 2k test and it was a bit dismaying to go slower (7:04) despite the additional training volume I'd been putting in...

My thought is as follows: I think amping things up to 4-5 ergs a week might have been hurting me leading up to the TT in terms of not being recovered enough, so I was going to begin the 2k plan from the beginning, again stretched over 3 sessions per week. While I think that question of recovery would be more or less answered by fewer sessions per week, I wasn't sure if I should be aiming to match the pace or sticking with a heart rate cap. Depending on the day, a bottom tier session in line with my MAF number is usually between 2:09-2:12 vs. a 2:04.5.. on a wattage basis it's roughly 17.5% higher in terms of pacing when comparing 2:04.5 to 2:11.... I wasn't sure if I was falling myself in a case of "junk volume" training by trying to hit the prescribed pace, of it I should ease off on bottom tier stuff in comparison.

With the higher paced interval/pace push sessions, I don't really concern myself with heart rate outside of trying to see what my progression looks like over time.

The other thing that I think potentially hurts me at lower ratings is being a shorter individual with relatively shorter arms, definitely not the prototypical "rower" build, so I didn't know if the pacing at low ratings was blowing my doors off since I was finding myself really having to get more shove from the lower body to be on pace as opposed to a longer, more well-rounded drive length.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk!

[MPx]

Some interesting issues.

I doubt you are underrecovered unless your SS training volumes are very high by which I mean more than 5 hours a week.

Its not clear if pace is your issue or rate? If you feel you have to do SS at (say) rate 18-20 and that is too hard to maintain 2k + 20 then I'd suggest simply upping the rate a bit until its comfortable - maybe @22? There's nothing wrong with rating higher if that suits your physiology. Its effort that's having the training effect not rate. The only thong to watch is that you maintain proper form and dont slump into some horrible weak stroke.

When I switched to tracking HR rather than just noting what it was, I found that I needed to slow down in my sessions to keep under cap. Over the first year, this trained me to erg slower and need to slow down - not helpful!
I also found that the difference in effort between a Slow SS and TT session was just too much for me to deal with mentally and I wasn't able to push myself as hard as I used to in the TTs.
I cured these issues by upping the intensity of some SS and adding a grey zone session. My week is now Slow SS, Hard Sprints, Grey zone, Weight/SS, Slow SS, Hard Intervals/Competitions, Weight/SS. Those 7 sessions still only cover ~50k or so which simply isn't enough volume to worry about recovery. Having said that I can't do more than the two hard sessions without noticing! Slow SS is 2k + 21 with HR staying in UT2; SS is 2k +18 with HR staying in UT1.

My only other thought is to contact John since you followed his plan and have the discussion with him, I'm sure he'd be happy to help.

[KeithT]

So, this sounds like something I might have written and actually had the same questions before. Sadly, I am not sure I have a good answer for you or if there even is one. I use to do all my steady state rows at 2:00 or less pace no matter how long thinking that was plenty slow enough and with the 18-22 second range over my PB at the time. I worried that I may be going too fast to really be steady state and started using HR Monitor and found I was going too fast if looking at HR percentages - I made a change and then many of may longer rows were at 2:05 pace or higher when capping HR. Over time I have often become frustrated with HR as it doesn't seem to coincide with how I feel. That said, I am not sure slowing the rows down worked or not. I do seem to have more energy for the hard rows now but then again I haven't had but one PB in the last year or two.

Others will have differing opinions and some will say that to really know what HR is steady state for you it will require testing of your blood and such. Like me, this may not be an option for you. So, you are left with experimenting to see what works best for you but it is confusing to many of us. I am sure other responses will dive deeper into the science and studies but it might not give you a clear picture.

[btlifter]

I'm a big proponent of slow work as a base. And that is never faster than 2k+25 for me.

"base" is the operative word though. The intensity sessions (2 "high intensity" + 1 "grey" session, for me) atop the base are the primary driver of improvement, particuarly over a relatively short time span.

There are several reasons why keeping the base work easy is important. But from a performance perspective, the most important reason is probably that it allows us to work harder during our difficult sessions - and recover. If those difficult sessions are lacking, a (the?) major benefit of the base work is removed.

[jamesg]

One thing I noticed was that even the bottom tier (2k+20-22) sessions were quite hard for me to match pace at lower stroke ratings any by virtue of that my HR was routinely getting north of 80%.

Quite so. Generic HR training does not suit rowing, since it forces you into low quality if you apply HR caps. The cap should be rating, not HR; the higher HR goes the better, it shows you are working hard with a good stroke. You can always stop and call it intervals.

[GlennUk]

FWIW I have been following the Eddie Fletcher FM/100k plan for about two years which utilises HR values combined with spm to 'cap' he exercises.

Two observations, first is that you need to determine your HRmax reasonably accurately in order to determine what HR values you need to use, whatever method you rely on.

If you don't have a reliable, observed value that your corresponding percentages will be worse and possibly useless. Notwithstanding the observations about testing to determine the variou thresholds being the best method.

Whilst i know that there are many debates about the values of using a particular % of HR, for me the proof was in the pudding. When i started the programme i did a HRmax test using incremental paces until i could not complete the final rep, which returned a HRmax value of c.176bpm which I then used to determine the % recommended int he training plan. I made progress but slowly.

I subsequently did a CTC which was longer and resulted in an observed HR vale of 183bpm, which I then used to re-calculate the % HR values for the plan. I made much more progress, and more quickly than previously which was evidenced in better pace for a give HR.

Secondly, training on the erg appears to be a long term project, for sure when we start we can make rapid gains due to improving technique, and if like me starting from a low base, improvements in fitness. However, gains may continue to come in the longer term if training is consistent over periods of months, possibly years.

However, i started following Eddies plan in 2021, having not erged or exercised at all for around 10 years prior to getting back on the erg ion May 2020. Over the next year i went from a very low base of fitness, to completing two marathons, a 60k and a 116k rows in a 12 month period using the EF training plans all based on HR. Although to be fair none of them were particularly quick.

Subsequently i continued following the plan with the goal of setting a reasonable FM time, i continued to see improvements in my performance with improved pace for a give HR value culminating in FM time of 3hrs 11mins (despite messing up the pacing big time) in Sept this year. Which whilst i recognise that its no a WW record as a MHW61 (62 in just over a week) it puts me just outside the 75th percentile. I am confident that when i return to following the EF plan with a view to setting a better 100k time, that i will continue to see improvements given my experience leading up to completing the FM.

If i had of discussed my fitness prior to using the EF plan, at my age i wold have expected to see little gains in the longer term and potentially a decline in peforamnce, to date this is not happening, no doubt it will, and i recognise that if i had followed a similar route when i first got y erg on 2010, then its likley i would have reached my physical peak some years ago and owl db ein decline, but hey i didn't and so i am still seeing improvements, albeit that my peak today is likley lower than it could have been 10, 15 or 20 years ago.

My experience is that HR training can have benefits but does require reasonably reliable HRmax values and

[Dangerscouse]

Some good advice above, so my only comments would be that you've probably not been doing additional SS sessions long enough to start making a difference, and it might have just have been a bad day when you did your 2k.

A one-off TT, if you've fallen short, shouldn't be perceived as an accurate indicator of progress or the lack of it. We all have bad days, so I'd gather more data points before I made a conclusion on progress.

I also would be surprised if you're under-recovered, although I'm obviously not aware of what else you do in addition to erging, so it might be an issue.

[RayOfSunshine]

you need to determine your HRmax reasonably accurately in order to determine what HR values you need to use, whatever method you rely on.

If you don't have a reliable, observed value that your corresponding percentages will be worse and possibly useless.

This has been my experience as well. I had thrown all HR training out the window until it was suggested I do some trials to come up with a better estimate of HR max.
The formulaic approach to HR Max is way off for me. It would say my Max HR is ~170 based on age. Through observation, it's 189.

[JaapvanE]

I had thrown all HR training out the window until it was suggested I do some trials to come up with a better estimate of HR max.
The formulaic approach to HR Max is way off for me. It would say my Max HR is ~170 based on age. Through observation, it's 189.

Here the same, My HRMax is around 190 while the formulas all suggest 170. And focussing a bit on HR Zones has allowed me to learn that not going all out in every training still allows me to improve while not feeling exhausted all the time.

[sizzlefuzz]

If you don't have a reliable, observed value that your corresponding percentages will be worse and possibly useless. Notwithstanding the observations about testing to determine the variou thresholds being the best method.

I have been going with 194 as I observed that during a 500m or 1k after a 20 min warm up. During a 2k or 5k my highest observed has been 191.

[sizzlefuzz]

Some good advice above, so my only comments would be that you've probably not been doing additional SS sessions long enough to start making a difference, and it might have just have been a bad day when you did your 2k.

A one-off TT, if you've fallen short, shouldn't be perceived as an accurate indicator of progress or the lack of it. We all have bad days, so I'd gather more data points before I made a conclusion on progress.

I also would be surprised if you're under-recovered, although I'm obviously not aware of what else you do in addition to erging, so it might be an issue.

Leading up to the TT I was doing BJJ twice a week, but the week of I took the time off for a mini-taper... part of me is thinking that I might have also screwed up my hydration/fueling on the day before/day of, so more similar to a "bad day". Overall, I think I need to make myself more comfortable with race pacing/rating.

Prior, when doing less erging I was doing kettlebell stuff and slightly more BJJ... BJJ i relatively in that glycolytic range so it may have also helped prepare me mentally for the earlier effort.

[sizzlefuzz]

FWIW I have been following the Eddie Fletcher FM/100k plan for about two years which utilises HR values combined with spm to 'cap' he exercises.

A question: how do you like the format of Eddie's plans? I am considering grabbing the half marathon plan to work with after the 2k effort. I can't find much information on his stuff, but I was impressed with his appearance on Tony Larkman's "The Indoor Rower" podcast.

[GlennUk]

FWIW I have been following the Eddie Fletcher FM/100k plan for about two years which utilises HR values combined with spm to 'cap' he exercises.

A question: how do you like the format of Eddie's plans? I am considering grabbing the half marathon plan to work with after the 2k effort. I can't find much information on his stuff, but I was impressed with his appearance on Tony Larkman's "The Indoor Rower" podcast.

I have been following his FM/1ook plan for a couple of years, and as i said in my initial post i've gone form not having exercised in 10 years to undertaking a number of significant challenges as well as doing a FM which put me 2nd in the UK, no 13 WW for eveiriefed efforts for my class. Admittedly the pool of submitted times is not huge, but for wider context, i am better than average and above the 50th percentile when considered in HW all ages including unverified rowers.

There are others who have followed, and continue to follow EF plans/support form Eddie and have set word records in their class, Rod Chinn comes to mind who set a LWM 100k records off the back of Eddies plans.

The point being that one needs faith in whatever one does, and when i started i was very unsure, the conventional wisdom of covering large distances to ge to a marathon (or other endurance distance) in training is turned on its head. The longest row for the marathon is c.90mins from memory, and for the 100k 3.5hours.

So for me the proof is in the pudding, the plan got me to do something i would not have dreamt possible.

I find the concept of ensuring enough recovery time and taking extra days worked well for me, i run a business and often have to travel so having some flexibility was helpful. If i feel i was taking too many rest days consecutively id repeat a week or weeks depending on why id missed sessions and how many.

I found the guide helpful from the psychological viewpoint in terms of prep for events, the nutrition sections were helpful too as they give an indication of how to prepare too.

As you can probably tell i'm a fan, given how much benefit i saw.

Others will hate it, bu i enjoyed the misure of different sessions, in duraiont/spm/HR. You specific paces wil fall out of the combination of spm/HR and i saw improvements in pace consistently throughout the training plans, especially the second time i did the marathon plan leading up to Sept this year. I hope the trend continues when i pick it up again in jan as iw as confident of making a signfciantly improvement to my FM time with proper.

Oh one other thing I also had some session with Eddie via zoom to talk about my training/progress which found very helpful.