Steady State ... row to heart rate?

[iain]

I have always assumed that the graphs and pictures that I attach to my posts, using imgur.com , are visible to all forum users. Does this depend on the computer or what?

Probably limited by IT access as on work computer. Not sure how widespread this is as I have never had similar issues at the several large companies I have worked at.

[p_b82]

Lots of corporate policies limit what external sites are accessible - image hosting is often blocked. In my experience, the bigger the firm the more restrictive the corp policies.

You would be able to see the posts/links on a mobile device without signing into the forum though - should you wish/be able to.

[JaapvanE]

The steady pieces shouldn't be hard and not more than some heavy breathing and a bit of a sweat. Should be able to have a conversation.

I use breathing rhythm as an additional indicator. When I take breathing rhythm and strokerate are close (typically 20 bpm/spm for me, as measured by my Garmin watch) I am pretty solid in a steady state pace. When my breathing gets faster (say 30 to 40 bpm), it is clear that I'm working to hard. When talking to a university professor about this, who teaches the subject matter and is extremely experienced in rowing, he told me it is a nice indicator but it is not perfect: in the begin of HR Zone 3 breathing is also still normal, but you can't do it for an hour and cardiac drift will put you firmly in HR Zone 3 after some time.

[JaapvanE]

I use HR Zone training as a bounding metric for HIIT and endurance workouts. This means I use a primary metric (Watts, Pace) for my sessions but adjust if my HR fluctuates too far out of the expected Zone for each interval. Call it a safety gauge for preventing cardiac arrest. But I also like to monitor my recovery time - how fast does my HR drop from its high to a resting pace between intervals. This is a measure of your fitness (shorter recovery = better).

I do to, and I too bring down pace when the pace isn't sustainable with keeping the HR in Zone 2. For me, it is an indication that I started too fast, and thus should start less aggressive in the next steady state session. For me, staying in Zone 2 is important as moving to zone 3 triggers a switch in energy system, and I want to improve my aerobic energy system.

Please note that if you are measuring HRR, AFAIK, it is only defined when your maximum heartrate in the exercise was at least in zone 3. So it might be a less well-defined metric for steady state where you aim to stay in Zone 2.

[dabatey]

To the original question.

For me, pace/power is what should be used for training, and the HR there as a backup to help tell you if you are on the verge of illness/ dehydrated or have maybe even just forgot to turn your fan(s) on.

It takes me 20 minutes to warm up, if I were to use HR as a 'target' metric, I'd have to guess by RPE or wait use for it.... Pace/Power to get me close to where I should be for those 20 minutes.

Edit.... I can see the use as a HR cap, but not as an HR target.

[JaapvanE]

1. Many HR devices are able to measure Heart Rate Variability (HRV). This requires the ability to measure beat-to-beat time variations. HRV is mostly measured in rest, but not necessarily. Most resting HR are between 40-60 bpm. So a measuring device (source) must be able to measure and transmit at a rate of roughly 1 reading per second, at least. Note that the source does not compute HRV ; it is the receiver that does that.

Sure about that? Because Garmin measures it in the device, and it is a device capability. I don't think tt can be done otherwise: HRV is typically measured in the ms-range and such scales actually exclude an external radio-connected device measuring it as ANT/BLE is too noisy/slow to make this kind of measurements. So the sensor/processor/sender most likely calculates it and broadcasts it.

2. I use a Polar H10 in combination with Polar M-460 receiver/display and the PM5. I don't know the tranmission protocols, but the M-460 displays HR data that are renewed every second, as does the PM5. I also observed that the Polar M-460 and the PM5 mostly display identical values. Why would they use a delay?

There is a delay as the ANT+ protocol only allows for metric updates every 400ms from any device. With BLE you can go faster to 250ms, but Garmin typically updates once every second (based on the HRM Pro and analysing the broadcasted data as it comes in into OpenRowingMonitor) to conserve energy.

3. For some time I wondered why at the end of a 5K all-out exercise my HR stayed at within 1-2 beats from the final maximum for about 8-10 second and only then started to drop (see graph below). I asked experts in sports physiology, who often use ECG to measure HR. They said that the HR mostly drops within a few seconds after end-of-exercise. So I suspected a device-related delay and questioned the technical experts of Polar. They answered that the H10 monitor measures R-R intervals exactly. From the incoming data, the receiver (M-460) computes and displays a HR value every second. They ensured me that there is no delay.

It takes some time for HR to drop in a human. But it also typically takes some time for the data to travel from the HRM strap to the PM5 (depending on the protocol type) it might take up to a second to be received on the other end.

[Nomath]

.. it also typically takes some time for the data to travel from the HRM strap to the PM5 (depending on the protocol type) it might take up to a second to be received on the other end.

I agree that it takes 'some' time for the data to transfer from the HRM strap to the PM5, if 'some' means up to a second.
I argued against what Aquaman wrote

CAUTION on HR - Most devices, especially watches, have 10-20 seconds lag displaying your BPM. Chest straps are more like 3-5 sec lag. ...

About whether HRV is computed by the sensor (e.g. Polar H10 strap) or by the receiver (e.g. Polar M460) as I conjectured

Sure about that? Because Garmin measures it in the device, and it is a device capability. I don't think tt can be done otherwise: HRV is typically measured in the ms-range and such scales actually exclude an external radio-connected device measuring it as ANT/BLE is too noisy/slow to make this kind of measurements. So the sensor/processor/sender most likely calculates it and broadcasts it.

Not 100% sure, but I find it very likely that the computation is done by the receiver. The HRV measurement with the Polar H10 strap and the M460 receiver takes several minutes. It is started from the M460. If after half a minute the M460 receiver is removed, the measurement is aborted for loss of connection. If it would be installed in the H10, there was no need for that ; the result could be picked up after the measurement was finished. I am not knowledgeable about device-device connectivity protocols but assume that it is Bluetooth-Smart.
Also apps like Elite HRV connect to the H10 via Bluetooth. They have a menu of different HRV readings, which are unlikely to be installed in the H10.

Sorry that the latter discussion is going rather off-topic.

[Rowan McSheen]

As for the OP's question -- for me steady state is governed by effort, for cardio benefit without taking too much out. So tomorrow you're good to go for that day's session even if it's an eyeballs-out toughie. That to me means heart rate. I'm about the same age as the OP and do my steadies at either hr capped at 120 for UT2 or 130 for UT1. This is the only time I wear the hrm. Workouts governed by pace or spm I do without the hrm because they're governed by other metrics.

[iain]

I think the issue is that RPE for the longer term is less reliable for most than HR. Personally endorphins (*I assume) mean that constant RPE will be associated with HR increasing more than the reduced effort required by the heart to move the (slightly) reduced blood volume. personally I find positively split SS rows (to maintain HR despite HR drift) very frustrating and so while I take account of previous HR to set target pace and have revised my plan if HR radically different, I always row to pace for each SS row even if it takes me a bit above the intended HR. As the "limits" are fauirly arbitrary without lab testing, I don't less this worry me. That said many times I have been under recovered and had to revise my plans!

[dabatey]

I think the issue is that RPE for the longer term is less reliable for most than HR. Personally endorphins (*I assume) mean that constant RPE will be associated with HR increasing more than the reduced effort required by the heart to move the (slightly) reduced blood volume. personally I find positively split SS rows (to maintain HR despite HR drift) very frustrating and so while I take account of previous HR to set target pace and have revised my plan if HR radically different, I always row to pace for each SS row even if it takes me a bit above the intended HR. As the "limits" are fauirly arbitrary without lab testing, I don't less this worry me. That said many times I have been under recovered and had to revise my plans!

The same sort of principal I work to and not only for steady state. I know what sort of pace/power should be giving me what sort of HR. So don't really worry if HR isn't right where I expect it, but if completely out (along with RPE) then it's a good warning sign.

As an example I was doing 4x10 minute bike intervals a few weeks ago when it was hot. Normally I'd expect my HR to top out near 157 for those in the first interval, but my HR was heading out much higher and RPE wise everything felt much harder than it should. There was nothing wrong with me (except maybe being in a slightly dehydrated state on starting), but I had been completely stupid and forgot to turn on my fans on a very hot day.

Steady state on the rower, a few times on recovering from viruses HR has been a good indication to hold off for just a couple more days before returning to training.

But I still always row/cycle to power/pace and HR is just a 'background' nice to have measurement for me.