What Training Have You Done Today?

[jcross485]

This is what I recognized as well yesterday. Additionally, getting the power metric wasn't happening at all. Only a few data points throughout the whole HM, so the watch calculated the power with 6W
Unfortunately, EPIX is not supported by this app. I saw it could handle skierg and bikeerg as well, but not for me.
For now I will go with the standard rowing activity and ANT+ "Trainer" sensor connection, will try the same with skierg today and use a renamed cardio activity to see what gets logged.
Probably I will ask the developer, if the app can made to support the EPIX. I think the EPIX is very similar to the Fenix.

Nothing like a 6W HM! What was your finish time, 3 days?!?

I would venture to guess they can get the app to support the Epix series for the same reasons you mention. As an aside, how do you like it? I have a Fenix 6x Pro which has served me well but part of me wants to treat myself to a new fancy gadget with new Epix Pro 2. I just don't know how much I'll get out of it that I'm not getting out of my current Fenix 6x Pro.

[reuben]

Ok, then you cannot compare the two options of course
You are using the approach I used before as well.
Yesterday, when I logged the session with my watch, I saw that a metric training effect and training load or something (giving an estimate for recovery time) was calculated based on the effort. This was not done for the pushed session from logbook.

Sorry, I guess I focused on the first few sentences of your post, which (to me) implied that you were having connection issues, and not enough on the subsequent sentences which implied that you had succeeded in one way or another, but were dissatisfied with the results.

My Garmin/Connect numbers are pretty much wackadoodle, as some activities are logged and not others. I get messages/alerts/whatever that I'm overtraining, and others that suggest that I'm a slug on a couch. I guess I'd need to be more in their "ecosystem" (I hate that term) to get better recommendations. But then, they'll always be imperfect recommendations based on Garmin's assumptions and incomplete data. My indoor cycling sessions are on a trainer with a builtin power meter - Garmin likes that. My outdoor rides have no such data - Garmin hates that. This seems to cause Garmin to have a fit. I have similar issues in other activities, so I just don't import a lot of stuff into Garmin/Connect.

I'm just trying to put up a decent fight as my years increase. I'm also trying to turn off my brain and just enjoy the orbits I have left.

[Nomark]

Thought I'd crack on with my "work harder" mindset all the same, so had planned to do 2:09 for as long as I could. (1hr pace target for now)

Good job just getting it done, but I'm curious about your training. Are you picking a pace that you want to hold for an hour and holding it as long as you can each week, gradually getting longer?

I'd thought about this for shorter pieces and curious if it works - e.g., say someone wanted a 7:00 2k, could they row at 1:45 for as long as possible (say 5 minutes) and build it up from there? Or attack it from the other way and row for 7 minutes and up the distance each time until it reaches 2k?

I was thinking it might be overcomplicating things, but seeing you do it has me wondering if it's a method anyone has used before

[KeithT]

57:24.5 15,016m 1:54.6 232 1098 24 151
8:46.6 2,250m 1:57.0 218 1051 23 137
8:31.9 4,500m 1:53.7 238 1118 25 145
8:30.0 6,750m 1:53.3 240 1127 25 150
8:29.7 9,000m 1:53.2 241 1128 25 155
8:29.0 11,250m 1:53.1 242 1132 25 160
8:36.4 13,500m 1:54.7 232 1097 25 158
5:57.2 15,016m 1:57.8 214 1036 24 156

A very rare day. I can't remember a day in recent memory, when I was more demotivated to row, but still managed to row. I'm still amazed I did anything, as I stood for about 30 seconds debating it in my head.

I planned on 18k, but it quickly became something far more than I expected, until I knocked out an earbud and I had to stop to find it, which then broke the spell.

Given that only a week ago I had a cold and felt fairly rough, it's nothing to complain about that I did stop when I did.

Looks good - I did a 16K session at 1:59 and it ended up being harder than planned on a day I felt decent before rowing - so opposite of you. Crazy how this works.

[KeithT]

CTC today.
Mind was sharp, but body couldn't follow, what I targeted. Satisfied anyway, this gives me a ~13s PB to my (fairly) old one

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
17:26.2	5,000m	1:44.6	306	1351	27	170
3:28.4	1,000m	1:44.2	309	1364	28	167
3:29.0	2,000m	1:44.5	307	1355	28	170
3:29.7	3,000m	1:44.8	304	1345	28	171
3:29.8	4,000m	1:44.9	303	1343	27	173
3:29.1	5,000m	1:44.5	306	1354	29	173

Decided to go for long intervals 4x10min 3:30r at r26, suggested by #ergenduranceseries afterwards.
Negative splits, starting slow, as legs were a bit wobbly after the 5k

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
40:00.0	10,799m	1:51.1	255	1177	26	164
10:00.0	2,617m	1:54.6	232	1099	26	161
10:00.0	2,678m	1:52.0	249	1156	26	162
10:00.0	2,725m	1:50.0	262	1202	26	164
10:00.0	2,778m	1:47.9	278	1256	26	170

Need to work more on higher rate stuff...

Very impressive - was happy to see this!

[KeithT]

Starting to prepare for World Indoor Sprints (1K) again. I have won and also finished 2nd in year's past. I know I am not in top form but feel I might be able to squeeze out a sub 3:00 with focused training - we will see. I am farther off my best for 2K and longer but for some reason still doing OK on shorter rows and shorter intervals.

[Dangerscouse]

Good job just getting it done, but I'm curious about your training. Are you picking a pace that you want to hold for an hour and holding it as long as you can each week, gradually getting longer?

I'd thought about this for shorter pieces and curious if it works - e.g., say someone wanted a 7:00 2k, could they row at 1:45 for as long as possible (say 5 minutes) and build it up from there? Or attack it from the other way and row for 7 minutes and up the distance each time until it reaches 2k?

Both methods are worthwhile doing. Holding your target pace for as long as possible can be a double edged sword. It's a good confidence boost, but it can be really tough to not HD when it becomes overwhelming. Part of this is based on what feels mentally most acceptable to you personally, as one could be better than the other.

[Sakly]

CTC today.
Mind was sharp, but body couldn't follow, what I targeted. Satisfied anyway, this gives me a ~13s PB to my (fairly) old one

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
17:26.2	5,000m	1:44.6	306	1351	27	170
3:28.4	1,000m	1:44.2	309	1364	28	167
3:29.0	2,000m	1:44.5	307	1355	28	170
3:29.7	3,000m	1:44.8	304	1345	28	171
3:29.8	4,000m	1:44.9	303	1343	27	173
3:29.1	5,000m	1:44.5	306	1354	29	173

Decided to go for long intervals 4x10min 3:30r at r26, suggested by #ergenduranceseries afterwards.
Negative splits, starting slow, as legs were a bit wobbly after the 5k

Code: Select all

Time	Meters	Pace	Watts	Cal/Hr	S/M	❤️
40:00.0	10,799m	1:51.1	255	1177	26	164
10:00.0	2,617m	1:54.6	232	1099	26	161
10:00.0	2,678m	1:52.0	249	1156	26	162
10:00.0	2,725m	1:50.0	262	1202	26	164
10:00.0	2,778m	1:47.9	278	1256	26	170

Need to work more on higher rate stuff...

Very impressive - was happy to see this!

Thx Keith! Hope to improve further on this one

Good luck for your 1k!
Will participate in a local comp for a 500m and 1k next week, but without specific prep, as I will do a marathon on 1st of March and building a good base for it currently

[Sakly]

Sorry, I guess I focused on the first few sentences of your post, which (to me) implied that you were having connection issues, and not enough on the subsequent sentences which implied that you had succeeded in one way or another, but were dissatisfied with the results.

Don't mind, I hope, I get it sorted anyway

This is what I recognized as well yesterday. Additionally, getting the power metric wasn't happening at all. Only a few data points throughout the whole HM, so the watch calculated the power with 6W
Unfortunately, EPIX is not supported by this app. I saw it could handle skierg and bikeerg as well, but not for me.
For now I will go with the standard rowing activity and ANT+ "Trainer" sensor connection, will try the same with skierg today and use a renamed cardio activity to see what gets logged.
Probably I will ask the developer, if the app can made to support the EPIX. I think the EPIX is very similar to the Fenix.

Nothing like a 6W HM! What was your finish time, 3 days?!?

I would venture to guess they can get the app to support the Epix series for the same reasons you mention. As an aside, how do you like it? I have a Fenix 6x Pro which has served me well but part of me wants to treat myself to a new fancy gadget with new Epix Pro 2. I just don't know how much I'll get out of it that I'm not getting out of my current Fenix 6x Pro.

The data is a bit strange. It gave me distance different to HM distance, but showed 21024m. Counted 1555 strokes, but ergzone gave 1545. I don't know what data is received from PM5, but at least power, pace and distance/meters should be data points.
I assume the watch receives power data, as a test without ergzone on my rower showed power data, but when ergzone is connected, somehow the power data gets lost. Yesterday in the gym I logged the skierg warmup with a copy of the rowing activity renamed to skierg and gut the same metrics as from rowing, but again no power data. It seems that the additional connection of ergzone affects the Ant+ data.

Regarding ErgIQ, I think there will not be any update, as the last one is from 2022. Many reviewers point out the EPIX is not supported, but obviously no change for that.
I like the EPIX much so far, far better than the Polar Ignite I had before. HR measurement much more precise under load conditions, better metrics, much more detailed presentation, longer Batterie life (not so much important for me).
As I am new to Garmin and they have so much devices and features, I cannot give any comparison to an older Fenix 6. From what I understood, the EPIX is mainly a Fenix 7 from functional point of view. The EPIX pro has a different sensor, which could support an ECG measurement, but currently not implemented in the software, as far as I know. This wasn't of much interest for me, so I took the non-pro version.

[p_b82]

Thought I'd crack on with my "work harder" mindset all the same, so had planned to do 2:09 for as long as I could. (1hr pace target for now)

Good job just getting it done, but I'm curious about your training. Are you picking a pace that you want to hold for an hour and holding it as long as you can each week, gradually getting longer?

I'd thought about this for shorter pieces and curious if it works - e.g., say someone wanted a 7:00 2k, could they row at 1:45 for as long as possible (say 5 minutes) and build it up from there? Or attack it from the other way and row for 7 minutes and up the distance each time until it reaches 2k?

I was thinking it might be overcomplicating things, but seeing you do it has me wondering if it's a method anyone has used before

As i don't follow a plan, I need to make sure that I do achieve overload - and so what I tend to do is pick a short/medium term goal and then work towards that. Until the end of last year this was fairly easy to do as I was making n00b gains on my pb's but this year it's requiring a little more focus.

when I started my r20 challenge in '24 i did pick 200w 2k as my target, and just added an extra 5-15s to my total time each week until I was confident I'd hit it in a 2k (go for 8 mins).
when It was marathon prep - it was pick a pace and just go at it for longer each time - before I started to follow a more structured plan with 2 months to go. (as I had a nasty back spasm and needed to really focus as I had to compress my training post recovery)

I tend to "have a go" at 3/4 distance at target pace for a TT before actually doing it, I'm mostly just using those sessions to see what my HR and RPE are doing as I know roughly what the odds of success are. in my case if Hr is already 180+ at 3/4 distance or time, then the odds are not in my favour.

I tend to pick paces based on paul's law or freesprints (who use 2 data points) - the 2:09x is roughly what I "should" be able to do for the hour based off 2k/10k; my two strongest distances outside the 500m.

[iain]

say someone wanted a 7:00 2k, could they row at 1:45 for as long as possible (say 5 minutes) and build it up from there? Or attack it from the other way and row for 7 minutes and up the distance each time until it reaches 2k?

Can't remember who but remember someone adding 100m a week at 1:45 to 1600m then did sub-7. I would prefer doing a set distance you believe you can hold rather than rowing to failure. Personally I would do maximum of once per week and finish with a "sprint" to demonstrate I had some reserves even if only for 200m. Probably worth starting conservatively so that you can do all sessions. Not sure about doing it for hour as pace for 10k and hr only about 1S/500m difference, so from 8k+ this would be a hard session at Hr "hoped for" pace that would take a lot out even weekly and hamper the other training. ALso Hr is a "Sweet Spot" pace and while useful, I think closer to threshold gives better responses even though sessions will be shorter.

p_b82. From previous discussions some time ago consensus was that Paul's Law (and FS which is a modified version of that) only really works from 1k to 10k for most and will underestimate what can be achieved for Hr and HM (FM changes again and all bets are off above that).

[p_b82]

p_b82. From previous discussions some time ago consensus was that Paul's Law (and FS which is a modified version of that) only really works from 1k to 10k for most and will underestimate what can be achieved for Hr and HM (FM changes again and all bets are off above that).

You're forgetting my lack of CV ability (fairly certain that I've got a genetic deficiency inherited as my mother has bad asthma & that's part the reason my HR runs so "hot" when exercising) .... so actually 1hr + HM (and FM) are all always ambitious targets for me based on the rough predictions.

[reuben]

The data is a bit strange.

While trying to remember how I connected the two, I found that I could set and rearrange the default fields in Connect - time, distance, calories, heart rate, etc. As I do a few different types of exercise, and tend to think of all exercise in terms of time, this is an attractive option for me. When I rearranged the fields for the different types of exercise I noticed that Connect displayed my total time on the erg while doing intervals (rests included), whereas logbook only gave me credit for actual rowing time (rests not included). To my way of thinking the time in logbook is correct.

So, whatever you end up with, be wary.

As far qs things like training readiness, load, etc., which you were asking about, I'm pretty sure they're Garmin-specific, so you'll probably need to use your watch rather than logbook for them - I don't think that Garmin will calculate them after the fact.

[Sakly]

The data is a bit strange.

While trying to remember how I connected the two, I found that I could set and rearrange the default fields in Connect - time, distance, calories, heart rate, etc. As I do a few different types of exercise, and tend to think of all exercise in terms of time, this is an attractive option for me. When I rearranged the fields for the different types of exercise I noticed that Connect displayed my total time on the erg while doing intervals (rests included), whereas logbook only gave me credit for actual rowing time (rests not included). To my way of thinking the time in logbook is correct.

So, whatever you end up with, be wary.

As far qs things like training readiness, load, etc., which you were asking about, I'm pretty sure they're Garmin-specific, so you'll probably need to use your watch rather than logbook for them.

Think the same, so I try to get the watch working well for rowErg and skiErg, connecting them as sensors. Generally this works fine, but power data is missing (or at least massively corrupted) for some reason I don't know, when also ergzone is connected.
Next session I will try ergdata to see if it's the same behaviour.

[nick rockliff]

Just a steady away 40r20 this evening

Time Meters Pace Watts Cal/Hr S/M
40:00.0 9,527m 2:05.9 175 902 20 124
5:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 116
10:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 120
15:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 122
20:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 126
25:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 127
30:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 128
35:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 130
40:00.0 1,191m 2:05.9 175 902 20 130

Had to pop in to the office this morning for a couple of hours. Only 20 miles but got stuck in some temporary traffic lights in the middle of Leeds on my way back so had to have lunch much later than normal. Don't like rowing so soon after eating.

Got my biannual bowel cancer screening result back today which was negative. Having had bowel cancer already it's always a tense time waiting for the result. It's good to see that they are bringing the screening age down to 50 too, I was 50 when I was diagnosed.