Heart rate vs. pace in building an aerobic base?

[drm7]

After a lifetime of competing in a power sport (volleyball), and mainly training with weights, I have started training on the C2 to build some cardiovascular fitness and round myself out a bit. My intermediate goal is to break 8:00 on a 2k, and maybe 20 min on a 5k. My personal stats: Male/48; 5ft11in, 185lbs; Squat 250lbsx1, Deadlift 285x3 300x1, Benchpress 205x1, overhead press 140x1

I have ZERO cardiovascular fitness. I hated running (always on the "remedial squad" to pass my running test at the Naval Academy) although I was a decent swimmer compared to the general public (but not to competitive swimmers). However, the lightbulb went on when I started to look into different training methods, and saw the different H/R zones (UT1, UT2, AT, etc.) I would get discouraged when I ran, because, in retrospect, I ran too fast.

I've been through all of the introductory exercises on the C2 US mainsite, and completed my first 30 minute and 5k benchmarks. The issue is my heartrate. I suspect I'm going too fast again, but it's confusing. I realize that MAX H/R is an elusive thing that has many confounding factors, but I figure its in the 175-180 bpm range. I don't have a HRM, but take my pulse at 1 minute and 2 minutes post-finish. (HRM is on the to-do list!)

My first 20 minute row, I definitely went out too fast, considering I just did 3x5 of heavy squats. I dialed the pace WAY back from 2:15 to 2:40-2:45 and felt MUCH better. I probably could have rowed for an hour at 2:45. One trainer says when training for aerobic base, you should be able to breath entirely through your nose, and have no trouble having a conversation. No problem there. I even kicked it up a little at the end. However, my H/R was 152bpm 1 minute after finish at a 2:30 average pace (counting the 1st 5 minutes of fly and die).

My 30 minute benchmark: I started around 2:30, and was able to hold under there the entire time. Did 6202m for an average pace of 2:25. But...I was definitely not able to breathe through my nose or have a conversation. My H/R was 144bpm 2 minutes after finish (80% of max, based on 180bpm) .

My 5k benchmark: Started a little quicker (under 2:20). Drifted up to 2:20-2:30 range. Finished 23:44 for an average pace of 2:22.4, But...Felt even less comfortable - even though I was able to maintain the pace. I didn't feel like I hit a wall or anything. Lots of sweating. Breathing very heavy but not panting. H/R 154bpm (85% of max) after 1 min, 144bpm (80% of max) after 2.

So, if you have made it through this long story - here's the question. I am going to start the Beginner Pete Plan, and I'm not sure how to pace my long runs. Based on heartrate and "perceived effort", I've been doing my "UT1/2" sessions at "AT" intensity. Should I back off to 2:45 and save the intensity for the 1x week intervals? (I also plan on lifting days in between rowing.) Or, because I think I can sustain a 2:20-2:30 for 5k I should use that as my base pace - heart rate and breathing notwithstanding?

[Bob S.]

You don't mention anything about your technique. Rowing on the C2 indoor rowing machine appears to be a simple matter, but that is deceptive. Your efficiency is very dependent on the technique used. If you are interested, check out this site:

https://www.britishrowing.org/indoor-rowing/

This home page has some photos of some pretty sad technique, but there is a site page on technique that is spot on. Thorough, but straightforward and simple. It is an excellent site to provide to those new to erging.

https://www.britishrowing.org/indoor-ro ... technique/

The initial page is too brief, but a click on the "Want to know more?" button brings out the whole enchilada.

[drm7]

Thanks for the links! I watched several technique videos on the c2 site and youtube, and my rows have been at a 18-22 spm. At first it felt way too slow, but I concentrated on having a strong pull with a slow recovery and smooth transition in the catch. In fact, whenever I increased my stroke rate to 24-26, my pace dropped off.

I also practiced strapless rowing, as I got a case of shin splints the 1st times out. (Using the tops of my feet to yank my body back).

[Anth_F]

Yes, technique is most important. If you are rating very high with (poor form) Then you will suffer badly and waste tons of energy, and your times will be poor in reflection.

[Bob S.]

Thanks for the links! I watched several technique videos on the c2 site and youtube, and my rows have been at a 18-22 spm. At first it felt way too slow, but I concentrated on having a strong pull with a slow recovery and smooth transition in the catch. In fact, whenever I increased my stroke rate to 24-26, my pace dropped off.

I also practiced strapless rowing, as I got a case of shin splints the 1st times out. (Using the tops of my feet to yank my body back).

It looks like you are already on the right track. Also with the beginner PP. Having a plan all spelled out is a good way to stay well focused. Finding a base pace is always a tricky business. One guide is that there is a tendency to use too fast a pace on long, stay state, endurance pieces, and too slow a pace on the high intensity, interval work. So, yes - don't go at AT paces when your intention is UT1/2 training. I had a bad habit of kicking in with final sprints on the UT pieces. There was no point to doing that and I had to remember to fight against that tendency. For a long piece that is intended as a time trial, it is a different matter. Time trials are racing, not training.

Re rowing strapless: Good idea. It certainly helps to correct any leg/back/arms sequence miscues. Note for intervals and time trials however. For those, it is safer to stick with the straps.

Bob S.

[jamesg]

I think I can sustain a 2:20-2:30 for 5k I should use that as my base pace

Yes. That level will help you sort out your technique and will also offer endurance. The ratio of Watts and Rating is the work in each stroke, so can be used as an index of stroke quality. You'll get to 10 quite soon, but initial work will have to be at 130 to 150W, rate 20-22 so that you can keep going.

Suggest you keep the drag factor low, so that the pull can be long and fast without high force. I use 80 and sweat plenty, but most stay at 130 or less for endurance work. The lower the drag, the quicker the pull action and the more time we have to rest coming forwards.

[drm7]

Thanks for all the replies! I think on my next 5k (workout #3 of week #1 of the Beginner Pete Plan) I'll shoot for 2:30-2:40, but try to keep it on the 2:30 side. I'll recheck the H/R and see how it sorts out. Once I get a H/R monitor I can dial it in even better.

Today I rowed my first 6x500m 2'r interval workout (workout #2 of week #1). I averaged about 2:02 for all 6 at 23-25 spm and a drag factor of about 108. Those last two hurt, though. My pace on the last 100m of each dropped to about 2:10, and my form got sloppy. I took my heart rate immediately after intervals #3 and #5 and it was pegged at 180bpm. That's fine, though. I treated this as a "max effort" workout and I have two days off after. (I also did low-rep heavy squats before the workout).

[gooseflight]

If you're feeling brave I would urge you to post a side on video of your erging here for people to give your technique the once over. For your 5K piece you are proposing a 100W stroke. I acknowledge that you have poor aerobic fitness and your HR readings would confirm that. For a near 6', 48-year-old guy with a sporting background, albeit non endurance, something doesn't quite add up.

[Oldcolonial]

I would suggest looking at output ( watts ) rather than pace. Pace on the erg goes up with the cube root of power so there are relatively large changes in output required to produce relative small changes in pace. From the C2 web site, pace in seconds per meter is equal to (2.8/watts)^(1/3).

Also, spend the coin to get a heart rate monitor strap. The garmin fabric one is actually reasonably comfortable and pairs easily with the PM4 or PM5. These are relatively short money and will give you another direct input to consider. I like using heart rate feedback particularly on "easy" days because it can prevent you from going too hard. Although I am new to the rower I have spend a fair bit of time as a middle distance runner and road racer. Having developed some familiarity with heart rate based training may also contribute to my comfort with it.

Much of the heart rate based training advice assumes that you know your resting, lactate threshold and maximum heart rates. These all vary substantially by individual, activity and over time as you age and train. If you are new to endurance training, you can expect your resting rate to drop, your rowing specific lactate threshold heart rate and even your maximum to increase as you get further into your training.
On the maximum side, the basic rule of thumb is age in years - 220. This estimate turns out to be junk. It is only an average and I recall the standard deviation of the original study for this being around 10 beats per minute. In addition, the same people have been shown to have different maximums for different sports especially if they are sports that they are not well adapted to. So if you are new to rowing, and not yet well adapted to it, you may find that over time, with training your maximum for the sport goes up. I found this to be the case for me by 7 beats per minute over the course of 12 months. Since then, I do not believe it has budged.

There are lots of recipes out there for finding your personal resting, maximum and lactate threshold which are the three key heart rates to keep in mind when calibrating your workouts.

[gooseflight]

I would suggest looking at output ( watts ) rather than pace. Pace on the erg goes up with the cube root of power so there are relatively large changes in output required to produce relative small changes in pace. From the C2 web site, pace in seconds per meter is equal to (2.8/watts)^(1/3).

Depends a bit on your starting point. For sure the faster you go the higher the watt output required to produce the same change in pace:

2:20 -> 2:15 14W
2:00 -> 1:55: 27W
1:45 -> 1:40: 48W

http://www.machars.net

[Oldcolonial]

Good point Gooseflight, the first and second derivatives, 8.4*speed^2 and 16.8*speed, respectively, matter more the higher the speed.

2:20 -> 2:15 14W is 3.7% faster, 12% higher output
2:00 -> 1:55: 27W is 4.3% faster, 14% higher output
1:45 -> 1:40: 48W is 5.0% faster, 16% higher output.


I have found the output to be very highly correlated to my effort level and heart rate which is why I like using it over pace.

[lindsayh]

On the maximum side, the basic rule of thumb is age in years - 220. This estimate turns out to be junk. It is only an average and I recall the standard deviation of the original study for this being around 10 beats per minute. In addition, the same people have been shown to have different maximums for different sports especially if they are sports that they are not well adapted to. So if you are new to rowing, and not yet well adapted to it, you may find that over time, with training your maximum for the sport goes up. I found this to be the case for me by 7 beats per minute over the course of 12 months. Since then, I do not believe it has budged.

FYI - yes the formula is "junk"

THE SURPRISING HISTORY OF THE “HRmax=220-age” EQUATION. Robert A. Robergs, Roberto
Landwehr. JEPonline. 2002;5(2):1-10. The estimation of maximal heart rate (HRmax) has been a feature of
exercise physiology and related applied sciences since the late 1930’s. The estimation of HRmax has been
largely based on the formula; HRmax=220-age. This equation is often presented in textbooks without
explanation or citation to original research. In addition, the formula and related concepts are included in most
certification exams within sports medicine, exercise physiology, and fitness. Despite the acceptance of this
formula, research spanning more than two decades reveals the large error inherent in the estimation of HRmax
(Sxy=7-11 b/min). Ironically, inquiry into the history of this formula reveals that it was not developed from
original research, but resulted from observation based on data from approximately 11 references consisting of
published research or unpublished scientific compilations. Consequently, the formula HRmax=220-age has no
scientific merit for use in exercise physiology and related fields. A brief review of alternate HRmax prediction
formula reveals that the majority of age-based univariate prediction equations also have large prediction errors
(>10 b/min). Clearly, more research of HRmax needs to be done using a multivariate model, and equations may
need to be developed that are population (fitness, health status, age, exercise mode) specific.
Key Words:

[jamesg]

Clearly if we use the Karvonen HR range idea for our personal training, we'll have to use our own personal maximum and minimum HRs. If not, might as well pull the numbers our of the hat..

[drm7]

Lots of great replies on here, I appreciate the feedback!

Two days ago I rowed another 5k (Beginner Pete Plan Wk 1 Wkt 3). It went a little faster than the previous 5k...I really need to get a H/R monitor and have it guide me, because my competitive nature sucks me into keeping my opening pace. Also, I had a pretty good rhythm going (slow, hard strokes), and I couldn't get into a good groove when resetting my pace to a slower band.

My splits:
2:18.4
2:21.4
2:22.8
2:22.5
2:22.4
Average: 2:21.5 Stroke rate between 18-21

Effort-wise, it seemed a little easier than the last run, although my H/R was about the same after the finish - 153 bpm 1 min after and 147 3 mins after. (This was done manually - count beats for 10 secs and mulitply by 6).

I'll be doing a lot of traveling for work over the next couple of weeks, so I'm going to stick to this pace, since I'll have plenty of time to recover between workouts. As it stands now, I only row 3x week. (Two longer runs and one interval). I'm going to use 180bpm as my max for now, since that's what it was during my hard intervals, and I was GASPING.

That's a great point about form, too. My main machine is at a YMCA, so I'll try to get one of the workers to video me if I get a chance.

[gcanyon]

Depending on just how out of cardiovascular shape you are in, your max heart rate could be lower than you think. This is based just on my own experience, YMMV.

Ten years ago when I first got a Concept2, I could easily hit 180-190 at the end of a row. That's higher than my calculated max, but as people say, the formula is just a guideline. For what it's worth, I asked my doctor and he said as long as it doesn't feel bad, don't worry about going so high.

Then I had some back issues and I fell out of the habit of rowing for a year. My cardiovascular fitness went to heck. When I got back into rowing, I found that my max heart rate was about 145 -- no matter how hard I rowed that first day, my heart just wouldn't go faster than that.

Some time after that, with some regular rowing, and now (ten years later) at the end of a row my heart rate can get up to about 175-180. So it was possible to get (most of) it back.

Some time has passed since your first post, so maybe this no longer applies, but if your practical max heart rate was/is lower than expected, give yourself some time to develop a better max.