mobile spew

Thanks Hank, I agree, today was not a "base" workout.  :-) I appreciate your and Mark's comments that it's not reasonable for me to expect to get up to max HR in 2 minutes (maybe max HR is possible if we were more strict on following the proscribed rest...) FYI - Here are the numbers from my pieces (I think the even-numbered pieces were down-wind) Piece, Time, avgSPM, HR avg/max 1, 2:26, 24.2, 132/151 2, 2:19, 25.1, 142/156 3, 2:16, 26.0, 143/160 4, 2:16, 26.0, 143/162 5, 2:12, 28.6, 149/166 6, 2:09, 28.3, 146/165 7, 2:16, 29.6, 151/169 8, 2:11, 29.3, 150/167 9, 2:15, 30.7, 148/167 10, 2:09, 31.8, 150/169 Of course, 70% of my starts were bad-to-atrocious...  Dale On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 1:19 PM Hank Koerner < hank.koerner@gmail.com > wrote: Thanks for the row and coffee, gents.  Follow-up to the morning's discussion: I think today's workout was designed to put us at lactate threshold (AT) multiple times. This  helps develop the ability to handle and susta...

Thanks for the row and coffee, gents.  Follow-up to the morning's discussion: I think today's workout was designed to put us at lactate threshold (AT) multiple times. This  helps develop the ability to handle and sustain intense efforts and build a higher threshold.  I think it worked, at least in my case.  You can see the 10 pieces* pretty clearly in the screenshot. I hit AT heart rate by the 5th piece. It went higher from there.  I conclude that I was at AT or better at stroke rate 28 and above.  As Mark pointed out, HR is a lagging indicator - it lags effort and is an imperfect measure, especially for shorter, intense intervals.  If we had rowing power meters tightly integrated with our rowing telemetry, as cyclists do, we'd see that the duration of these pieces were at our AT power threshold. But we don't and use what have -HR - instead.  As an aside, I think Garmin could do a better job capturing the physiological cost of this sort of workout and related impact on ...