What are you going to do with the information?

This!

I remember thinking that HR would be smart for swimming. ANd i guess it can be fun looking at afterwards, but during, it is not worth much.

The beauty of data on the bike/ run is that you can monitor it mid-effort to see if your perceived effort matches with changes in the data (HR, power, pace, etc). Then you can make any necessary adjustments depending on the goals of the workout. Because of the nature of swimming, it's unrealistic to check the data mid-swim without impacting the swim itself. Therefore, I'm not sure why HR would be a metric I'd monitor in the pool.

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

I love a gadget and collecting data when I workout but I too still cannot see the benefit of HR in swimming. Even if you used it in a TT does it help after? If your swimming is improving you go faster.

My HR doesn't even change after 600m. Stays there whether I swim 800m or 8000m.

Well, I for one am using my HR information to understand:
1. how does my breathing frequency affect my HR
2. What speed am I aerobic at and so if I go faster I mess up my run
3. If to get faster, I need to focus more on speed or endurance

---

2018 Races: IM Santa Rosa, Vineman Monte Rio, Lake Tahoe 70.3

A while back I bought the tri bundle so I have the HRM Swim. I use it for most swims -- well, I wear it and record the data. It is interesting to look at it afterwards. The pattern you noted is also typical for my swims -- escalating HR over the course of a set. I also notice a marked decrease in HR with a little rest between sets. I believe this is largely driven by lack of oxygen which accumulates over a set. It makes me wonder if my conditioning would benefit if I could find a way to do some sets where I could get all the oxygen I want (like when I am running or on the bike), but so far I have not been able to find a way -- I just cannot master breathing every stroke (i.e., both to the right and the left); my son suggested I buy a snorkel for stroke work (to be able to concentrate on my stroke with my face in the water all the time), but so far I haven't figured out how to get more air (or even as much air) from the snorkel in a regular set (it takes me so long to clear it after every flip turn).

BTW, while I cannot see my HR while I am swimming, I can see it between repeats as long as I get my HRM above the water. I haven't done it yet, but it seems that it may be a useful to do a set where I do my send-offs based on when my HR has recovered back to a certain level. Anybody know about whether there would be a benefit to something like this?

Personally, I would combine it with measurements of breathing frequency, muscle oxygenation, lactate levels, EMG activity, core temperature, etc., in order to have a more comprehensive picture of the physiological demands of what I was doing.

Well, either that, or ditch all the monitors and just pay attention to my perceived exertion in relation to an objective measure of the intensity...



The pace clock is the "power meter" of the pool. (I read it here on ST), but it's the only thing I use. Perceived effort wouldn't work for me; I'd be too slow (Which I am, compared to a real swimmer).

I've always been interested in HR while swimming, but, couldn't make it work under normal circumstances.

- - nice swimming Twain!

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

I nice combo would be an optical HR strap tight around the arm like the new Wahoo one, but that also broadcasts in old-school analog. Analog signals travel just fine in the water and you can see your HR live as you swim. And moving the strap to the arm would keep it from slipping off the chest with every push-off. I used to have an old Polar or some other brand where the HR worked fine under water.

I think the cooling effect, pressure, and no impact of swimming keeps your HR a little bit lower than running. But those same factors allow you to go even harder for longer. And you definitely can get the same max heart rates you can in other sports. You just need a coach screaming at you to do 5 more 50 sprints with 5 seconds rest. Every athlete has psychological barriers they have to push through to hit their maxes.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

I use it and find it helpful for post exercise / workout analysis.

I have done tests to see what my ranges are, swim-all-day pace and then build to all out efforts. I have hit max rates that are about 5bpm short of max rates on the bike or run.

Post activity, I have a look to see if the results mesh with my perceived effort for the swim. Another example, I participated in DP's 10km swim of at the end of 2017 and looked at the data from the continuous swim (for which there was a build in effort) and felt that I may have left a second or two per hundred on the table through the exercise (based on HR data) - Now, how do you practically execute that, you'll need to have sights on a pace clock and some wits about you to do the mental math while swimming (until I hit a threshold, my perceived effort sensibility is pretty dull in the 1:22 - 1:28/100 pace, but makes a big difference when long swims are at play.

My observation is that I can probably work harder in the pool - and by better knowing the heart rate I can associate it to the perceived effort and correlate it to lap times. If anything, fiddling with HR makes swimming interesting in a new way which is a benefit by itself!

Also, thanks for the reminder about good old analog straps; just dug one up - works with my old Timex Ironman watch.

As a side note, and maybe this should be another thread. But using a Blue Seventy Swimskin to keep the strap from flapping - wow, those suits are fast! 2-3 sec per 100 faster it seems. Is it cheating to use them?

What is this objective measure of which you speak???? One big difference between swimming on one hand and running and biking on the other is that swimming fast is much more dependent on technique than the other two. So measured pace in swimming is not as good of a measure of intensity as is power in biking and pace in running.

And some of us have a better perception of exertion than others -- so having an objective (although indirect) measure can be a helpful data point.

Not sure why I am arguing with someone as accomplished as you are (i.e., I can't begin to understand the physiology of human performance), but your position seemed more dismissive than well reasoned (I would guess that back in the day, some people were making similar arguments regarding power meters). I believe many swim coaches use HR during workouts (swimmers take pulse on neck between some repeats), so there exists a body of folks that believe there is some validity to paying at least some attention to HR.

Agree. Seems like it's a lot of work and not sure what I would get out of it other than it would be interesting to correlate with objective performance in addition to subjective measures of performance.

Hi Twain,

Regarding the swim skin, no, it’s not cheating. As long as you can correlate training in it to your non-skin and race efforts/paces, there’s no harm in using it to progress.

No real harm in using an hrm either. Not looking at it during an using it as post-workout feedback might be the best use of it. The intent should be to ultimately do away with it, once you’ve had enough practice and can pinpoint the cost of a given effort without the hrm. Minimal tech for maximum benefit.

As for why you can’t elevate your HR super high in swimming: despite your solid 1650 time, you’re still uncoordinated by swimmer standards. As you get the swimming reps in and your body adapts, you can put more power into the specific motor patterns, with a corresponding increase in the ability to get your HR up. Improvements in kick rhythm and the ability to maintain a solid 6-beat kick would drive it up further.

Really well said; the goal was first just to gather the data and then look at some benchmarks.
As an aside, I wore the analog strap today and was able to look at avg HR after each drill. It wasn't that interesting. It's more interesting to take it in post-workout.

And *sigh*, "uncoordinated by swimmer standards". Ain't it the truth. I spent the last 5 years focusing a lot on swimming. Have dropped the 1.5k time from 24 mins to an occasional sub 22 but that's still 2-4 minutes slower than fellow age groupers with legit swim backgrounds.

- Though max HR is lower than cycling/running, it seems very difficult to achieve super high HR in swimming //

The way HR works is that whatever sport you didn't come from, it is harder to achieve higher rates. Most people complain they cannot get their HR up on the bike compared to running, but not the ex cyclists. They can go up a long mountain and get some really high rates.


But here is something for you to try, wear your HR monitor during a race sometime, I will wager that your highest rate is somewhere near the end of the swim and running to T1. And you don't have to have been a swimmer for this to occur. Unless of course you just dog the entire swim in races, which most people don't do.


And having a lower HR on a 50 sprint is a no brainer. It should be lower, you just are not active long enough for it to really go that high.

Wildflower Long Course 2016
- Swim: avg hr 139, max 147
- T1: avg 154, 168 max (steep fing ramp!)
- Run 1: avg 164, max 167
- T2: avg 153 max 175
- Bike: avg 142, max 168
- T3: avg 135, max 145
- Run 2: avg 143, max 165

Very interesting. The swim avg HR isn't really that much lower than the bike and the run. And interesting though not surprising that transitions are highest HRs.

Depressed HR in the pool is mostly due to the hydrostatic forces exerted on the body by the water. The heart doesn’t have to work as hard to pump blood to the extremities because of the water’s compression on our bodies. As well, as your skill level improves you don’t work as hard to move a yard as you did previously resulting in greater speed and less effort. Skill adaptations and improved efficiencies will result in lower heart rates.

Also, CO2 levels in the blood drive our need for oxygen. Just because you are running or cycling you are not breathing “all the time.” Rhythmic breathing is very present on the land just as it is in the water.

As well, as your skill level improves you don’t work as hard to move a yard as you did previously resulting in greater speed and less effort. Skill adaptations and improved efficiencies will result in lower heart rates.//

Have you ever swam before? Kind of joking here, but kind of not. What you say is true if you were to fix your pace and stay there forever, does anyone ever do that? You get more efficient, you move more water, and yes you can go an old pace with a lower HR. But of course what most of us in the real world do is go faster and jack that HR back up to where it ought to be. I wish you were right and my 50 years of swimming allowed me to be on some sort of cruise control, but I get in the pool and there it is, smacking me in the face again.


And keep in mind that the only sport that has metered breathing is swimming, and when you deprive the body of O2 the heart beats faster to compensate. That is the reason that people that race hard from the gun will most often have their highest HR towards the end or beginning of the swim where they are trying to capture feet that are faster than they are, or sprinting in with a group and blasting T1 to get on the bike as quick as possible..

Yes I swam competitively from age 7 through college. I understand your points but would state that raising heart rate is not the sole purpose of training. Nor is raising your heart rate the only way one gets faster. If I can move faster without pushing my heart rate to very high levels I’ve become a better swimmer.

Metered breathing absolutely occurs in cycling and running. In fact, the harder you work the more metered your breathing becomes. Your heart wants to pump oxygenated blood so your breathing to oxygenate that blood is appropriately timed. That timing breaks down the more anaerobic and higher heart rate one becomes. There’s a comfortability that many people lack in the water and they associate it with not breathing whenever. Understanding you meter your breathing all the time when you exercise can hopefully change some people’s minds.

I always wear one. I pay zero attention to it during my workout but I'm always interested to see the data afterward.

---

---------------------------------------------------------------

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/profile/domingjm

I do not get this point. When I run, I do not try to stifle my breath rate. I breath as much as my body wants to (IOW, I do not meter my breathing). In the pool I absolutely meter my breathing because I know if I inhale while my face is in the water in will be most unpleasant (at best).

This does actually make sense, freediving background i assume
Does this positive pressure add up when wearing a wetsuit
Is there HR data available with vs without wetsuit