I am trying to create a HR coloured zone chart for workout analysis now that we have that option.
The issue that I need to resolve is that my Max HR feels different for each discipline & so my various zones will presumably be different? At least that is what I am thinking but perhaps that is incorrect? I have seen written elsewhere that others feel Max HR is different between run & swim with some advising using different Max HR.
With swimming for example I cannot seem to get my HR above 150ish even when absolutely gassing it as my arm strength fails. Similarly with cycling my legs tend to fail before my heart. Therefore should I regard my Max HR (and so HR zones) as the same as for running or allow for the muscle fatigue/limits and lower them? If I ignore the muscle strength limitation (universal MaxHR) then I worry that I will never reach Z5+ with swimming if I try to employ a 80/20 type regime.
Could it be that my body is causing my muscles to fail to prevent injury & actually if I pushed harder then I could achieve a higher HR. I am nervous of testing this though, particularly with swimming because of wrecking my rotator cuffs.
Assuming that the Max HRs are discipline specific. I am thinking that I have to create e.g. a Run HR Zone graph to analyse my runs & only select that graph for run activities but then deselect that one & choose a Swim HR Zone graph (different thresholds) for swim activities.
The following shows a swim with as close to max effort as I dare go, with the different thresholds applied.
Correct, maxHR is specific for each discipline. This requires different HRzones for each. In theory, once those zones are set then an overall graph could be used if it was based on zone classification not the underlying HR’s in each.
It works well. Below is a screenshot of my custom charts with the different swim & run thresholds as compared to the generic HR Zone chart & it has recognised the different thresholds. Top is the swim & then a run below. The purple corresponds to my red zone ( i.e. above LT2). Far better than mine which necessitates having to manually change thresholds in each chart when FTPs change.
One further thing if I may. I use power (Stryd) for running & cycling on the basis that power is the "objective " load (& also more responsive - terrible HR lag at the start of the first hill interval) whereas HR is more how the body is responding to the load i.e. “subjective”. Is swim pace therefore perhaps a better metric for me to assess swim TLs than HR? Does swim pace correlate approximately to power in that sense as an objective measure?
Regarding swim, it depends. Traditionally, pace is the standard the equates most closely to power. HR is a bit variable because of both efficient form (those you have swam since childhood) and physiological changes in the heart of said swimmers. My experience is that HR & RPE help dial in pace zones. Again, it’s a bit of a tough nut because this who find swimming more challenging have fewer gears/lower ability to swim at distinctly different paces, whereas accomplished swimmers have a huge range between Z0 RPE and Z4/5 race pace. For the generally less developed, there’s little point in distinguishing between strokes when defining pace zones. Just pick the stroke that’s used most. Does that help?
And, as mentioned in my PM to you, I’m impressed with your graphing.
Many thanks for the compliment about my graphing but the praise really deserves to go to @David for giving me the tools. I did use Today’s Plan for a while as that looked a bit prettier (lots more money) & also allowed me to have a different dashboard for each discipline & then a combined overall one. But I switched when I worked out that Intervals sort of does the same by selecting & deselecting which graphs to display. Plus I can customise the graphs.
I do feel as though HR seems the better determinant for effort level with my swimming as the screenshot below illustrates. The swims felt very different in terms of effort, one quite fast (for me at least) but the other gassed at the end! Pace based load has them almost the same but HR based load recognised the marked difference between them. The 30s difference in time seems small (less than 1 sec per length) but represents a big step up in effort.
I am a relatively poor swimmer in that my front end is reasonable efficient (though weak strength), my breathing good (though mostly unilateral) but my kicking & body position is poor.
As an aside, one irritant was my watch recording only 999m which means that it is not registering on the Interval pace chart for 1K. My vanity says that it is worth the effort of using Fitfiletools as it was a 1K PB but it is a pain. It is not the first time that it has happened. Why does Garmin think that I would stopped 1m short? Sensible software would surely have rounded up!
“Sensible software” Yeah, my pedantic nature gets a bit out of sorts with bad design or implementation. But I can’t get too bent out since I’m not a programmer.
I agree 100% that Intervals.icu gives us tools that no other platform does, or IMHO comes close to doing. It brought back the fun for me.
Yes, I believe in using the load that matches your RPE. It requires insight, integrity and self-reflection but I feel it offers the best representation of the dynamic aspects of the human experience.
Yeah, my pedantic nature gets a bit out of sorts with bad design or implementation. But I can’t get too bent out since I’m not a programmer.