Swimming OHR finally here!

For what I saw with training status, the load is not completely taken into account (I think garmin was smart this time !)
It seems to be taken into account for recovery, detraining or maintaining but not for overreaching, productive or unproductive. I guess because it can't calculate a vo2max from a swim. I think that way is pretty smart, it knows I'm training so it doesn't show anymore detraining when I do a week mostly swimming. Anyway, I think the only solution to calculate a true load is by entering a RPE at the end of a session. 

snowfree52 said:

Anyway, I think the only solution to calculate a true load is by entering a RPE at the end of a session. 

Can you give some info about that, please? Thanx!

You cannot enter RPE.

Even if you could enter an RPE what use would it be? It's a subjective measure. What scale would you use? Borg 6 - 20? A 1 to 10 scale? A 1 to 5 scale? And how would your tie that back to heart rate?

Borg's recalculate 1-10 formula could (and has worked) in training programs in lieu of a HR monitor. If Garmin/Firstbeat could do some type of software update where the entered RPE corresponds with the user's set swimming HR zones, I think this would be much better than using the oHRM in it's current state. As you stated, the only issue is RPE is subjective. Because I'm one who has terrible results using the oHRM, I would rather input what feel is my RPE over the oHRM data should I not have a HR strap.

endurancetraininginprogress.blogspot.com/.../training-with-rate-of-perceived.html

we agree on something :) 
I think RPE is the best at evaluating load if you already know a bit about yourself because it is simple and is not technology dependant. ( 
Who has ever been at the middle of a ride and suddently his hr monitor, power meter or else died ? or going for a run and your watch cannot find your hr monitor for whatever reason ? or at the middle of the session you start to see some strange numbers because there is some problem ... 
Even problems not technology related : you do a hard run and it's very hot, you are tired and because of that your hr is much lower than normal.
you end up with the watch telling you this was super easy whereas in reality it was super difficult. (this actually happens to me a lot because I am very sensitive to heat.)

best of the best would be RPE + perfect data from technology ;)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to stir up ***, but have you verified with a strap that your heart rate isn't /actually/ jumping 30-50 BPM? And compared to what baseline? 

My RHR right now is right around high 40s low 50s - higher then when I was actually fit during tri season the last two years :P

I was at the K spa the other day and had a cold bath, warm bath, and hot bath - something like high 50s, 102, and 106-7, respectively (per watch, but also the HOT tub was definitely a few degrees warmer than our 102-104* hot tub at home, which I have very dialed preferences about). 

In the cold bath, my HR dropped to a low of 38. Warm bath, up to like 60 or 80 (tough to read the graph and I don't remember specifically, then hot bath, up to the low 100s. All of this while extremely stationary, and watch very tight, so I have no real reason to suspect accuracy. Point being, hitting your body with the thermal load of a bunch of very hot water could actually modulate your HR like that.

Not necessarily useful data, but not necessarily false either.

Although now that I re-read your post, maybe your point is JUST that it's useless data, not that it's waterlogged data.

alexwhittemore said:

have you verified with a strap that your heart rate isn't /actually/ jumping 30-50 BPM? And compared to what baseline? 

Sorry.  I just noticed your question.  I normally use my Tri while swimming.  When I go to the pool, I do the same workout.  Of course each day will be different, but based on those workouts, the oHRM averaged 25-30 higher than my strap.  That all being said, I recently changed something that has improved the oHRM significantly.  I wear my watch snug, but not to the point where it becomes bothersome to me.  I took the watchband loop with the little nub that secures it in the watchband hole off an extra band I had.  I replaced the loop without the nub on my current band (giving me two with the nub) and wear the watch at the same way.  Now it doesn't move as much (I guess it must have been moving more than I thought in the water) and my HR is around 5 bpm high.  This is something I can live with.

Pretty graph and indicates the rests...but it's wrong! My max heart rate is close to 174. If I go over 160 I'm breathing really hard. In reality my breathing rate rarely changes when swimming because I'm not doing any intervals, just steady distance. I'd accept the first block but even that's 20 beats too high when I took a static measure. Completely skews my data. 

Crap data is useless data. I want this to work. But until it works properly to reflect my work rate, then it's of no use to me.

Not doing anywhere as much swimming as I'd like to so hence the very turgid pool swim this morning with a 945 on l wrist and F6 on the right. F6 is pretty good and very close to what I would expect my HR to be. The 945 is definitely reading high.