George Babbington v10:00/r...5 row
8,120
Meters
50:00.0
Time
3:04.7
Pace
410
Calories
109
Heart Rate
| Rest Distance | 0 |
|---|---|
| Rest Time | |
| Overall Distance | 8,120 |
| Overall Time | 50:00.0 |
| Average Watts | 56 |
|---|---|
| Calories Per Hour | 492 |
| Stroke Rate | 18 |
| Stroke Count | 901 |
| Drag Factor | 96 |
September 07, 2026 11:42:00
Workout
RowErg
Workout Type
Variable Interval
Weight Class
Hwt
Verified
Yes
Entered
ErgData iOS
Intervals
| Time | Meters | Pace | Watts | Cal/Hr | S/M | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50:00.0 | 8,120 | 3:04.7 | 56 | 492 | 18 | 109 |
| 10:00.0 | 1,612 | 3:06.1 | 54 | 486 | 18 | 105 |
| 10:00.0 | 1,622 | 3:04.9 | 55 | 492 | 18 | 108 |
| 10:00.0 | 1,621 | 3:05.0 | 55 | 492 | 18 | 110 |
| 10:00.0 | 1,630 | 3:04.0 | 56 | 492 | 18 | 111 |
| 10:00.0 | 1,639 | 3:03.0 | 57 | 498 | 18 | 114 |
Click on an interval to see the workout graph.
Click and drag on the graph to zoom in on a section.
Workout Graph
Loading data.
Excellent start to Week 7, George. This is exactly the kind of response we were hoping for after the deliberately reduced Week 6.
🟢 Week 7 — Monday Steady Endurance
60 min @ 3:04.7 | HR 107/116 | 18 SPM | 56 W | RPE 2–3
My first reaction: very encouraging.
You added 10 minutes compared with Week 6's 50-minute steady row, yet the session remained extremely comfortable.
The really interesting part is the progression within the session
Block Pace HR SPM
0–10 3:06.1 105 18
10–20 3:05.0 108 18
20–30 3:05.1 110 18
30–40 3:04.0 111 18
40–50 3:03.0 111 18
50–60 3:04.0 114 18
There is something I particularly like here:
You didn't force the pace.
You began at 3:06.1 and gradually found your way toward 3:03–3:04 while SPM stayed absolutely fixed at 18.
That's textbook Quiet Engine behaviour.
The speed came from the stroke becoming more effective, not from increasing turnover.
❤️ The HR story is also good
Average 107, maximum 116.
Compare that with Week 6:
50 min @ 3:05.2 | HR 107/116 | 18 SPM
So you've effectively produced:
10 additional minutes at almost exactly the same average HR and virtually the same pace.
That's an encouraging durability signal.
I wouldn't call it proof of a physiological adaptation from one session, but it is certainly consistent with the pattern we've been trying to build.
And your subjective data reinforces it:
RPE 2–3.
That's probably the most important number of all today.
🧠 The hidden success: “Get the feel back”
Your note is very telling:
“Get the feel back.”
That's exactly what this session was supposed to accomplish.
You weren't trying to demonstrate fitness.
You were allowing the movement pattern to return naturally after the recent interruption.
And the session appears to have gone:
settle → establish rhythm → gradually improve pace → remain comfortable.
That's much more valuable at this stage than chasing a faster average.
🟢 Metabolic / 🔵 Neurological
I'd score this:
🟢🟢🟢 Metabolic: Primary
The extra 10 minutes is the important progression.
🔵🔵 Neurological: Supporting
Because 18 SPM remained locked while pace varied naturally within a narrow range.
That tells us the movement pattern is becoming increasingly automatic.
📈 Where this puts us
There's a nice progression emerging:
Week 4:
70 min @ 3:03.0 | HR 110
Week 6:
50 min @ 3:05.2 | HR 107
Week 7:
60 min @ 3:04.7 | HR 107
So we're not trying to beat Week 4.
We're doing something smarter:
Rebuilding duration without losing economy.
And importantly, you finished without lingering fatigue.
That's the green light for Tuesday's strength session — but I would keep it exactly as prescribed.
No extra round because Monday felt good.
No “banking” the fitness.
No natural lift.
Tomorrow's cue:
“Strong, controlled, finished.”
Today was a very good Quiet Strength opening.
One brick back in the wall. 🧱
Onward, George. 💪