I disagree. Everyone was terrified of Apple Watch HR function, but it’s fine. The only hassle with it is transmitting it.
Well, my experience of OHR is poor on Garmin devices 
2 Likes
Yeah, pointless when exercising.
I should add that I got so fed-up of chest straps failing, I haven’t bothered getting another one as yet. No win!
1 Like
there’s really no need to count far. 25’s or 50’s don’t count, 100’s count to 1 (end and back, 1…done on next lap) , if you really struggle with counting to 3 for 200 then just swim for time. Evey lap look at pace clock. People overthink the inconsequential details when the thought should be going into the swimming itself.
2 Likes
Only reason i ever got an edge was because you cant wear watches on the track and I wanted to record power. You cant have an edge in sight either but you attach then under the saddle (or upside down on the bars is acceptable at Herne Hill)
1 Like
I actually take my watch off and put it on the frame even when recording via the watch?
1 Like
Is that so you can see it in zwift or whatever (run and/or bike?)? What are you subsequently doing with the information afterwards?
Agree. If I don’t have a watch for whatever reason the warm up I can usually remember because it 4x200m with different strokes/patterns. The main set I will usually look at the clock and work anti clockwise. E.g. 12x100 at 1:45 +10s means I start each rep 5s or one clock position back from the previous. 12, then 11, then 10 until I’m back to 12.
Except that someone always interferes with that, then I lose count. So I assume 2min/100 over whatever period I’ve been in the water.
It doesn’t really matter if I record the session a bit off in my spreadsheet, it’s whether I did the work after all
.
1 Like
Partly but also to validate training and racing. ZwiftPower or Ironman Virtual Racing might call me a cheat without HR data, Zwift may not let me join their superduper Kona Qualifying team.
I get you. Did wonder. Probably a bit of faff to get an Ant+ dongle?
1 Like
Being pedantic, you asked about multisport watches and then make reference to a Garmin that isnt a multisport watch.
I don’t know what Edge you have, but with any Garmin watch that supports the BT broadcasting you are after, you’ll also get Physio True up, meaning your Garmin account will naturally blend all of your workout data into one cohesive picture for all your training. Whether anyone actually cares about that is another matter!
Any of those newer watches are going to allow you to be entirely phone free if you wish, so for running you’ll have maps and music without the need for a phone. The maps is the most handy one for me for running in new places, including trail, if I’m ever travelling with work.
If an AW works for you, and you’re happy with the non-multisport functionality you’ve analysed on here before (i.e. having to separately record swim, bike and run workouts, rather than one single “triathlon” that you just need one button press to switch between), then I’d just get another one. As others have said, noone really “needs” a sports watch, but the functionality they provide is useful if you’re minded to make use of it.
The only thing I’d say is if you’re not looking for a “daily wearer”, which to me is the primary purpose of an AW, then I really don’t understand why you’d choose that, with all of it’s battery life constraints, versus a dedicated sports watch that will last for weeks of workouts if you’re not wearing it constantly, so turn of 24/7 HR monitoring, etc. You don’t want to be constrained by a HR strap, yet are happy to be constrained by a charging cable? Reviews of AW6 say it will struggle to last a marathon for some people, without switching things off to battery save. If you aren’t buying the AW for the day-to-day functionality it’s built for, then it seems pretty bizarre to me that you’d make it your sports watch of choice.
Just my opinion though.
1 Like
BEing more pedantic, I asked about a watch, my OP referred to both the Apple Watch (as you correctly point out is not a multi sport watch by industry definitions) and I used the phrase multisport watch. 
For clarity, I wasn’t restricting the debate to only watches that can record a triathlon as a single file. 
The rest of your points are fair though.
Why Apple Watch well I’m only really considering Garmin and only recent Garmin;s transmit HR over BT and only if you use the Virtual Run feature I linked above, which is an awkward workaround. S2 functioning battery life has not been a problem for me these last 4? Years, so an S3 for £169 is an inexpensive resolution to the problem, with no learning curve or change to my existing processes.
In some ways I’d prefer a change, but this doesn’t seem to be the time.
As I say, if it meets your needs, then I agree.
Looking online, AW3 has 5hrs GPS the same as AW2. That’s horrendously short as far as I’m concerned … I wear my Garmin 24/7, use it for all training except cycling (as I also have an edge), track 24/7 HR/steps/sleep, night time SP02, have push alerts come through, etc, and I need to charge it at most once a week, and that takes not much more than the time spent having a shower and getting changed.
With 5hrs GPS time, I’d be charging every couple of days even if I sacrificed all the other bits and just turned it on for training…
As I say, it’s all personal preference. But I like HR straps (what others say about OHR being rubbish is 100% true for me … I use it occasionally, but other than 24/7 HR it’s not a patch on a chest strap) and find them no inconvenience at all, yet would feel hugely constrained by a requirement for such regular charging. You seem happy with AW, and so even DCR has said the reduced price of AW3 is hard to beat for what it can do.
1 Like