I always thought you were logging not enough calories for exercise, but apparently I am wrong. I think your adjusting the base is something for me to keep in mind. I may need to set a new constant base in this way to dial in the accuracy of my watch. Base calories from a worded description of activity level is not the most accurate way in doing this.

Based on what I have been seeing over time with your posts, you must be in excellent shape. My watch lists me in “fair” shape, but I do not think I am that good yet. Stating “fair” or “good” shape are only qualitative terms anyway. I cannot run more than one minute, and pushing myself at that. Paddling nine miles maintaining high intensity? Not possible for me at all. Maybe never. Swimming for one hour straight? Not right now. In the future. So the calories you burn for the same exercise, intensity, and time will be much lower than for me. That is if I could keep up with you. Not likely. So in part this may explain what you log for calories and what I log can be noticeable different.

My watch is using a BMR of about 2000 calories. This is high. Calculators on the Net place me at about 1800 using BMI. Now percentage weight of body fat does make a big difference. After looking at hundreds of pictures online with body fat percentage attached to them, I estimate mine to be about 20%, and now a little bit less. This makes for a BMR of 1,450 calories. Interesting, eh? So this means your BMR calculator on the Net is accurate only for those with lean bodies, IOW those in good physical shape.