(1) I cleaned the back of the Watch with water.
(2) I switched the band for the smaller band and made sure it was tight enough I could not slip a finger between the band and my wrist.
(3) I took my phone in my hand. I set the Workout App to "Outdoor Walk". I made sure that System Services location stuff was turned on. I started "Outdoor Walk" with no goal. I started it. I resisted the temptation to walk with my hands in my pockets.
(4) I walked around the long block (a measured mile, and the Watch agreed it was a mile), and since I was still under 20 minutes at that point, I detoured and went around a neighboring, smaller block (about a half mile, and Watch agreed). My pace was consistently below 20 minutes (usually 17 and change sometimes 18 and change). My BPM never dropped below about 118; the Watch thought the overall average was 128.
(5) After 31 minutes, I arrived home, ended the Workout App "Outdoor Walk", hit Save, went to the apps screen, waited a few seconds and then checked "Exercise". It gave me credit for 24 minutes of the walk.
I dunno what the hell the programmers who put this thing together were smoking, but if they think a brisk walk is faster than 3 mph, or they think that a 46 year old should have an average BPM during a brisk walk that is higher than 128, they should just fucking tell us what the real numbers are and make them settable. For the record, I did the mile walk portion of this outing twice earlier in the day (once by myself, once with my walking partner) and got no Exercise minutes towards the goal. Steps are being counted (I'm over 13500 for the day).
What's weird, is it did so much better before I opened up the Workout App the first time, which makes me at least a little suspicious.
Because I believe this should have been a calibrating activity (GPS active and all), I'll update this if I see better behavior, but I'm not feeling a lot of optimism.
Here is a post script on the subject of what a reasonable cardio range would be for someone my age:
220 - 46 = 174
70% of 174 = 122
Nobody thinks 70% of max heart rate is shabby.
Other possible calculations for heart rate (IF THEY ARE USING KARVONEN THEY SHOULD BE BEATEN WITH NOODLES UNTIL THEY SUBMIT AND APOLOGIZE):
208 - (.7 * 46) = 176 max heart rate
70% of 176 is 123
206 - (.88 * 46) = 165ish
70% of 165ish = 116
Why should they not be using Karvonen? Because Karvonen produces higher heart rate goals for people who are in worse shape. Which at a minimum seems like a big bite of liability to be taking on.