Trendweight Users: Does this make sense?

sky_northern

I think you are getting too focused on some 'real number.' Trends are important, that is what really tells the story.

Maybe it's just me but, I don't think it matters if your really 165.0 or 165.5, or even 166.5 it matters that you are trending down with a nice slope on your trend line.

AnnPT77

midwesterner85 wrote: »

I'll take a look at Libra, thanks @blues4miles .

It isn't a matter of knowing whether I'm gaining or losing, it is trying to come up with a fair current weight irrespective of fluctuations. I've always understood that Trendweight smooths out volatility, and misunderstood that it also results in a more accurate current weight.

Speaking as a Libra user, I don't think it really comes any closer to what you say you're really looking for. It does basically the same thing as Trendweight, it's just that you can play with the time horizon for the smoothing algorithm.

I don't really see how you can do what you're wanting to do, without bringing in your calorie data as well (eaten/burned), since your "fair current weight" today depends on that, more than on your trendline alone. If I eat 3500 over maintenance today, I'm going to be up a pound pretty soon, and my past scale trend doesn't predict that. But I'm no mathematician . . . .

yarwell

midwesterner85 wrote: »

What I would expect: Some actual scale readings are higher than the trended weight and some actual scale readings are lower than the trended weight.

Me too, it is overdamped so more "soothing" than "smoothing". I think it's aimed at people who eat the fridge if the number goes up by 0.1 lbs.

Different mathematical parameters would be closer to what you expect, it isn't predicting but trying to smooth out noise so you would expect some value either side of the line if it was well tuned.

http://capmblade1.blogspot.co.uk/2007/12/hackers-diet-examining-trend-line.html

sallygroundhog

AnnPT77 wrote: »

midwesterner85 wrote: »

That all makes sense... it looks like I just misunderstood what Trendweight does. I had thought Trendweight was predicting current weight as of today (which it does, but I posted a link to the graph rather than a screenshot with that detail because I am having errors uploading the image here).

So when Trendweight says your actual weight today is X, it is going to be an average of prior weights and not quite your current weight, unless you are eating at maintenance. That makes more sense, but then makes Trendweight useless because it doesn't actually give me what I'm looking for (current weight after water weight fluctuation adjustments).

This is not *strictly* accurate, but you can almost imagine that your individual weight dots for each day are either little helium balloons pulling up the trend line (if they're above it), or little iron balls pulling down on the trend line (when they're below it). You may have the occasional "pulling up" day, but in order for the overall trend to be downward, more of your recent daily weights need to be below the line.

This is a wonderful explanation!

sallygroundhog

midwesterner85 wrote: »

I'll take a look at Libra, thanks @blues4miles .

It isn't a matter of knowing whether I'm gaining or losing, it is trying to come up with a fair current weight irrespective of fluctuations. I've always understood that Trendweight smooths out volatility, and misunderstood that it also results in a more accurate current weight.

I think it will do that when you are at maintenance and no longer losing or gaining.

AnnPT77

sallygroundhog wrote: »

midwesterner85 wrote: »

I'll take a look at Libra, thanks @blues4miles .

It isn't a matter of knowing whether I'm gaining or losing, it is trying to come up with a fair current weight irrespective of fluctuations. I've always understood that Trendweight smooths out volatility, and misunderstood that it also results in a more accurate current weight.

I think it will do that when you are at maintenance and no longer losing or gaining.

FWIW, that's not what I'm finding . . . though I admit I'm new enough to maintenance that while I'm pretty sure I'm close to neither gaining nor losing, I can't be sure yet that I'm exactly on that point - if it's even possible to be exactly on that point. But then I don't eat the same number of (net) calories every day, either, which complicates it.

What I'm seeing, with Libra set on its default settings (7 day smoothing, 7 day forecast) is a trendline that meanders up & down within a pound or so of goal weight (which is fine with me, because I understand what it's doing, more or less).

blues4miles

AnnPT77 wrote: »

sallygroundhog wrote: »

midwesterner85 wrote: »

I'll take a look at Libra, thanks @blues4miles .

It isn't a matter of knowing whether I'm gaining or losing, it is trying to come up with a fair current weight irrespective of fluctuations. I've always understood that Trendweight smooths out volatility, and misunderstood that it also results in a more accurate current weight.

I think it will do that when you are at maintenance and no longer losing or gaining.

FWIW, that's not what I'm finding . . . though I admit I'm new enough to maintenance that while I'm pretty sure I'm close to neither gaining nor losing, I can't be sure yet that I'm exactly on that point - if it's even possible to be exactly on that point. But then I don't eat the same number of (net) calories every day, either, which complicates it.

What I'm seeing, with Libra set on its default settings (7 day smoothing, 7 day forecast) is a trendline that meanders up & down within a pound or so of goal weight (which is fine with me, because I understand what it's doing, more or less).

Up and down by a pound for the "trend" seems like quite a bit of variation. I dislike that the default setting for Libra is 7 days. I use 21 smoothing days and 14 forecast days. I think more people would benefit from longer trends for the smoothing, especially if you are maintaining. A shorter forecast timeline could give you a heads up if you are suddenly gaining/losing.

AnnPT77

blues4miles wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

sallygroundhog wrote: »

midwesterner85 wrote: »

I'll take a look at Libra, thanks @blues4miles .

It isn't a matter of knowing whether I'm gaining or losing, it is trying to come up with a fair current weight irrespective of fluctuations. I've always understood that Trendweight smooths out volatility, and misunderstood that it also results in a more accurate current weight.

I think it will do that when you are at maintenance and no longer losing or gaining.

FWIW, that's not what I'm finding . . . though I admit I'm new enough to maintenance that while I'm pretty sure I'm close to neither gaining nor losing, I can't be sure yet that I'm exactly on that point - if it's even possible to be exactly on that point. But then I don't eat the same number of (net) calories every day, either, which complicates it.

What I'm seeing, with Libra set on its default settings (7 day smoothing, 7 day forecast) is a trendline that meanders up & down within a pound or so of goal weight (which is fine with me, because I understand what it's doing, more or less).

Up and down by a pound for the "trend" seems like quite a bit of variation. I dislike that the default setting for Libra is 7 days. I use 21 smoothing days and 14 forecast days. I think more people would benefit from longer trends for the smoothing, especially if you are maintaining. A shorter forecast timeline could give you a heads up if you are suddenly gaining/losing.

I change up the defaults sometimes - I was commenting on the defaults because I'd bet a lot of folks would use them with . . . well, expectations that might not be born out. During weight loss, I got quite good at predicting the magnitude & timing of my weight gains/losses, so I feel like I have a decent handle on the fluctuations now, too. Libra's just another tool or double-check.

Nothing is going to happen suddenly, and I'm thinking in terms of a maintenance weight range that creates a sort of "warning track" for unexpected gain/loss.

Note that I mentioned I don't eat even amounts daily. Even in maintenance, I'm doing NEAT + exercise, because my activity levels are variable and somewhat unpredictable (weather dependent). I'm also thinking in terms of weekly rather than daily calories.

Lately I've been eating 1800 net most days, with perhaps one day every week or so at 3000+, averaging out to my estimated maintenance calories in the 2100-2200 range - but between the water weight cycling and (small) actual gains/losses, I get larger daily scale weight fluctuations than I would if I were trying to eat a specific goal every day. Over the past two weeks, my scale weight has varied through a range of 6+ pounds, but quickly returns to something in that 1-pound range through which the trend line meanders.

Unlike OP, I don't feel a need to know my "true" weight. I don't even think such a thing exists.

I appreciate your insights and comments nonetheless, @blues4miles!