Go home, Strava, you're drunk...

Options
oocdc2
oocdc2 Posts: 1,361 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I've been using Map My Run for several months now to log my runs. Considering the general rule of thumb that a person burns (roughly) 100 calories/mile, that's been fairly true-to-form when MMR calculates my calories.

After Map My Run crashed on my phone (it was a phone thing), I installed Strava to compare. Beloved, Strava graciously gifted me with 160 extra calories for the same distance (6 miles), pace, everything. This clearly needs more research (i.e., more runs), but have others had this issue?

Part of it may be that I don't use a fitness tracker, just my phone's GPS, but that's a big difference. I'm considering re-installing MFP only because I'd rather log my exercise calories on the conservative side than eat back too many.

Replies

  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    edited March 2017
    Options
    Curious if you entered your weight in Strava and if you've sync'ed an HR meter (and Strava is set to use it in calculating cal burn).

    Calories burned per mile depends on your weight. That may be the difference if you weigh > 150lbs.

    Or, if you use an HR meter, Strava can use it to 'help' with the calorie calculation. Found out about that when the thing was doubling my run burns. I have a high max HR, so my moderate efforts look like I'm sprinting to Strava. I had to turn off that option in the settings to get anything that looked even close to realistic. But then, I don't use the estimation anyway. I prefer the standard calculation:

    0.67 * weight in lbs * miles run = net calories burned

    I forget the gross calories calculation - that's what would compare best to MFP, Strava, etc.

    ETA: for Enginerd's correction - yes, it's 0.63. Apparently, my memory sucks.
  • The_Enginerd
    The_Enginerd Posts: 3,982 Member
    edited March 2017
    Options
    MFP overestimates calorie burns for runs as well. The 100 calorie/mile rule of thumb is approximately true for a 160 lb person, but the farther you are from that weight, the more it will be off.

    Correction to the formula @stealthq, posted, the constant should be 0.63. I've used this for years to maintain my weight with mileage varying from 20 MPW to over 60 MPW. I prefer it even to the HRM based calorie count I get. The accuracy of those HRM based algorithms is not what marketing would lead you to believe. I've had counts from those vary by up to 30% on the exact same run due to weather differences.

    Strava consistently gives me 30% more calories than the formula.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    Options
    I found MMR to be notorious inaccurate - I ditched it after doing several marked distance runs and it telling me I have done only half the distance
  • oocdc2
    oocdc2 Posts: 1,361 Member
    Options
    I've read that inaccuracies in distance could be caused by a phone's GPS glitches. Fortunately, both MMR and Strava agreed on that.

    I don't use a HRM (fitness tracker), which, again, could explain some of the differences, but certainly not a 160-calorie gap.

    Using your formula, @The_Enginerd , it seems MMR overestimates my calories, but not by much. Considering I've already adjusted to eat back 80% of my exercise calories (I'm at maintenance), I may use your algorithm instead. Thanks!
  • The_Enginerd
    The_Enginerd Posts: 3,982 Member
    Options
    Also, I'll add that I record my running and biking with a Garmin watch and use a HRM. Garmin Connect then pushes it to Strava. As far as I can tell, Strava is using it's own algorithm based on distance and possibly elevation to calculate calories burned. Even though HR data is there, Strava doesn't seem to use it in it's calorie calculations. If I don't wear a HRM and Garmin falls back to calculating calories burned based on distance and weight, it gives me an inflated calorie count as well.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 24,967 Member
    Options
    Regarding calories, Strava gives me about what I expect I burn. It seems pretty accurate.

    However, today, there is something wrong with the distance challenge on Strava.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    oocdc2 wrote: »
    After Map My Run crashed on my phone (it was a phone thing), I installed Strava to compare. Beloved, Strava graciously gifted me with 160 extra calories for the same distance (6 miles), pace, everything. This clearly needs more research (i.e., more runs), but have others had this issue?

    I've used the same GPX file and processed it with each of the major app platforms, to see what the outcomes are.

    What I've found is that MapMyFitness and Strava were mid range, Endomondo is quite high, Runkeeper was a bit low, Runtastic was a bit high. The point is, they're all different outcomes with exactly the same input data.

    In terms of user experience I hated MMF, and Runtastic. Strava has the most stability.

Categories