Darn Garmin Training Status

DX2JX2
DX2JX2 Posts: 1,921 Member
edited November 22 in Fitness and Exercise
Just annoyed because my Garmin is calling my training status 'unproductive' since we've had a stretch of oddly hot and humid weather right after a stretch of really nice and cool fall weather. Since all of my runs are outside, my Garmin reads changes in temperature and humidity as changes to my estimated VO2Max since they ultimately impact my performance for that day.

I know it means nothing but c'mon. I'm working my butt off over here (but am definitely not overdoing it).

Replies

  • P0PTART
    P0PTART Posts: 50 Member
    I did not know that!!! I wondered why I got such low numbers when I was seriously pushing it.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    I love this feature, which is maybe why it's so frustrating and funny when it's wrong.

    For me, my longer rides tend to show enough cardiac drift that four hours in the saddle knocks my measured VO2max down. So I do a long ride up Slate Peak, and it says unproductive for a week.
  • CricketClover
    CricketClover Posts: 388 Member
    What Garmin device do you use? I have never seen this feature on mine. Is on the actual device or once you view it in the connect app?
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    It's in the device and the web site. The app shows it too but a phone screen is too small to do the report justice.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    I don't see it either. I've got a VivoActive HR, so it might not do the VOmax or something.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    Mine dips a lot in the winter especially (and summer too) - gets a lot harder to breathe. (I was a little worried about how out of shape I was feeling this last winter- could barely run 2 minutes without being out of breath..then comes the first freak warm day in February and I felt so amazing running and I PR'd 10 miles by a giant margin. Look at the sucky weather as added training - the next run in good air will feel that much easier.
    r9mn6xls7xrx.png

  • DX2JX2
    DX2JX2 Posts: 1,921 Member
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I don't see it either. I've got a VivoActive HR, so it might not do the VOmax or something.

    I think the training status/impact functionality might only be included on the Fenix and Forerunner series.
  • CricketClover
    CricketClover Posts: 388 Member
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I don't see it either. I've got a VivoActive HR, so it might not do the VOmax or something.

    I think the training status/impact functionality might only be included on the Fenix and Forerunner series.

    ahh ok, that is what I was wondering when I asked what device. I, like Tackle, have the vivoactive HR. I thought I remember seeing somewhere about the VOmax but that may have been my old Polar device.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited October 2017
    CricketClover wrote: »
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I don't see it either. I've got a VivoActive HR, so it might not do the VOmax or something.

    I think the training status/impact functionality might only be included on the Fenix and Forerunner series.

    ahh ok, that is what I was wondering when I asked what device. I, like Tackle, have the vivoactive HR. I thought I remember seeing somewhere about the VOmax but that may have been my old Polar device.

    I've seen it on one of the settings pages.

    Anyone know if the VA3 will do this?

    Okay, found the answer. Apparently for walking or running, but not cycling.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    I don't see it either. I've got a VivoActive HR, so it might not do the VOmax or something.

    I think the training status/impact functionality might only be included on the Fenix and Forerunner series.

    I get the impression that First Beat software is expensive. Garmin tends to treat them as premium features. Threshold detection only showed up in the Fenix and Forerunner, I'm sure this is the same.
  • MobyCarp
    MobyCarp Posts: 2,927 Member
    General rant: I trust my Garmin to record time accurately to the extent I can press the buttons accurately. I trust it to record heart rate accurately to the limit of my chest strap monitor. I trust it to record location within the limits of GPS accuracy. Location over time gives a reasonably accurate number for pace.

    More complicated calculations, I don't trust Garmin at all. Before I turned that particular nag off, it would reliably tell me I needed 11 hours recovery after a 2 mile warmup. Because GPS isn't totally accurate, it ticked a mile early during a mile track race and Garmin thinks my mile PR is 5:31. (Actual mile race time, 5:44.9) Notwithstanding that Garmin has 5:31 for my fastest mile, knows my age, my weight, and my height, and as an awful lot of historical heart rate and pace data, it predicts I can run a 5K in 16:24. (My actual PR 5K is 19:07.)

    It's a pretty stupid piece of software that predicts I can run a 5K at an average pace faster than the software has for my PR mile. Given how Garmin has done with this stuff, I wouldn't trust anything labeled "training status" to be anywhere close to useful.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    Garmin didn't write any of the software you're complaining about, First Beat did. It's in Suunto watches and many other devices too.

    It's predicting how fast you could run a 5k in your peak condition in a race. It's just asking a lookup table based on your VO2max.

    This has nothing to do with training status.
  • MobyCarp
    MobyCarp Posts: 2,927 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    Garmin didn't write any of the software you're complaining about, First Beat did. It's in Suunto watches and many other devices too.

    It's predicting how fast you could run a 5k in your peak condition in a race. It's just asking a lookup table based on your VO2max.

    This has nothing to do with training status.

    Doesn't matter who wrote the software. The results show that it's written stupidly.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    If you say so.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    MobyCarp wrote: »
    General rant: I trust my Garmin to record time accurately to the extent I can press the buttons accurately. I trust it to record heart rate accurately to the limit of my chest strap monitor. I trust it to record location within the limits of GPS accuracy. Location over time gives a reasonably accurate number for pace.

    More complicated calculations, I don't trust Garmin at all. Before I turned that particular nag off, it would reliably tell me I needed 11 hours recovery after a 2 mile warmup. Because GPS isn't totally accurate, it ticked a mile early during a mile track race and Garmin thinks my mile PR is 5:31. (Actual mile race time, 5:44.9) Notwithstanding that Garmin has 5:31 for my fastest mile, knows my age, my weight, and my height, and as an awful lot of historical heart rate and pace data, it predicts I can run a 5K in 16:24. (My actual PR 5K is 19:07.)

    It's a pretty stupid piece of software that predicts I can run a 5K at an average pace faster than the software has for my PR mile. Given how Garmin has done with this stuff, I wouldn't trust anything labeled "training status" to be anywhere close to useful.

    While I generally agree with the sentiment, I don't have the same animosity towards garmin. I get that it's all based on a bunch of calculations and assumptions which may or may not be accurate for my circumstances. As such, anything beyond time, distance, and elevation I take mostly as useless trivia - interesting, but not particularly meaningful.
  • MobyCarp
    MobyCarp Posts: 2,927 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    MobyCarp wrote: »
    General rant: I trust my Garmin to record time accurately to the extent I can press the buttons accurately. I trust it to record heart rate accurately to the limit of my chest strap monitor. I trust it to record location within the limits of GPS accuracy. Location over time gives a reasonably accurate number for pace.

    More complicated calculations, I don't trust Garmin at all. Before I turned that particular nag off, it would reliably tell me I needed 11 hours recovery after a 2 mile warmup. Because GPS isn't totally accurate, it ticked a mile early during a mile track race and Garmin thinks my mile PR is 5:31. (Actual mile race time, 5:44.9) Notwithstanding that Garmin has 5:31 for my fastest mile, knows my age, my weight, and my height, and as an awful lot of historical heart rate and pace data, it predicts I can run a 5K in 16:24. (My actual PR 5K is 19:07.)

    It's a pretty stupid piece of software that predicts I can run a 5K at an average pace faster than the software has for my PR mile. Given how Garmin has done with this stuff, I wouldn't trust anything labeled "training status" to be anywhere close to useful.

    While I generally agree with the sentiment, I don't have the same animosity towards garmin. I get that it's all based on a bunch of calculations and assumptions which may or may not be accurate for my circumstances. As such, anything beyond time, distance, and elevation I take mostly as useless trivia - interesting, but not particularly meaningful.

    Thank you. You said that better than I did.
  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    MobyCarp wrote: »
    General rant: I trust my Garmin to record time accurately to the extent I can press the buttons accurately. I trust it to record heart rate accurately to the limit of my chest strap monitor. I trust it to record location within the limits of GPS accuracy. Location over time gives a reasonably accurate number for pace.

    More complicated calculations, I don't trust Garmin at all. Before I turned that particular nag off, it would reliably tell me I needed 11 hours recovery after a 2 mile warmup. Because GPS isn't totally accurate, it ticked a mile early during a mile track race and Garmin thinks my mile PR is 5:31. (Actual mile race time, 5:44.9) Notwithstanding that Garmin has 5:31 for my fastest mile, knows my age, my weight, and my height, and as an awful lot of historical heart rate and pace data, it predicts I can run a 5K in 16:24. (My actual PR 5K is 19:07.)

    It's a pretty stupid piece of software that predicts I can run a 5K at an average pace faster than the software has for my PR mile. Given how Garmin has done with this stuff, I wouldn't trust anything labeled "training status" to be anywhere close to useful.

    While I generally agree with the sentiment, I don't have the same animosity towards garmin. I get that it's all based on a bunch of calculations and assumptions which may or may not be accurate for my circumstances. As such, anything beyond time, distance, and elevation I take mostly as useless trivia - interesting, but not particularly meaningful.

    +1
This discussion has been closed.

Categories