Hi ,
It looks like you're using an ad blocker.



The revenue generated from the adverts on the site is a critical part of our funding - and it's because of these ads that I can offer the site for free. But using the site for free AND blocking the ads doesn't feel like a great thing to do, which is why this box is so large and inconvenient. Some sites will completely block your access, but I'm not doing that - I'm appealing to your good nature instead. Did you know that you can allow ads for specific sites, whilst still blocking them on others?

Thanks,
Ian Williams aka Fetch
or for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Heart rate

301 watchers
larkim
larkim
Jun 2018
9:09am, 18 Jun 2018
5,056 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
Not had time to play with the idea of a widget yet, but on the VO2 Max thing I switched bluetooth off on my watch over the weekend to stop my watch communicating with the Garmin servers.

I activitated three very short "runs" on my watch whilst wearing the HR strap and copied them up to the Runalyze site. For the first one, the figure reported was 59.11 (59.25 was the figure reported on the previous "real" run), and the figure reported on the next two was also 59.11.

Nothing conclusive from this, though my instinct was that firstly the activities were too small and meaningless to have really generated any reportable change to VO2Max, but with that being the case I assumed that the first event was reporting the updated score generated after my last "real" activity.

So for me long run yesterday I also kept bluetooth off and dragged the resulting FIT file to the Runalyze site before letting my watch communicate with Garmin Connect. The result though was that the VO2 Max figure reported in the FIT file was identical (59.11) to the figures reported in the other three "test" activities that I had sync'd.

Given this was a low HR 20 mile run, I'd find it very surprising if that did result in no change (to 2 decimal places) to VO2 Max, I'm now working on the assumption that the figure that gets reported is some sort of post-activity calculated one, so I'm now going to investigate that.
Badger
Badger
Jun 2018
9:27am, 18 Jun 2018
9,488 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Badger
One thing I've noticed is that Runalyze shows big drops in its own calculated VO2max for long runs, and much smaller drops for the Garmin watch data. Partly this is not letting one bad day shift the numbers - firstbeat are very clear about it taking time and multiple runs to learn you. I wonder if it deweights long runs because cardiac drift could skew the value down?
larkim
larkim
Jun 2018
9:41am, 18 Jun 2018
5,057 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
I'm sure there are many ways to skin a cat, so FirstBeat and Runalyze's approaches to calc'ing VO2 Max are quite different. Garmin's calc puts me now at 58.59 (I sync'd another test activity this morning, and that showed a reduction, which I think is reinforcing my assumption that whatever is being reported in that field in the file is the figure you bring into your activity, rather than a post-activity calculation) but Runalyze has me at 45.86 for that run and 47.52 as its "effective" calc. Quite a gap!

Runalyze's figures are highly dependent on my max / resting HR figures being accurate it seems plus their "correction" factor.
flanker
flanker
Jun 2018
10:31am, 18 Jun 2018
17,629 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
flanker
All proper scientists use a correction factor. It always used to the called the f-factor :)
larkim
larkim
Jun 2018
11:00am, 18 Jun 2018
5,059 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
Just as aside, my wife has a Vivosmart HR+ so I uploaded one of her FIT files to my Runalyze profile and there is no "VO2Max (by file)" record in there, so that does imply that there is a watch based calc going on.
Dvorak
Dvorak
Jun 2018
11:14am, 18 Jun 2018
16,217 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Dvorak
Tangentially, with the mentions of Python and such, I encountered this Humble Bundle of Pocket Primers on programming, which includes Python, on a largely pay what you want basis. Only available until 1900 today.

humblebundle.com
HappyG(rrr)
HappyG(rrr)
Jun 2018
12:05pm, 18 Jun 2018
28,891 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
HappyG(rrr)
Dear Heart Rate experts...

fetcheveryone.com/viewracedetails.php?id=2347088

Is my HR trace for this race (a 10K) broken, or did I run for 10 mins at 155 (80% maxHR), then suddenly jump (without going vertically uphill or upping the pace) to 175 (90% maxHR) and stayed there next half hour, peaking at 187 (97% maxHR).

Peak I'm OK with because you should be going hard at the end, but 3/4 at 90%? It was bloomin hard going but that doesn't sound right, does it?

Thanks wise peeps. :-) G
larkim
larkim
Jun 2018
12:27pm, 18 Jun 2018
5,060 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
Assuming stride cadence is correct, there's a striking correlation between 88spm (i.e. 176 steps per minute) and average bpm of 178, 177, 175, 177.

Loose watch on the wrist picking up cadence instead of heartrate?
larkim
larkim
Jun 2018
12:28pm, 18 Jun 2018
5,061 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
[I should have prefaced that with, "how about a response from someone who is *not* a Heart Rate expert"?]
HappyG(rrr)
HappyG(rrr)
Jun 2018
12:47pm, 18 Jun 2018
28,894 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
HappyG(rrr)
I suppose that's possible Larks. Has anyone else experienced with an optical HR on wrist recording cadence as HR?

But then it's "correct" at 187 at the end, where I'm maxing out, up hill slightly, trying to do a final push to make the final time slightly less woeful than it was.

And I always run at 85-90 cadence, so why don't all my 9 min mile runs at sub 150bpm show wrong?

I thought maybe it was just that I'd gone out too hard, but then it would climb gradually, wouldn't it? Hmmm. :-) G

About This Thread

Maintained by Elderberry
Everything you need to know about training with a heart rate monitor. Remember the motto "I can maintain a fast pace over the race distance because I am an Endurance God". Mind the trap door....

Gobi lurks here, but for his advice you must first speak his name. Ask and you shall receive.

A quote:

"The area between the top of the aerobic threshold and anaerobic threshold is somewhat of a no mans land of fitness. It is a mix of aerobic and anaerobic states. For the amount of effort the athlete puts forth, not a whole lot of fitness is produced. It does not train the aerobic or anaerobic energy system to a high degree. This area does have its place in training; it is just not in base season. Unfortunately this area is where I find a lot of athletes spending the majority of their seasons, which retards aerobic development. The athletes heart rate shoots up to this zone with little power or speed being produced when it gets there." Matt Russ, US International Coach
  • Show full description...

Related Threads

  • heart
  • training
  • vdot

Report This Content

You can report any content you believe to be unsafe. Please let me know why you believe this content is unsafe by choosing a category below.



Thank you for your report. The content will be assessed as soon as possible.










Back To Top

Tag A User

To tag a user, start typing their name here:
X

Free training & racing tools for runners, cyclists, swimmers & walkers.

Fetcheveryone lets you analyse your training, find races, plot routes, chat in our forum, get advice, play games - and more! Nothing is behind a paywall, and it'll stay that way thanks to our awesome community!
Get Started
Click here to join 114,538 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here