Garmin

5 lurkers | 224 watchers

Dvorak Aug 2022 9:34pm, 21 Aug 2022 25,822 posts	Dvorak That's correct, SPR: Garmin have all the data, but the resulting output does not correspond with what they expressly say they will produce from the data. Additionally, as well as the typically high readings, I've had days shown in the last eight weeks of 44, 46 and 48 rhr. On the 48 day, the lowest figure shown on the graph is 50! I probably should just ignore the the figures as claptrap, but it's niggling me.
chunkywizard Aug 2022 9:35pm, 21 Aug 2022 14,718 posts	chunkywizard Ah, I’ve read back and now I understand. Maybe the graph is an approximation of the data and so it looks like the 50bpm is for 30 minutes but it isn’t? Or maybe the RHR definition is wrong? Or perhaps there is a bug in GCM! Can you get the HR graph full screen and zoom into the 50bpm period and check? Looking at my data in GCM, my RHR is always lowest overnight. If I zoom in, it doesn’t flat line at all, it goes up and down. I wonder if on the FR 35 the sample rate is lower and the data is interpolated on the graph or some values (used for calculations) aren’t shown. Or it is a bug! I wonder if Garmin will comment.
larkim Aug 2022 8:32am, 22 Aug 2022 18,751 posts	larkim Not quite the same observation, but often when I check my HR graph on the 645 in the morning (which shows the last 4 hours or so of heart beats) I'll see a single point (say 48) highlighted as the low point, yet the RHR reported on the graph which is on the next page of the HR widget will show something like 55. Suspect the net observation is the same as yours Dvorak. Would be interesting to know what parameters they put around RHR when calcing it.
SPR Aug 2022 8:40am, 22 Aug 2022 38,040 posts	SPR My high in my run yesterday was 174 but the high shown on the HR summary for the day was 170. It's done similar before but I've just ignored it.
larkim Aug 2022 8:50am, 22 Aug 2022 18,752 posts	larkim I ignore it too, just curious to understand how it all works. I'm sure there is some good logic in it, but it's the sort of discrepancy that weakens people's trust in the data (I'm exaggerating a bit) - a bit like the "that course was long, my Garmin says I ran 10.21km on a 10k" nonsense.
SPR Aug 2022 8:55am, 22 Aug 2022 38,041 posts	SPR Oh I'm definitely not saying it's not worth investigating. I've just ignored it for now as for running I have an obvious real high in the run. In the case of the high though, neither the graph or the summary of day HR pick it up.
larkim Aug 2022 9:59am, 22 Aug 2022 18,754 posts	larkim Not watched the whole video, but a sample of two here mapping their lab recorded VO2Max against Garmin. Pretty close, workably so. Both over-estimates on the Garmin side https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-5UOPwCWHk&feature=emb_logo
Bowman 🇸🇪 Aug 2022 10:02am, 22 Aug 2022 1,670 posts	Bowman 🇸🇪 My F7XSS underestimate by 3, compared to lab tests. So i guess there is a span.
Badger Aug 2022 10:23am, 22 Aug 2022 15,516 posts	Badger My high in my run yesterday was 174 but the high shown on the HR summary for the day was 170. It's done similar before but I've just ignored it. Seen that quite often. I think it is because of the way the daily heart rate is logged, it isn't every second as that would create a huge file, and it's showing you the highest rate that went into that log.
Badger Aug 2022 10:30am, 22 Aug 2022 15,517 posts	Badger Dvorak I never see long perfectly flat sections like yours, it's always varying if only by one or two bpm (exactly what HRV is looking at). It might be that it's not picking up your resting rate very well, it might not be logging it properly, it might be looking at this section with no variation at all and thinking it's suspect. Or maybe it's me who has the problem because my HR isn't stable enough.