Training Load useless, please update your algorithms

Yup, most Garmin statistics are useless especially training load. I did an hour yoga and a half hour run today. Garmin gave the run 30 times more load than the yoga. Strava gave it 5.5 times more load and Training Peaks gave it 1.3 times more load. Training Peaks is very near my perceived load. Garmin is a joke. 

stennican said:

Garmin gave the run 30 times more load than the yoga. Strava gave it 5.5 times more load and Training Peaks gave it 1.3 times more load. Training Peaks is very near my perceived load. Garmin is a joke. 

The question is who is right. Both Strava and Training Peaks just estimate, while Garmin measures. And your perception may be very much wrong as well. You won't know unless you make a test in the lab, but my bet is that either your HRM did not work properly, or that Garmin was the closest.

Sorry but I disagree with your statement about Garmin, Trux:

TrainingPeaks calculates training load from the time you have spent in the several training zones you have specified for the specific sport you did. So do Garmin and Strava, in the exact same way. The big difference however between TP on the one side and Garmin & Strava on the other side is the following:

In TP the athletes can specify per sport what their correct training zones are. The athletes can specify for as many different sports as they want. The calculation of TP as such is the most accurate of them all if it comes to the real training load per sport. 

Garmin does exactly the same kind of calculation as TP only in Garmin you cannot specify your heart rate zones for all the different sport you are doing. In Garmin you can only specify your heart rate zones for cycling and running (on the road or track). For all other sports you cannot specify which makes the calculation for any other sport an absolute joke if this sport differs from running or cycling in muscle use, amount of upright position of the body and body support (e.g. sitting on the bike, in a rowing boat or having to keep downhill ski position).

This is an absolute joke because the training zones and load coming with a sport are different for different sports. On running you can achieve a higher max heart rate than e.g. swimming. This has to do with how much you are doing the specific sport in an upright position or not and up to which extend you have to deliver the 'power' to keep your body in the right position for the sport. The more you are in an upright position the more the heart also has to 'battle' with gravity when pumping the blood through your body. The more muscles you use in your whole body the higher your max heart rate and VO2max for that sport will be. If you do e.g. cross country skiing the max heart rate you get there is highly likely higher than with running so when one athlete is running or skiing at the same heart rate of e.g. 160 bpm, it can still generate a different training load for running and skiing for this same athlete. Something which can be taken into account by TP but not by Garmin.

Conclusion: The Garmin calculated Training Load for any other sport than cycling or running is indeed a complete joke

8711504 said:

TrainingPeaks calculates training load from the time you have spent in the several training zones you have specified for the specific sport you did. So do Garmin and Strava, in the exact same way.

Not at all. Garmin uses Firstbeat algoritms for processing the HR Variability data, detecting so training stress, lactate threshold, VO₂, and other variables. That happens live in real-time, and the data is not being saved and transferred to Strava and/or to Training Peaks, so all that they can use is the time, speed, cadence, and HR, but they cannot use the most important clue - the HR Variability, hence by principle their calculation is based on less relevant data, and is more approximative.

Are you sure HRV data isn't *saved* (to FIT files)?

I sync runalyze.com with my Garmin Connect account, and when I wear an HRM-RUN sensor, I see an HRV graph in runalyze.

Besides, many people train without a chest strap, so they don't get HRV data. So even if the Firstbeat algorithms can take advantage of HRV data, they can't completely rely on it. (VO2Max and training load are still calculated even when there is no HRV data -- i.e. when HR data comes from the optical sensor)

As you probably know, FirstBeat Training Load is based on EPOC.

https://www.firstbeatanalytics.com/en/features/training-load/

The Firstbeat Analytics engine transforms heartbeat data recorded during any workout into EPOC values. EPOC values accumulated during each training session over a rolling 7-day are tallied and used to provide a new perspective into the restorative and adaptive work your body is doing in response to training.

Here's an EPOC whitepaper:

https://assets.firstbeat.com/firstbeat/uploads/2015/10/white_paper_epoc.pdf

R-R Intervals (HR variability) are part of of the algorithm, but there's got to be a version of the algorithm which doesn't need that data. (Otherwise how do I get a training load when training only with the wrist-based optical HR sensor?) Contrast with lactate threshold estimation, which absolutely requires a chest strap.

WillNorthYork said:

Are you sure HRV data isn't *saved* (to FIT files)?

On most models it is indeed not saved with the data. I believe only Fenix 6 (and perhaps some other newer models) have the possibility to save the HRV data, but the question is whether Strava and TP use the HRV at all. The algorithms are patented by Firstbeat, who is now owned by Garmin.

No, my heart rate measurement was perfect for the activities in my example. I'm aware that the Garmin wristband only works in a very narrow range of activities. So, I have a Polar arm band HR which bluetooths to my Fenix 6. Even this arm band can get it wrong during certain circumstances but then the error is obvious to me since I track my HR on a regular basis and know where it should be and can quickly measure it either at my neck or my wrist. Also, I've been an athlete for decades so my perception of training load and onset of overtraining is highly attuned. All three algorithms are simplistic. It's just that Garmin lacks the configurability to make it useful at all. Muscular load is just as relevant as cardiovascular load and the proportions of those loads vary radically by activity.

stennican said:

I have a Polar arm band HR

The question is whether your Polar HRM supports the HRV and whether it sends the HRV data to Garmin in a compatible format.

stennican said:

Muscular load is just as relevant as cardiovascular load and the proportions of those loads vary radically by activity.

I am not aware of any customer grade device able to measure selective muscular load. As far as I know, all they just use the cardiovascular load (HR & HRV) and some of them also breathing data (SPO₂). I do not think that any of them have any possibility to measure how much certain muscle groups get the load, and even less they can differentiate between individual muscles.