Productive = worse fitness quantifiers?

Question

I currently one of the most striking examples of inconsistency in Garmin feedback. After a rather inconsistent period of exercise, where I switched the style of my training, then had it interrupted considerably by a virus, I see the biggest block of green I have ever seen in the Garmin training status. Basically it's 3 solid weeks of "Productive" green, when with following a good training program I only occasionally see any!

The problem is that during this period my fitness has fallen. All race predictors have got worse. VO2 max figures have slid a little each week.

So is getting less fit and having worse race predictions what Garmin defines as "Productive"? What is the point in statistics that make no sense? Or am I missing something?

trux · Accepted Answer

You did not show your HRV status for that period, but I believe that the Training Status remains on the 'productive' level because of it. It looks like it is the primary factor here. Garmin tells in the article at Training Status | Garmin Technology the following:

Productive 
 Your fitness is generally increasing because of effective training efforts. If you aren&rsquo;t running or cycling regularly, your training may still be considered productive if your HRV status remains balanced during heavier training periods.

After the period of illness, your HRV may be improving, hence the training is considered productive, despite a light decrease of VO2max. And according to Firstbeat (the provider of the algorithms) in the article at Training Status: the Balance of Training for an Individual Athlete , the Training Status is more about the balance between Acute Training Load and Recovery, than about the immediate performance. They do not mention VO2max, or performance level at all. On the other hand, this article may be outdated (I do not see the publishing date), and since the overtake by Garmin, the methodology might have changed slightly.

Productive = worse fitness quantifiers?

Top Replies

All Replies