Running Power

Hi,

This is not exactly a F5+ question but I didn’t know where to put it.

I really want to get into Running with Power but I’m undecided between the very expensive Stryd Pod or Garmin’s own Running Dynamics Pod.

More specifically, if I were to buy the Garmin one (which is reasonably priced) how can I calculate my target Power that I should mantain for a Marathon (during training and race)?

Stryd does this for you but no mention any where I’ve seen of Garmin doing this too, I need this target otherwise Power would be just another number on my watch screen.

Thank you.

0 dansebr over 6 years ago

Hi, thanks for the reply, Stryd won’t really let you do that unless you actually own their device (and why would they), I tried, I created an account and all.

I don’t really care that much for the pace from the pod, I’m ok with what I get from the F5+ gps, all I care about here is the power and the Garmin pod should give me that for almost a 3rd of the price of the Stryd, however I can’t find where to calculate my goal, I don’t want to pay for the stryd just to get this value.

I will keep looking.

On a similar note, have you really founded the Stryd and Power in general helpful to really improve your running endurance?

Thanks.

0 R_Tellis over 6 years ago

There's a sticky thread on Running Power in the FR935 forum. While I think it was initially intended for the Garmin CIQ app there's still some discussion of running with power in there.

As to your specific question there's no marathon target power built into the Running Power CIQ app so you would have to do a Critical Power Test that's outlined in several places across the web which would then give you an idea of what you're training and race power targets should be.

That said training and racing by power is kind of like training and racing by heart rate. It takes some time just recording the data while doing what you've been doing to get a feel for it before using it as your principle training guide.

0 lj50 over 6 years ago

Garmin’s way of working with Stryd is baffling IMO.

I have had the Stryd for a few months, been tracking using an Apple Watch and then exporting the fit file from Stryd PowerCentre and importing it into Garmin Connect. The analysis has been excellent, colour shading showing where my cadence, ground contact time, vertical oscillation, etc. Are good and bad; and helpful averages of all of those metrics in the summary.

My family were kind enough to buy me a 5+ for Christmas so I excitedly connected the Stryd to that and have been on a couple of runs... sure, the data comes through in the charts. But none of that insight, and the only averages are cadence and stride length.

It strikes me as utterly idiotic that I got better analysis from Garmin Connect using another company’s watch than I do using theirs. If I’m missing something, someone please tell me, but that’s just unfathomable to me.

To the OP, I’ve been using Peter’s Pacer in conjunction with Stryd data fields whilst running and I think that sort of does what you’re asking. Not elegant but works.

0 dansebr over 6 years ago

Thanks OnlyTwo R_Tellis and lj50 , I’ve now check the sticky on the FR935 forum and after a lot of obsesive browsing I went on and bought the damn Stryd :confused:
Nah I’m actually excited, can’t wait to try it.

Thanks again, also lj50 your family was “kind enough” to buy you a 5+ for chistmas! :eek: I’ve got a sweater !

0 lj50 over 6 years ago

Surely if anyone from Garmin reads that even they will think “that’s lunacy” and get it changed. They’re trying to sell hardware but giving users better analysis if they import data from other platforms instead of using Garmin’s hardware.
odsweng Something surely for the next update?

0 FlowState over 6 years ago

lj50 OnlyTwo If you write your own FIT file on your own platform (or a fairly open platform), you can put any data in there you want, including "real" native metrics. Any rando could write a Python script to create a FIT file with any data they want, and upload it to any platform they want.

If you use Garmin's platform (watches and cycling computers), they prevent 3rd-party apps from writing native metrics to FIT. 3rd-party apps literally cannot record what you want to see. There is a feature which allows 3rd-party apps to "emulate" native metrics, but the app/site that reads the FIT has to decide whether they will accept these "faux native metrics" in place of the real native metrics.

The funny thing is, most third party sites will display "faux native metrics" as if they were native, but Garmin Connect will not. GC will just show them as boring "developer fields", without all the nice coloring and integration with the rest of GC (like overall stats).

So until Garmin decides to change that, users and devs will continue to complain. I have a feeling this is deliberate, as it would allow devs to write apps which completely replace native features that Garmin charges for (like speed/distance from footpod, even with GPS enabled).

On the subject of running power, if anyone is interested in a full-screen running power data field with 6 fields, power zones, alerts and more, I'll just leave this here....

https://forums.garmin.com/forum/deve...wer-data-field

0 lj50 over 6 years ago

FlowState Funnily enough I used your data field for the first time today and I commend you on it, it’s excellent.

Your explanation makes sense in terms of what’s happening, but it really is quite a stupid and counter-productive implementation from Garmin. Their effort to sell an inferior footpod gives people a reason NOT to spend 3, 4 or 5 times that amount on their flagship devices.

I really would be fascinated to see a justification from Garmin here. It will be a shame if this is simply ignored.

0 FlowState over 6 years ago

lj50 Thanks! Glad you like it. Tell your running friends!

I don't think they'll justify it here, but I think my explanation covered all the bases.... It's more like they want to sell their expensive flagship devices, and they're not too worried about footpod sales, I think.

Your characterization could apply to a few things that Garmin does (from the customer's POV), but OTOH, I understand exactly why they do what they do. Their bread and butter is market segmentation, which is why there are dozens of watches (and six device tiers in Run Power >_<).

Anything that threatens their market segmentation has to be locked down. As a matter of fact, I was initially shocked that an app like dwMap was allowed to exist, as well as apps like Run Power which can directly connect to an ANT+ sensor, so you can connect to a power meter without buying a multisport watch.

But you'll notice that the native experience is always a bit better than the app experience. For example, if you don't have a power meter-enabled multisport watch, Run Power can't realistically let you search for your sensor and select it from a list, so you have to manually type in the ANT+ ID....

I used dwMap for a year, but after getting a watch with native navigation, I'll never go back....

I'll also point out that Apple Watch is the complete opposite. There's basically one hardware model, and you have to pay / subscribe to all your apps. Like FirstBeat metrics, which you pay for once with your Garmin devices, are a yearly subscription on AW.

I still prefer Garmin's way as a customer, as I can keep my current watch forever (ha).

As a dev I would probably prefer to have one hardware model tho.

0 lj50 over 6 years ago

And that’s great - and perfectly understandable- when they make the native feature better than the alternative, but in this case they’ve made it substantially WORSE. Its literally a reason not to buy a flagship device, that makes no business sense and threatens their market share substantially more than it protects it.

“use someone else’s device and our platform will provide useful analysis. Use our device and it won’t.”. There is simply no logic in that I’m afraid.

0 FlowState over 6 years ago

lj50, yeah the next step is to block importing of files not created by Garmin devices.... I don't think they care / expect you to use GC if you don't own a Garmin though. I'm sure most runners would prefer to use something like Strava or Smashrun by default. And if you like data, there's Runalyze.