Training Status - Unproductive

If you really want to delve into all the stats and science you'd need to sign up and use Firstbeat Sports software which is free to trial for 10 days and then super expensive.
You will have seen in one of the other training load threads that one such user has that information and doesn't understand how Garmin comes up with it's number. But he doesn't touch on the fact that although the number is hard to calculate based on his Firstbeat information it still "makes sense" based on his activities.

Without seeing all your activity it's hard to make any definitive statement, but Garmin classes an Unproductive status as "Your training load is at a good level but your fitness is decreasing" and then goes on to explain that this is likely because you may be struggling to get enough rest and recovery.
What does the recovery advisor say after your exercise, and are you following that?
Another thing you could try if you have a chest strap is to do the HRV Test before each activity and gauge your "Stress Level". If this is really high (I think it takes a few readings before it starts giving anything other than 0 stress) then that would also indicate you need to rest and that any training you do will be unproductive.

Hope this helps!

This run looks really unproductive.

High heart rate at low speed. The average is low because of the walk in the beginning (Why record the walk as a run?).

You did stoped 2 times? Try enabling auto pause, or pause it yourself. It does affect the results, I guess.

Also, avoid using Math Max HR. Use Lab Tested Max HR or use your LTHR.

And first off all, You should try building and aerobic base first (Pass some time on Z2).

You can sign up for a trial of Firstbeat Sports individual software if you want to get into the nitty gritty details. One other person has a thread here about delving into the details of EPOC Peak etc and how he doesn't understand how Garmin come up with their training load number. But he kind of misses the point that regardless of what "633" might mean it still looked like he was in the right training zone. So using Firstbeat may not help your understanding all that much.

Garmin defines an Unproductive training status as "Your training load is at a good level, but your fitness is decreasing" and then goes on to explain that this is likely due to not getting enough recovery and rest.
Without seeing your other activities it's hard to say anything with any certainty, but there would be a couple of things you could do to check if this is accurate.

First thing - you have a chest strap, so try taking the HRV Stress test before your exercise and build this information up. It usually gives you a 0 result the first few times as the watch calibrates but eventually it'll give you sensible scores. If you are consistently getting high numbers on this then that would indicate your body is under duress and working out at that point is unlikely to produce much benefit.
In line with this - what recovery times is the watch giving you after your exercise, and are you following those? You mention dropping out of the "optimal" zone while resting but was this in line with the recovery advisor?

Lastly - yes HIIT workouts etc count towards your training load. About 75% of my training is HIIT gym work, and the watch still gives me a decent guidance for training status.

Some Context
I realize that there are multiple threads on this topic already and I have done my best to review all of them.
I have also given the watch 5 weeks of time to calibrate itself.
I have downloaded and read the whitepapers from FirstBeat that discuss and explain VO2max estimation, EPOC development and then how they estimate Training Effect.
I have read a few other white papers as well on this topic. I am not sure I really understand yet how Training Load is calculated.

I have seen the charts in those whitepapers that explain the build up of EPOC and its relationship to % of VO2Max.
Example, a 15 min run at 90% of VO2max can develop a 130 units of EPOC. The same 15 min run at 70% of VO2Max will develop only 45 units of EPOC. Assuming you ended the workout at that point, your Peak EPOC will be those very numbers. I correlated this understanding with my EPOC numbers from prior workouts with a Suunto watch (where Movescount actually tells you the actual EPOC values for the workout, including the peak EPOC reached) and they align.

I have also seen the chart where EPOC and Activity Class are used collectively to predict TE. Example, activity class 6, and Peak EPOC 50 results in a TE of 3.0
This also got me to recognize that Acivity Class played a role in TE determination. I checked on what activity class I had setup in my user profile. I read up on the table (in one of those white papers) that classifies teh activity classes and explains what each of them mean. I picked the one that matched my activity level.

VO2Max from the watch (although mostly unchanged over 5 weeks) seems to be correct and matches up my prior Suunto numbers, as well the 1.5 mile test, and the Rockport test.

I use the bundled HRM chest strap that came with the watch each time I workout.

The issue I am having
Regardless of type of workout, or intensity, I never see any other status on the watch other than "unproductive". This is over 5 weeks.
Here is an example run that I performed yesterday morning (there are several other runs prior to this one, but similar).
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1767866806

Some other info
I am unable to conclude whether the strength workouts or my gym HIIT workouts matter to this discussion, but I have several of those too.
Training Load has been in the green all along (with the exception of a few days when I was traveling and let Load drop to LOW - intentionally did not workout believing that the Load may be the reason that the status isnt changing).

Also want to clarify - I am not complaining nor am I trying to find fault with the watch. I am really only concerned that I may be overdoing the workout in trying to achieve a certain Training Effect (my goal 3.0) atleast 2 times a week. The times I have reached a 3.0, I have felt that it has left me somewhat sore - over and beyond what my trainer used to put me through.
-------------------

What am I missing or doing wrong? It cant be that every workout over 5 weeks is unproductive, especially with -
a) Load optimal,
b) Recovery Advisor reading 0 hours before I began my workout,
c) HRMax as detected by the watch being equal to the 208 - (0.7 * age) value.
d) a good RHR
e) adequate sleep as measured by the watch 24/7 for 3 weeks
-------------------

I don't know of a way to get my Peak EPOC value for a workout from the FIT file. It may help me if I knew that number because i could use that as an indicator. The only way I am able to estimate my EPOC is from the chart in the white paper by using time and the "% of VO2Max" I am running at. I am thinking that the EPOC number on the vertical axis will represent peak EPOC reached, i.e. 50 units for a 15 min run at 70% VO2max.

Your help will be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

CPJ

One of the things that I noticed in your posted run is a quite significant drop-off in your performance condition towards the end of your run. I am wondering whether the software is seeing this this fatigue, and interpreting it as overtraining and therefore unproductive?

It is also worth noting that while Suunto presents a single TE number, Garmin breaks this down into an Aerobic and an Anaerobic TE, so the numbers won't be directly comparable between the Suunto and Garmin universes.

Another issue is that autodetect may be leading your watch into underestimating your Max HR, and therefore it may think you are working out harder than you actually are. Very few people hit their max HR's because a. it hurts, and b. it's not particularly effective training. If you know your true MaxHR, enter that. Otherwise you may want to do a self-administered MaxHR test - you only need to do this once, and you are then good to go for a couple of years.

Another thing to consider is that VO2 max on the F5 is affected by efficiency.
As a marathoner, I'm very efficient in the aerobic range. If I only do easy runs for a few days, typically my VO2 goes up by 1 or 2 and often it results in "peaking".
Conversely, racing and interval training drag it down again and I often end up with "unproductive", despite it being the opposite in reality.
Also, as most of my runs are easy, VO2 on the F5 is always higher (63-65) than what I had measured by metabolic cart (61) 1.5 months ago.

The F5's VO2 will, like your heart rate, also be affected by temperatures. If it's hot and humid, your heart rate will be higher at given speed and VO2 will likewise result in lower values, so realistic for a race in your climate or those conditions.

VO2max - Maximal Oxygen Uptake, It does not decide on aerobic training.
From the humidity and temperature do not depend Fenix, but you. (аnd this is individual).

VO2max from 61 to 65 for 1.5 months in real terms.

I wasn't talking about real measured VO2 max, but of VO2 max calculated by Garmin. I think you missed that somehow.
VO2 max calculation on the F5 is based on an extrapolation curve by Firstbeat of given heart rate at given speed (and given max. heart rate) and it will take data from whatever run you feed it, provided that data is within acceptable range. Even very slow runs.

VO2max - Maximal Oxygen Uptake, It does not decide on aerobic training.

Well, actually it does. One of the best ways to improve VO2max is steady state aerobic training.

Note also that VO2max should not be viewed as a daily training metric. What you should be looking at is trends over periods of a couple of months following a period of training focussed on improving VO2max specifically.

Furthermore, does anyone really expect VO2max to keep on increasing? Rapid increases can be expected from untrained undertaking a programme of exercise. For long term athletes, changes will be smaller and the returns diminishing despite training. Once you've reached that plateau, performance benefits will only come from becoming more efficient, more economical.

To improve, yes. But you do not recognize your maximum until you reach this maximum ;)



Why not? If you train for two weeks below your laboratory maximum, the real one will also decrease.
Once measured shows your limit. The current values are the real limit at the moment.

In this case the issue you're having is the same most of us are having (including me) but haven't been able to articulate: the watch is spitting out numbers but isn't really designating where on your spectrum it is.

For example, take the vo2 max measurement, the number it gives back is just the number, it doesn't do anything unless you move up. If you do another run, at most it might tell you (on the watch) the same number. There is zero context for any of the info, it tells you numbers and that's about it. Same goes for LTHR and every other number from workout to workout, run to run. If the watch just confirmed things in simple language (ex:your vo2 max score has not changed since your last run, but you've maintained your score, or: your vo2 max has decreased because 'insert reasons here').

Context, this is the point. If the watch would have confirmed what it thinks is your max (and not with just a semi-arbitrary number alone) most of the issues people have with their information would go away. You'd have a confirmation of sorts, a bannister to lean on. Instead Garmin elected to stick to numbers alone and hope the user base "gets it." Their watches and software need a hand-holding option for users (or simply just some user context info that can be turned on and off). At least then most people (including me sometimes) can get back SOME reasons why their training load went up so much or why their ae/ana TE is what it is in the moment and for the week/month/year etc...A lot of this can somewhat be found within the app or the website....but i'm wearing the watch all the time, something there makes more sense than fishing around for information outside of this. Doesn't have to be elaborate, just textual information in the moment, done.

EPOC, VO2Max , TE and HR - Part 1

Thanks to all of you who responded. Sincerely appreciate it.
I have noted your comments and inputs. Will a few things differently and see what results from it.
Having run a few half marathons, it pretty disappointing to know that all of my workouts are unproductive, but as some of you have indicated, that may very well be true and I may need to make some changes.

In the meantime, I did perform one experiment yesterday to understanding the working of the watch.
[Note: All charts/graphs below are the work and property of the original authors. I am using them as is below because it helps with this dicussion. I do not claim any authorship for the work]

I took a sample workout from one of FirstBeat’s whitepapers and decided to perform it to see if I got similar EPOC/TE numbers (See Chart 1 below)
I performed the first 34-35 minutes of the workout.
There are 4 specific time periods in the 34-35 minutes.
a) Time period 1 – Minute 0 to Minute 12 (approximation) – Warm up, light jog
b) Time period 2 – Minute 13 to Minute 14 (approximation) – Slow down/Stretch
c) Time period 3 – Minute 15 to Minute 22 (approximation) – Easy running – Goal TE 2.3
d) Time period 4 – Minute 23 to Minute 34 (approximation) – Continued Easy Running – Goal TE 3.0

My goal was to achieve (a) the 2.3 TE by Minute 24-25 (approximation indicated on the chart below) and (b) 3.0 TE by Minute 34-35 (again, approximation indicated on chart).

Chart 1 provides EPOC against Time. It also provides additional info on TE in the text above the line.
The chart indicates an EPOC level of 29 or 30 units by Minute 22 (once again, an approximation)
It further indicates an EPOC level of 60 units by Minute 34 (approximation)

Chart 1:
" />">

The Chart 1 data does not tell us what the Activity Class of the individual performing that workout. Hence I used Chart 2 below (TE Approximation EPOC versus Activity Class). This chart is also from another FirstBeat whitepaper.
Plotting the EPOC values from Chart 1 on Chart 2 (below) allows us to determine the activity class of the individual.
Plotting 30 against TE 2.3 provides us with an activity class of 6.
Plotting 60 against TE 3.0 also validates the activity class to be 6.
My activity class is also at 6, which helps with this experiment.

Chart 2:
" />">

Hence, we now have –
a) EPOC levels to be achieved
b) Time (mins) to achieve those EPOC levels
c) Activity class

Finally, in order to perform the run, I needed HR that I would need to maintain for those 4 time periods (defined earlier).
I used Chart 3 (from another FirstBeat whitepaper) to get my target HR numbers.

Chart 3 below maps EPOC levels to % of VO2Max [Note: to VO2Max NOT HRMax.] [Note 2: VO2 and HR are correlated but do not vary 1:1]
There are calculators online that help perform the conversion.

For Time period 1: I just warmed up at low HRs.
For Time period 3: To achieve EPOC 29 units @ Time 22 minutes: will require maintaining 58%-60% of VO2max.
Total EPOC achieved by Time 34 minutes was 60. Hence I need to generate an additional EPOC of 30 units in the remaining 12-13 mins.
For time period 4: To achieve additional EPOC 30 units @ Time 34 minutes: will require maintaining 65% of VO2max

Note: I could have run the whole 34 minutes at 62%-63% but I really wanted to validate if I could achieve 2.3 at time 22 minutes. Hence didn’t want to run at a higher HR earlier and skew the results.

Convert % off Vo2max to % of HRmax
58%-60% VO2Max = 74%-75% HRmax
65% VO2max = 79% HRmax

Hence I now had my target HR numbers (bpm) for each time period and followed it diligently.
My recover advisor was 0 hours. My HRV Stress score was low.

Chart 3:
" />">

Chart 4 (below) indicate my pace and HR for the various time periods.
Ignore all activity after time (40 mins, approx) because I was reviewing the numbers and then began a cool down walk.
The variability you see in those charts is because I have always found it somewhat hard to run to a HR number and I have a tendency to speed up.

Chart 4:
" />">

NOTE: The maximum images this forum allows per post is 4. Hence I will write another post to complete the observations.

To be continued...

CPJ