Performance condition does not appear in trail running activity

Former Member
Former Member
I can see Performance Condition in running activity but not in trail running activity I added P.C. data field and there was no data displayng.
  • cristidan The figures for zones look way out - if you can really sustain zone 5 for 25 mins of your run that would be very impressive. It's difficult for me to compare with my trail runs as my 4/5 mile runs usually only have 150M of elevation gain. It would be interesting to see a post of one of your runs on the road without the steep climbs. My gut feel is that your HR zones are not correct - what is your MHR and how did you derive it ? As for anaerobic training effect I have never found that useful but maybe my interval sessions aren't hard enough!!
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 7 years ago
    I do not like to run on the road,I could not be fast enough for such a long time to get the same values that's why I can not have my real Lactate Threshold.

    With the formula 220-age .My MHR its182

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/2600604454

    Auto Detection feature is turned on Lactate Threshold -166bpm/4:07km, VO2max 56
    I have the heart rate zones based on BPM, Z4 146-163, Z5 164-maxim
  • So here's the question: if this is about heart rate vs. gradient and pace (and I do pace myself properly on the gradients) - then why is my performance condition going down during the runs back home (training status is the same for now)?
    There is something missing here.


    It’s well known (and confirmed by a firstbeat rep) that gradient is not taken into account for VO2Max and performance condition. As mentioned, in contrast, the Garmin running power field does take gradient into account.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 7 years ago
    OK well that's good to know. Means that VO2Max in my case will continue to go down as I run in significantly more hilly terrain here than when away - which is to me bizarre as one would assume that VO2Max should go up when running in more challenging terrain. Ah well never mind...
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 7 years ago
    It’s well known (and confirmed by a firstbeat rep) that gradient is not taken into account for VO2Max and performance condition. As mentioned, in contrast, the Garmin running power field does take gradient into account.


    When I read Firstbeats description of VO2max estimation (version 2.0, as used by Garmins most recent devices), my understanding is that elevation is taken into consideration.

    I enclosed a picture from Firstbeats site.


    ciq.forums.garmin.com/.../1334665.png
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 7 years ago
    OK well that's good to know. Means that VO2Max in my case will continue to go down as I run in significantly more hilly terrain here than when away - which is to me bizarre as one would assume that VO2Max should go up when running in more challenging terrain. Ah well never mind...


    I'm in the same situation but I do not think you need to worry, you just see on the watch that VO2max goes down but actually improves, the only way to check VO2Max for those who run on the hill is to make a lactate threshold test on a straight road from time to time.
    At least that's what I have understood so far from this post.
  • When I read Firstbeats description of VO2max estimation (version 2.0, as used by Garmins most recent devices), my understanding is that elevation is taken into consideration.

    I enclosed a picture from Firstbeats site.



    Hmm, that's an interesting image (although it's hard to read because when I click on it I get an image with a black or transparent background instead of white). Maybe it's just implying that data will be used when you go up and down hills, not that it will be corrected in any way. I noticed that the graph on the bottom only has speed and HR, for all of the scenarios (OK and filtered), so maybe it's only implying that it can guess you are going up or down a hill based on your higher or lower HR for a given pace. After all, it doesn't know that you're stopped a traffic light either, it can only infer that from your pace.

    However, based on my own personal experience, and several complaints in these forums for watches like 630 (which to be fair is not the latest) and Fenix 5/935, I don't think elevation is explicitly taken into account for performance condition/VO2Max estimation.

    e.g. From this very thread:
    I find this an interesting discussion. I have recently changed locale during holidays. My performance levels and VO2max went through the roof (6 points for Vo2 max in 10 days.)
    There are two differences: the runs were on almost zero elevation gain/loss ground (at home it is hilly), and in rural areas (home is in the city).
    Coming back, my VO2max is staying the same (but I expect it to drop any day now), and my performance condition is a disaster.


    From the FirstBeat rep who posts on these boards:
    Good point. Changes in elevation are taken into account, but how this is achieved is probably quite different from how one might assume. The intelligence or smartness, if you will, upon which the Firstbeat analytics engine benefits has quite a bit to do with the ability to segment data and recognize when incoming data streams are representative of your VO2max and when it isn't.


    I think here he's implying that elevation changes are taken into account not by looking at elevation per se, but by filtering out non-representative data (I assume by comparing HR/speed to what's normally seen).

    A) Yes, if you go for a 10k run that is all downhill... then, ceteris paribus, yes, I would expect you'll have a higher than usual positive (+) Performance Condition - certainly during the earlier parts of the race. You are running faster than normal with less effort. So that's the first part. You could expect to get a similar result if you were running with a strong tail wind. Upon several occasion I've, personally, seen a few points difference in Performance Condition between running into the wind or against it.

    How does this impact your VO2max? Well, that's a little trickier. Other than when you first start using your device, your VO2max calculation is never based entirely on a single run. So, unless you're always, only, running in downhill races (highly unlikely), your watch will likely recognize that particular as being non-representative and take that consideration into account as it looks to see if your fitness level has actually improved.


    There is the same implication that elevation data is not explicitly used to correct pace (any more than Firstbeat knows whether you are running with a tail wind or head wind).

    So my understanding is that elevation changes, as well as wind, road surface, bad HR data etc. are just some of the external factors that will cause non-representative data, which FirstBeat claims will be automatically ignored.

    If elevation were taken into consideration, it would be possible for FirstBeat to calculate a grade-adjusted pace (similar to Strava, and similar to Garmin's grade-adjusted Running Power), and use this corrected representative data to calculate a "grade-adjusted" VO2Max/Performance Condition.

    IOW, if elevation were taken into account, then nobody would complain about getting a poor Performance Condition when going up a steep hill at the beginning of a run (with their watch which has a barometer), and you wouldn't get an overly optimistic Performance Condition when running a downhill race. Your VO2Max wouldn't artificially skyrocket if you switch from hilly to flat runs, and it wouldn't crater if you do the opposite.

    Anyway, that's just my own understanding of the issue. Hopefully I'm not spreading misinformation.
  • cristidan - determining Max Heart Rate by 220 - age is VERY innaccurate and if you wish to use HR zones for training you need something much closer to your real max. Either go to a lab and get MHR and VO2 max tested or do a "Beep Test" on a treadmill - if you google it you should find enough info to help you do it. Just as an Example 220 - age for me gives Max of 158 whereas my true Max is about 185 so if I used 158 All my training would be in Zone 4 or 5!!!
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 7 years ago
    Impressive 62 years old and 185 MHR I didn't think it's possible.
  • cristidan - thanks but unfortunately MHR is largely out of our control and doesn't tend to be impacted by training (although there is much conflicting research). What does change is the ability to sustain excercise at a higher % of max heart rate - which at the moment with my recent lapses in training is quite poor for example at the moment I am running a 3 mile run at 8:08 pace with an average HR of 144 which is putting my training in zone 3

    If I look back 18 months to when I was training much more consistently and intensely then a 3 Mile race would be at an average of 163 and 6:31 pace but my MHR has not changed - at least not measurably