Related
Options

Training recommendations & Training status

ccs-bonn
over 3 years ago

Hi,

I started to follow my watch's training recommendations, those that appear after selecting the activity (run in my case). After the activity the training effect ist quite close to what it should be (the recommendation comes with an expected training effect) - however the training status has gone to unproductive'

How can that be? Different teams working with different metrics :-)

Also, to be able to plan my day, it would be awesome if those training recommendations could be available on Connect or in the app, not just in the watch.

Any advice appreciated,
Christian

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    Garmin will make judgements about your training status based on your heart rate vs pace (or power on a bike). It will establish a performance baseline for you over time and monitor your performance against this baseline each time you train. 

    If your heart rate is higher than normal for a given pace /power the implication is that you are performing below par. It might simply be fatigue over the course of a long activity, which could be OK, but if you start off poorly and continue that way, or fall apart early then it suggests the activity is counter productive, VO2max dropping etc..

    You might perform the workout to spec and get the expected training effect, but your performance is judged on how your heart responded to the load. If you look at your Performance Condition data field during activity, or review the graph of this data after completion, you might gain some insight into why you have been marked down. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to eezytiger

    Thanks - that's clear and understood.

    However, I would expect, that the algorithms for workout recommendations, training effect and training status would be aligned if it all happens on the same device...

    So, my training status tells me, I need more anaerobic work. The workout recommendation suggests intervals with an anticipated training effect (anaerobic of 3.5) - great, what I want :-)

    Then I do the workout, the training effect is as expected (3.5 anaerobic) - so I would think I my performance was as expected - and so I would also expect my training status to reflect that.
    However the training status says 'unproductive' with decreasing fitness and stable load - that does not really make sense to me...

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    While Training Effect and VO2Max/Training Status are calculated at the end of a workout, you don't immediately get faster at the end of a workout. It takes time and recovery for the physical adaptations to training stress to occur.

    So you should only expect to see the benefits (as measured by VO2Max and Training Status) of following the training recommendations over a period of days/weeks AFTER your training.

    Not a matter a different teams different metrics, just a case of the body taking a while to respond to training. Which sucks in an instant gratification world.

    Agree if the training recommendations were more easily visible.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to mcalista

    Most probably that's it...

    What made me wonder is, before following the recommendations, my training status was seldom 'unproductive' - but as soon as I started, it went there.

    Some more documentation would also be nice, instead of leaving customers guessing...

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    About this topic I've 2 garmin watches with the training status feature.
    Looking to my training status report https://connect.garmin.com/modern/report/-1/running/last_four_weeks I'm checking that Garmin want I choose a watch.

    So.... is the training status calculated only by the watch?
    It would mean that an athlete uses more than one watch, it's training status will be never right... right?

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Merlinox
    Merlinox said:
    It would mean that an athlete uses more than one watch, it's training status will be never right... right?

    Enabling Physio True Up (on both devices) should share the Training Status between devices. 

    Not sure if it is strictly necessary, but I perform a sync with Garmin Connect before each run, to ensure that the watches share a common starting point. (Also helps to get a current weather forecast for the heat acclimation calculation).

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to mcalista

    Unfortunately I do not find this to be true. I returned my 6X last Friday for warranty exchange and have been using my 5X+ while I await replacement. Everything synced and True Up enabled on both. 

    Training status could not be more different. 

     

    The 5X+ knows nothing of my 6X history and thinks I've launched from zero to hero in four days instead of years. 

    It seems obsessed with my running VO2max, yet I have not run outdoors since last August. I cycle daily with a power meter. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to eezytiger

    In my case I needed to upload two corrupted fit files.

    1 - I downloaded them from my Enduro
    2 - I fixed it with https://www.fitfiletools.com/#/remover#view
    3 - I uploaded them into Garmin Connect (website)

    I tried from Garmin Connect to send them back to watch but nothing.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Merlinox

    I believe (guess) the problems arise from Gamin's implementation (licencing) of Firstbeat analysis on a per device basis instead of globally for the whole ecosystem.

    For this reason Garmin will not process (apply Firstbeat analysis) to files from secondary devices, even if they are Garmin devices. You will only get the metrics from the device that recorded them. Furthermore, I suspect that generational changes in the watches, their firmware and the FirstBeat versions installed within that firmware probably limit cross device compatibility and data exchange.

    Personally I think Garmin has made a mess of all this. Training load and status should be an attribute of an individual and their account, not separated on a device by device basis. Maybe in future this will change, since Garmin now owns Firstbeat, but I fear we are stuck with this stupidity. It is very poor data design.

    IMHO. :-)