Alway anaerobic shortage

Yes, I'm "trying", but not succeeding. And that's mainly because it's not clear what to do in order to "satisfy" the watch and to categorize my run as "High Aerobic". All I know from this sentence is that I can't improve my lactate threshold and VO2max, but there's no clue whatsoever what to do to improve them,,,

I do not know what you already tried, but for me doing a higher effort 5K - 10K run with HR in high aerobic mode (just under or around my threshold HR and pace), works well. And that's also what the chart suggests too

Well, that's a good point. Or 2 good points, because I don't run 5k or 10k pace (for longer than the intervals) unless I am in a race, and maybe my threshold is set incorrectly (it was set automatically by the watch though on my last race so it should not be much off IMHO)

flocsy🤠 said:

No, because from there I have no idea what to do in order to achieve more "high aerobic"

To achieve high aerobic, you need to be long enough in one of the 2 following zones

Approximately, based on typical zones

If this doesn't give you a high aerobic effect, then something is wrong with your LT data or your VO2 max model or a combination of both

Keep in mind that there are only 3 things that the watch is considering when calculating the training effect: the duration, repetition and the level of effort of intervals. Technically, the watch is evaluating the EPOC and parsing through your work and rest interval dynamics, evaluating your effort as a % of your VO2 Max data (HR and Pace).

Put it in yet another way, the watch is looking at the total effort accumulated in target zone during the workout, minus the recuperation during resting periods.

So the training effect is not directly influenced by your user settings (heart rate zones, power zones) except for your age, weight and HR Max.

By the way, it would be much clearer to have 3 datafields on Fenixes:

1. LowAeTE

2. HighAeTE

3. AnTE

If you spend substantial times in both low aerobic zones and high aerobic zones during an acitivity, in some way  the algorithm is increasing the TE of both low aerobic and high aerobic from 0.0 until 5.0. Otherwise it would be unable to split your Load among these zones/categories. My F5+ could not do that, but my F6X can do, so an aerobic TE could be split.

My problem is that you are said that you know real time what you are doing in terms of loading your body and how you are loading without checking your actual HR, the present HR zone number or the average HR of your activity. But in fact only some part of it elaborated, the algorithm does not disclose everything to you real time, just ex-post.

I mean that eg. in one specific moment your accumulated high aerobic TE is more/higher than low aerobic TE. Then it may happen that in 10-15 minutes low AeTE will be higher than  high AeTE. You know nothing about it during your activities, just know that the algorithm will give you aerobic TE. Either high or low, or usually both.

When you push the button to save there may be just a sort of accidental moment which aerobic TE is the relative winner, which system gets how much “award”.

I go further if the algorithm is brave enough to declare that the primary effect was on base, tempo, threshold or whatever, calling it as workout labels, then maybe there should be datafields to reflect each of these. You know like a gauge showing the whole range of labels and your actual position within this range. For example: you are right now around the border of "Base" and "Tempo", but stil in "Base". So you can increase your effort to push you over the border and make it sure that when you end your activity you will get "Tempo".

I mean either it is enough to know how much time you spent in different HR zones or if these workout labels give you more or more detailed information that this more or more detailed information should have known while you  were running, cycling etc.

I know that labels do not equal to zones/metabolic systems see https://www.firstbeatanalytics.com/en/features/workout-labels/, but as a whole I see some sort of contradiction regarding the depth of information you get here or there about the same thing. In other words either something is *** or valuable, but it should be showed in a consistent method.

Going back to the beginning of tihs post of mine:  Load is shown in 3 categories in GC and on your watch (ex-post, of course), low aerobic, high aerobic and anaerobic, but training effect exists just for 2 categories, aerobic and anaerobic. A bit strange, isn't it?

 NOTE: my post was edited, added, deleted and rephrased some of its content

Etupes25 said:

evaluating your effort as a % of your VO2 Max data (HR and Pace).

Btw how do you interpret/convert for yourself this sort of advices which can be found here: https://www.firstbeatanalytics.com/en/features/workout-labels/

“Speed training 10 x 50m x 150-200%VO2max / 3min“

”Extensive intervals 15 x 200m at 105-115%VO2max / 1min active jogging”

”Intensive intervals 8 x 1min at 120-130%VO2max / 4min”

You know your actual HR and actual pace, your HR zones, your LT HR, yourLT pace, your VO2max expressed in ml/kg/min.

And you have a watch on your wrist and advice to run at eg. 150% of your VO2max.

Can you convert it at all either to pace or HR ? And you just simply say that you try to keep a pace which is the maximum pace being sustainable for 50 m, 200 m or for 1 minute? 

I never understood how others can work with these advices, I just simply ignored any advice including a ratio of VO2max. Especially if the ratio is over 100%. When I had fresh lab results, I tried to calculate which HR equals to 75% or 90% of VO2max using the curves, but even this sub-VO2max assignment was not easy.

But I never understood how I could calculate  which HR or pace equals to 150% of my VO2max, because the latter is a maximum, so by definition there is impossible to achieve 110% or 150% of your VO2max in terms of ml/kg/min.

Maybe you can achieve 110% of the HR that you have at the very moment of achiving your VO2max, but I guess it is possible to achieve 150% of that HR where you achieve your VO2max only for very very untrained people.

So the last chance is to say that you may achieve 110% or 150% of the speed that you are at achieving your VO2max (91% or 67% in case of pace), but even in this case you should know your “VO2max speed/pace” which is typically unknown for watch users.

What did I miss?

EDIT:

It seems that my logical deduction was more or less correct, See https://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Fulltext/2001/01000/Energy_system_contribution_during_200__to_1500_m.24.aspx where the main message for me is the section titled  "Supramaximal" and this sentence from the Discussion: "The relative exercise intensity (....) of the 200, 400, 800, and 1500 m were 201, 151, 113, and 103%, respectively." .

So it seems that there is no universal conversion factor for X%*Vo2max in case of supramaximal anaerobic training (X>100).

And you can add more evidence like on slide 5 of http://ustfccca.org/assets/symposiums/2017/Franks-Houston-2017.pdf. So totally different numbers.

A lot depends on your max HR and heart rate zones. Maybe you can try to reset max HR and/or the zones. 

Depending on how my max HR is set, the same training ends up as high aerobic or low aerobic. If automatic max HR detection is on, max HR gets set quite high and it becomes hard to reach high aerobic and impossible to reach anaerobic.

If I don't wear the watch during sleeping, max HR estimation is (in my case) much lower, and it is hard to get low aerobic training results.

(I tested with 2 watches with the same software).

I forgot, are you wearing a chest HR strap? Can you have a look at the HRV logged during activities, for example in Runalyze?

What to look for in Runalyze HRV: the amount of noise in the R-R intervals plot. But as the amount of anomalies in your summary is very low, it is not a factor. In the past I noticed that the Fenix didn't do a great job when the data was very noisy (due to a worn out HR strap for example), and the R-R plot is the easiest place to see that.

Next thing you can check is your max HR setting and your heart rate zones. Do you have Auto Detect on for max heart rate? How did you set up HR zones?

Yes, I have Auto Detect Max HR. On the other hand my Running Heart Rate Zones are set to be based on % of LT.