Change of Heart rate zone type: Influence on Training Load / Training Effect (cont'd)

Well, the exact algorithm Garmin (or Firstbeat) uses was not published, as far as I know, but from the tids and bits that you can find in the available documentation, it looks like the algorithm does not really rely on the HR Zones that much, and rather is trying to detect your LT with the help of the Respiratory Rate (it means through the HRV). Now, there is a question whether it is the case also without a HRM chest strap, because the HRV detection is not really that accurate with the wrist HRM, especially when you move. I am afraid nobody will tell you here - users do not know it, and Garmin will not disclose any other details than already patented and published in an official document.

Thx for the reaction.

(1)

I am not curious the exact algorithms at all, I just wanted to know that my custom usage of Z1 low barrier and Z2 low barrier for moderate and vigorous intensity minutes, respectively, does not interfere anything else in the Firstbeat realm.

As I wrote I was following the CDC guidelines (64% of maxHR <=moderate <=76% of MHR, and vigorous >=77% of MHR), that is I simply put these two calculated values as low barrier of Z1 and Z2, respectively, certainly different for running, cycling and other HR zones.

These values are not fully inline with the traditional thresholds of warm up and easy zones. In other words not fully inline with low aerobic range (Z1+Z2 or just Z2, who knows) calculated by any of the three basic HR zone methods offered by Garmin. So it is the reason why I started to wonder about it.

(2)

And I use not “of %MRR” method, but “of %LT” method. The reason behind is not any real use of the LT approach for Z3, Z4 and Z5 either, but simply to have a place where I can check any time both cycling LT and running LT in GCM, which was earlier mixed up chaotically in LT of performance tab.

Note: in the latest version of GCM IOS it was not fixed, this menu item of Perfomance tab was simply renamed from “LT”  to “Running LT”, but when one gets a new cycling LT HR as I did today, “Running LT” still shows this cycling LT  HR value. Long siiigh!

I just hope that this error in GCM has nothing to do with the LT values used for the algorithms by the watches. Which is likely, because in HR zones I always see both LT HR values correctly.

Tisztul_A_Visztula said:

I just wanted to know that my custom usage of Z1 low barrier and Z2 low barrier for moderate and vigorous intensity minutes, respectively, does not interfere anything else in the Firstbeat realm.

Not directly, but of course indirectly. As you change your heart rate zones and you target them, the resulting HR, HRV and pace dynamics will obviously be different and that will impact all your TE metrics. But to be clear, this is an indirect impact.

The only data that directly influence the accuracy of your VO2 Max and TE metrics are your HR Max, weight, age, Rest HR, HR/HRV/Pace accuracy during the workouts (altitude and local temp records are also taken into account).

Tisztul_A_Visztula said:

Etupes25 said:

that directly influence the accuracy of your VO2 Max and TE metrics are

Just to make it clear, you  did not add Training Load, but you did mean it, too, didnt you?

Still hoping for a relief for mankind. :-)

EDIT:

Btw is it a mere error ""Your Garmin device will report the most accurate Training Effect when your maximum heart rate and your heart rate zones are configured correctly." ???

See support.garmin.com/.../

Tisztul_A_Visztula said:

Just to make it clear, you  did not add Training Load, but you did mean it, too, didnt you?

Yes, including Training Load (a derivative of EPOC)

Tisztul_A_Visztula said:

Btw is it a mere error ""Your Garmin device will report the most accurate Training Effect when your maximum heart rate and your heart rate zones are configured correctly."

Yes, this is puzzling. Another member pointed to that as well a few days ago and I found contradictory articles about this the same day, but I can't find them again...

I have been trying different heart rate zones systems and fine tuning but kept training on pace and power. I didn't see any impact on the metrics.

Going back to Stephen Seiler 3-zones 80/20 approach, I ended up keeping the standard %HR Max zones. It seems to be good enough to match expectations from easy to VO2 Max.

The way I take it is that if your HR Max and your heart rate zones are not properly configured, you end up having a TE that doesn't match your effort, and you think that it is the TE that is not accurate.

I found that contradictory article, finally:

"SETTING UP YOUR PERSONAL HEART RATE ZONES

Several widely used methods exist for personalizing your heart rate zones. Setting up your heart rate zones based on percentages of your maximum heart rate (%HRmax) is the most common way. Other common methods when used with compatible devices include heart rate zones as a percentage of heart rate reserve (%HRR) and factoring in your lactate threshold heart rate (%LTHR) into the mix. Each of these methods uses your maximum heart rate as a key reference.

Which method is best for you? It really depends on a combination of what you are familiar with and the resources you use for training advice. One benefit of heart rate zone training is that it allows you to follow training programs and execute workouts at the recommended intensity. Customizing your zones according to %HRmax or following a program designed with %HRR zones in mind means you will be slightly underdoing it, especially during lower-intensity segments.

How you configure your personal heart rate zones does not impact advanced performance metrics such as VO2 max, training status, training load, load focus, or aerobic and anaerobic training effect feedback available on compatible Garmin devices. Overestimating or underestimating your maximum heart rate can, however, affect the reliability of these metrics."

www.garmin.com/.../

Thanks for the quotes, Etupes25!

Personally, I think the first article telling that it is important to have the HR Zones set up properly is to certain extent right, too. Although the zones are (probably) not directly used for the calculation of all the metrics, if you have the zones defined inappropriately, and try adapting your training to them, you will end up with wrong effect, and in consequence it may have negative impact on the metrics.

Say, for example, you set the zones too high, and try to make Maffettone training in Z2, expecting low aerobic effect - in fact you may end up with high aerobic effect, and not profit from the Maffettone method at all.

So in fact both articles are right in certain sense. Setting the zones right is important in order to properly plan and execute the workouts. And in the same time it can still be true that the HR Zone are in no way taken in account for the calculation of the metrics. 

Etupes25 said:

and factoring in your lactate threshold heart rate (%LTHR) into the mix. Each of these methods uses your maximum heart rate as a key reference.

Well, indeed, this seems to be contradictory enough.

%LTHR method when topZ4=bottomZ5 is LTHR does NOT use maxHR as a key reference. It uses LTHR as a key reference.

The bolded part is clear.

The way how I train is different. As a preparation I focused on MHR tests, although I decreased its frequency since I am over 50. I switched off auto MHR detection which seems to wildly underestimate my MHR.

Besides I focused on LTHR data I got. And I compared LTHRrun and LTHRcycle provided either by a Fenix or an Edge to those defined in lactate measurement based lab tests. My LTHRrunBYgarmin is still close to LTHRrunBYlab achieved appr. a decade ago, although it started to decrease since I upgraded from F5+ to F6X :-), but interestingly my LTHRcycleBYgarmin is more thab 10 bpm lower to LTHRcycleBYlab, again  measured last time around 10 years ago.

Based on my perceptions, my LTHRrun may be correct, perhaps it is underestimated by 2-3 bpm, but not more, while my LTHRcycle more seems to be underestimated by 5-6 bpm, but at least 2-3 bpm.

Anyway having known that my MHR is correct for both sports, I simply follow how much load I am getting km by km while I am running and where I am in aerobic TE and anaerobic TE.  When cycling this sort of check is not constant, it is more sporadic.

The only part I miss during the activities is the breakdown of the load between low aerobic and high aerobic, but after lots of runs and rides I know where the threshold between them may be, when I get all the aerobic load as low aerobic load and when high aerobic load. And these thresholds, both for runs and rides, are very very close to the default pct of Z2 top based on %LTHR. Hmmm maybe also my LTHRcycle is correct, too???

Btw it is something that could be finetuned, I do not understand why there are no 3 TE numbers and 3 loads as data metrics. At least post-training you can see your loads divided as low aerobic and high aerobic, but why not realtime? Similarly with TE numbers. These are estimations anyway, not guaranteed results.

And also I cannot understand why you cannot get a confirmation that after a long run or ride you improved both your low aerobic capacity and your high aerobic? Why do these two exclude each other?

If I stop the activity and start another one at once I can improve low aerobic and then high aerobic, or vice versa, but not without stopping, saving and restarting. It is another big, big contradiction. 

You can also cheat to increase your VO2max ...

---

How to gain 2 VO2max points effortlessly (and even up to 7 points) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbE-lO0lMqw