Training status explained

Nice, what i dont understand is the new 945 Load focus, where you have 3 bars for different intentisites, ok, but they have different size (i could understand it is based on my fitness...) but are moved between theme (not aligned), is this supossed to be the perfect load of time/type of exercise thing??

Thus, we would have to fill this gaps in that order and size? i never have this order and size 

The 1st bar is your anaerobic level. The 2nd aerobic high and the 3rd is aerobic low. The goal is to keep these balanced to provide better training.  If you press the start button on this screen, it will give you some insight if you're lacking in a certain area.  My data from my 935 was downloaded and I had a pretty good balance. I got my 945 May 2nd and then twisted my ankle. When I started running again, I took short slow runs for the first couple of weeks.  Needless to say, my anaerobic training dropped and it was suggested that I do a few interval runs to balance out my training. 

Yes. That’s also how I understand this. 

As I see it, it gives you a general approach to „balanced“ training. Which is good for some (more beginners etc) because most people work out it that sweet spot Zone (upper Z3, high aerobic) most of the time and don’t do the easy runs/rides or the proper intense Intervalls. So, now one can really see what type of work out one should do to stay balanced. 

But the problem is that for more competitive athletes there is not one balanced training. their focus changes throughout the year and their current phase of training. Clearly you want to focus on easy runs if you’re recovering, so forget about the suggested anaerobic workouts in that phase... etc.

So, if you want an easy approach try to hit the goal with all 3 intensities. 

If you train more complex, you should forget the balanced goals and focus on your current goals.

This is the right response. 

These devices are for guidance, not prescription.

Which most people don't differentiate when using it, which they expect it to. I altogether ignored Garmin's assessment from the beginning opting to watch the overall load vs. what Garmin thought I was or should be. 

As the above stated, it's fine for beginners or people looking to have a generally lower balance output in their lives. I mean without probing too deep, I'm assuming Garmin/Firstbeat's metric here is intended to skew to a lower/safer expectation for the gen pop, rather than to ram hard at massive gains (of any kind). 

MDus24 said:

If you train more complex, you should forget the balanced goals and focus on your current goals.

I agree to a certain extent.  The purpose of the 4 week Load Focus is to maintain balanced fitness.  I won't speculate that it was designed for beginners as this would assist intermediate and advanced athletes too.  Your watch doesn't know what level of athlete you are. The data is based on you and you alone, not what level you believe you are at, which I would add is speculative.  I also found in this case balanced doesn't necessarily mean 50% this and 50% that.  If the metrics detect a trend or plateau in your last 4 weeks of training, it will suggest other training types to help maintain balance of your current fitness level.  Of course if you're training for a certain goal or specific sport, your focus will be on just that.  For example, a sprinter will focus more on speed work and strengthening fast twitch muscle fibers.  But they wouldn't do only this for 4 weeks.  They'll have some easier days working in the aerobic zone, thus balancing their training.  As Phil already stated, it's for guidance and not prescription for maintaining fitness.  If you're training to meet a certain goal and that goal requires the majority of your training to be conducted a particular way, then by all means we should dismiss the data.  We all know are bodies and capabilities better than anyone else and we know what needs to be done to reach our goals.  But for maintaining our current fitness levels, I can see how the data and training recommendations can be useful, providing the data is correct.

2goBeyond said:

As the above stated, it's fine for beginners or people looking to have a generally lower balance output in their lives. I mean without probing too deep, I'm assuming Garmin/Firstbeat's metric here is intended to skew to a lower/safer expectation for the gen pop, rather than to ram hard at massive gains (of any kind). 

I'm a little confused by what you mean here.  Gains are what you put into it.  I can maintain my current fitness level with a balanced training schedule.  I can increase my fitness level (gains) by pushing myself harder when I train and still have a balanced training schedule.  Maintaining balance doesn't mean a lower expectation level.  A triathlete can make a 6 month training plan to prepare for his next event. He's not going to do 2 months of running, 2 months of cycling and 2 months of swimming. He's going to have a balanced training plan. Let's say his cycling is his weakest event. He can incorporate more cycling training in his plan to while maintaining balance and still see gains. Doing so wouldn't make him have less expectations with his running or swimming events just because his focus wasn't with cycling only wouldn't you agree? 

Good stuff here and in a few other posts in this thread. I would just add that conceptually it might be best to think of the "Balanced" state as a basic threshold rather than an ultimate goal, a good reminder (that some folks - at practically every level - desperately need) that you need to incorporate different types of efforts in your training to be effective.

There's a lot of range built into the amounts of TL accumulation that will result in a Balanced state, and there isn't anything 'wrong' (tm) with having a specific Focus, provided that you aren't well above your Optimal TL range. Keep in mind that a specific Focus, say High-intensity Aerobic, automatically means that you have met the minimal threshold contributions for the other two types of efforts (Low-intensity aerobic and Anaerobic in the High-intensity Aerobic example).