FR 945 accuracy of race time predictions

Are you using OHR or a chest HRM? I find OHR to be so suspect to "rubbish" that it tends to invalidate all these metrics. So say I did an easy run but the OHR thought I was near max (as has happened), the algorithm would then "rightly" assume I could only run that sort of time for that distance. Using an HRM then my current results are remarkably accurate. Best (both in July) of late 5K 17:57, 10K 37:37. Current predictions 17:52 and 37:41. I don't "feel" quite as fit now as I did then either...

OHR - but I keep saying there are two issues - one with wonky HR data which affects performance metrics.  However even if my HR lead to over reaching - I would think based on the paces that it would be showing improvement?

And the other is the performance race predictor - where i have set records like my 10k faster than the widget suggests - and btw the widget's race numbers change way too quickly. I realize that is driven partially by the Vo2 max given by the HR data.   But I've also had good HR data but bad metrics.   

I had suggested to Garmin that if you "beat" a prediction then the logical thing to do is to make that time your prediction even if the underlying algorithm suggests otherwise perhaps because of "confusing" or "poor" OHR data. Then again how long should that last until it reverts back to the algorithm to indicate your then current state.

It clearly is not perfect but way better than the previous algorithm which gave impossible predictions. When I got ill it correctly modelled that in the predictions and they improved as got back to fitness again. So, in that sense, it certainly seems to have some merit for me.

Another factor is your entered Max HR. Is that correct for you? Can you actually get close to it right now? I have found that it is a critical number to get more or less right - well unless you want flattering predictions.

So interestingly I wonder if garmin reset something remotely on my watch.  Lol now I'm really into it good. I say this bc my mile and km records went missing and so on my easy run my 8:00 mi and 5:00 km replaced what I had before (although my 5k, 10k, 1/2 and marathon records (all but 5k faster than predictions) were still there.

So besides this my VO2 max has 'climbed back' to 66 over the course of two days where it dropped to 62 and the fitness and predictors are now more in line.   I can't understand either how my "max" can go up and down 4 in a week but I guess that's part of the 'charm'.  

I'm having the same problem with my FR945.  Just did a relatively easy 10km training run (HR avg low 150s) and yet my predicted 10km time is still 2 minutes slower than what I just ran in the easy training run.  It makes no sense to be that much slower. It is probably a good 6-7 minutes off what I can run over 10kms so not even remotely close. 

I'm having the same problem with my FR945.  Just did a relatively easy 10km training run (HR avg low 150s) and yet my predicted 10km time is still 2 minutes slower than what I just ran in the easy training run.  It makes no sense to be that much slower. It is probably a good 6-7 minutes off what I can run over 10kms so not even remotely close. 

I want to bump this thread to comment on the continued absurdity of all this.  I recently got an external HR monitor (HRM)  so that has 'helped' a little - my VO2 max has increased from 59 to 64.  But the race paces are still terribly slow.

I ran an 8k in 25:59 the other day and part of that of course is 5k, which I covered in 15:55.    Of course race predictor says 16:51 and a very slow marathon time of 2:48.30. (I could run 2:40 when I was much slower at the 5K)   Granted I haven't done too many runs past 24kms lately but the RP should have some clue. 

Further it tells me my LT pace is like 4:11/km! What even is that?  I think this leads to my VO2 max/training load to be out of whack too...   Despite running a lot of 3:20 or faster kms lately my load for anaerobic is 259, my LT load is 1,921! and my aerobic is 1,059. 

I really don't think A) my LT is 4:11 lol - how can it think I can run a half at 1:18 like that? and B) If I'm spending a lot of time at paces way below that why do I not get credit for running anaerobically?  

All these things are as silly as can be.

And if I dare to run without the HRM and use the bad wrist monitor my VO2 max drops. Except for when I ran an easy run with a HR in the 120s and it said basically HR was too low to do any effort so it didn't count.    LOL WUT?