Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

update to 8.2 increased Exercise Load significant

B@rt
over 3 years ago

here is a screenshot of 2 exactly identical interval training sessions only differnce is before and after the update(6-nov vs 6-jan).

it looks like these new calculated values are way to high.

also my VO2max value declined from 61 to 55.

in oktober i ran a marathon with a exercise load of 346, my speed is not changed when it is compared to my heartrate.

gave it some time(more than 3 weeks) to readjust to the new/changed algorithm but think there is something wrong.

what can i do to get this fixed?

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    VO2Max and Training Effect both look at effort as a % of HRMax as a key input. Unfortunately, one of the things that can get screwed up after a FW update is your HRMax datapoint (more so if you are using the LTHR zone setting method). As you are seeing problems in both metrics, I think this may be the issue.

    I'd suggest updating your HRMax in Garmin Connect. Don't just review it and say "that looks OK", but force an update by changing it to something else, then syncing the watch, then changing it back to the correct number and syncing again. Make sure you do this in Garmin Connect rather than than watch, otherise the incorrect data will be re-imported at the next sync.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to mcalista

    I agree 100% that this is a max HR issue.

    There are a variety of different formulas to predict Max HR, so your mileage may vary. The Tanaka formula is accurate for me based upon several races this year.

    HR-equations.jpg (860×358) (sweatscience.com)

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to ss29640

    Sadly there really are no equations/calculation for finding one persons maximum HR.  These are all different and produce different results.

    For me the Tanaka version produces a maximum HR of 180... my maximum is 195!  So if my watch was setup with 180, it would think I was in zone5, full gas, seeing red at a 175bpm... when really I am in reality just at 89% of maximum at a hard threshold/Tempo effort (especially if a hot day).  Really it looks like most of them produce the same result for someone age 40 (180).

    Best to just do a maximum HR intervals test, or run hard 5k in warm weather with a hard as hell finish sprint the last 50-100m.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to NickMN

    It's entirely possible that you fall far away from the central tendency of the distribution. When you measure your HR, are you using wrist optical or a quality chest strap HRM? I personally use the Polar H10.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to ss29640

    My wrist doesn't work well with the optical so I have always used a chest strap (Garmin HRM-Dual).  But my point is that a lot of people fall low or high of the average or mode.  To give that calculation a test... is very simple to do.  If you run 400-1000m intervals and see HR hitting 177-182 towards the end of each rep... clearly 180 isn't your max.  It would be smart to add 5-10bpm depending on your fitness (if super fit and train often it is very hard to get HR up in a regular workout)... and continue to asses.  If you hit 185 in a hard test but weren't seeing white/black and thinking you were dieing... maybe add 3-5 to that.

    Occasionally wear the DUAL and an older ANT+ only Garmin strap using the "Auxilary Heart Rate" connectIQ datafield which allows for an extra sensor (you don't pair it, it auto pairs), which is pretty cool.  Kind of nice in the winter when occasionally static/lackofsweat gives some weird readings.  Although with the HRM-Dual if you notice that the respiration rate drops out, usually the HRM strap isn't reading BPM well also.  Auxiliary Heart Rate FR945