Real life accuracy of training readiness.

I think training readiness is great on the 955. But it uses a lot of metrics from the watch. I am lucky not having any problems with them, so that gives me a reliable training readiness figure. I actually use it in my marathon preparation, sometimes I just delay a scheduled training to a day later. Or if the recovery is going faster, I schedule an extra training.

Here on the forum I read a lot of problems with one ore more metrics, so than I think training readiness is less good. But I am happy with it.

It's a fairly good aggregator of other statistics.The two that seem to affect it most are sleep quality score and recovery time. It's a reasonable indicator, alongside Body Battery (which is, essentially, linked to stress measurements only).

All I can say is that I have had useful runs when the TR score has been low (below 40) but they've been harder work than when it's been over 60. You don't have to take its advice, and it's not always right.

I probably wouldn't upgrade to the 265 if TR is the only thing that you want.

TR takes into account sleep score, recovery time, HRV status, acute load, sleep history, and stress history, all of which are things that the 255 can already track. From my experience, recovery time alone already tracks pretty well with my ability to perform a hard workout. Sleep score is sometimes unreliable because sleep zone detection isn't that accurate.

With the 255 you have access to glance folders so you could group all the TR metrics into a glance folder to see everything easily from one view.

At the end of the day, remember that your watch can't tell how you feel. It's important to listen to your body and understand when to push/hold back, regardless of what the watch is telling you.

se non lo fai per l'oled, lo sconsiglio assolutamente. tutti quei dati li trovo davvero irrilevanti. Nella mia esperienza sono inaffidabili. Terrei il 255 per tutta la vita. presto dirò cosa penso di garmin nei confronti di noi appassionati.

As mentioned above,  I personally wouldn't upgrade just for the training readiness (TR).  I'm not a good sleeper, and my lack of good sleep scores tends to zing my TR quite often.  If I had to wait for a good TR to train, I wouldn't be training too often.  That's just my experience, as I know everyone is different.  Never know, maybe it might work well for you.

I doubt I would change for that reason, it is just an agglomeration of other information. I certainly dont decide not to run based on that , but how my body feels. 

Also for interest see this post I am doing on the 265 based on my initial experiences

forums.garmin.com/.../1583630

i'm pretty sure all the metrics that go into training readiness are present on the 255, you just don't get the overall summary but can still use the inputs to make your own decision. it depends how much you want to have to think for yourself when you wake up and have to decide whether to run out the door or go back to sleep.

i find it generally gives a good indication of where i'm at - you can push through at low intensity a day past when it tells you to take a rest but any more than that and you're likely to pay for it. if it says you are good then generally you are, unless there are other factors at play it is unable to detect. 

i am however somewhat suspicious of all the status details on the watch since garmin can't handle timezones properly. being GMT+12, my activities show up as being a day ahead of when they actually were, similarly for stress. so each morning the watch seems to think i have already been for a run and had a high stress day!

given the number of bugs i have personally encountered with the latest gen forerunners, i would be hesitant to invest more money into them. the 265/965 are said to be based on the same software as the 255/955 so have all the same bugs (and probably some new ones too).

also consider whether the amoled screen is a good thing for your usecase - opinion seems divided on amoled for outdoor activities