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

GAP slower than expected!

On a run with short intervals, I've noticed that the average GAP is slower than expected.

In the five 30 s intervals shown here:

  • three have (nett) ascent, but two of those have slower GAPs, and it's only the largest ascent that shows a faster GAP, as should be expected for all three;
  • one has no ascent or descent, but has a slower GAP; and
  • one has nett descent, and has a slower GAP, as should be expected. 
Time Distance Avg Pace Avg GAP Total Ascent Total Descent
00:30 0.12 04:06 04:17 1 0
00:30 0.11 04:27 04:32 3 0
00:30 0.12 04:01 04:36 0 2
00:30 0.12 04:01 04:16 0 0
00:30 0.11 04:44 04:26 5 0

 Looking at several other recent short interval runs, I see the same pattern...

Top Replies

All Replies

  • I uploaded a FIT file for a recent run to https://runalyze.com/tool/fit-viewer and I didn't see any fields which seemed to correspond to either "instant GAP" or a "GAP multiplier" for speed, for "record" (instant) entries. Didn't see anything related to GAP for "lap" or "session" entries either.

    It kinda says something that runalyze doesn't have the option to show Garmin GAP, either.

    I would guess that GAP is calculated on the fly but not recorded -- when we view it after the fact, it's also calculated.

  • OTOH, I just exported the same activity as GPX, reimported it, and changed the activity type to running. There was no grade adjusted pace. That could simply be a limitation by design (they want you to buy a Garmin device), or could it point to the fact that GAP is somewhere in the FIT file (or at least, there's some information in the FIT file that's necessary, such as enhanced_speed.)

    EDIT: same result with TCX (although the quality of the import was much better with TCX compared to GPX.)