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

Inconsistent feedback

Although I know I should take many of the feedback features with a grain of salt, I am still annoyed by the inconsistency of the different features. They really seem to be calculated completely independent from each other. For example, my Load Ratio is currently 1.2 and has been in the green for quite a while. Yet the Load Focus says "Your overall load is high, Try scaling down back....". Another example, a few days ago, the Load Focus said something like "too much light aerobic". Yet, the Endurance Score said something like "do more long workouts to improve your Endurance Score". What does the watch want me to do, do long workouts in the high aerobic zone?? That goes against all principles of endurance training.

I have this watch only four weeks, so I still give it the benefit of the doubt. Maybe it needs still more time to learn about my level. I hope that these inconsistencies will disappear after a while.

0 Etupes25 over 1 year ago

peterdb said:
For example, my Load Ratio is currently 1.2 and has been in the green for quite a while. Yet the Load Focus says "Your overall load is high, Try scaling down back....".

It is mathematically possible to have a controlled load ratio and a training load outside the green zone. If your training load was already highish in the first days of the 28-day chronic load, and then you have a recent workouts that put you outside the green training load range, you'd have a high numerator (acute load is over last 7 days) over a highish chronic load and your ratio is OK.

https://www.firstbeat.com/en/blog/interpreting-acute-vs-chronic-training-load-a-firstbeat-sports-feature/#:~:text=The%20'sweet%20spot'%20for%20load,of%20developed%20'fitness').

peterdb said:
Another example, a few days ago, the Load Focus said something like "too much light aerobic". Yet, the Endurance Score said something like "do more long workouts to improve your Endurance Score".

The endurance score has its own approach that favors long endurance efforts, so that athletes that max out their Vo2 max and FPT/VO2Max ratio have still an axe to grind :-). Of course, this might lead you to some "focus" on low aerobic in training focus.

Can you get a balanced training focus and a "superior" endurance score? Yes you can, but over time...

I am not a super fan of the training load green zone alone all by itself because it encourages you to increase volume virtually endlessly. The training ratio will avoid that you increase it too fast, but it will let you increase it endlessly as well. None of them will entice you to vary your weekly load, have recovery periods or other type of periodization. Only the suggested workouts will do it in in the preparation of a race.

However, keeping your training focus balanced is a good primary overall objective, provided you follow the recovery and/or readiness guidelines.

0 peterdb over 1 year ago

Update: finally, the inconsistencies in feedback and reporting have disappeared. It seems the watch really needs at least six weeks before the recommendations make somewhat sense. It would be nice if the watch would say that, just like it does for e.g. HRV and Hill score, where it shows data only after three weeks. Anyway, happy that most inconsistent feedback is gone!