Let's hope for something as good as ZoneSense??

Thank you for the link to AlphaHRV-discussions. I've read all the 157 entries and all the 541 entries in the one year older (startingdate) submission at the same forum:

New AlphaHRV version (Oct 2022)
forum.intervals.icu/.../20966

The latter thread took me at least 4 hours to read since people with mathematics/statistics as occupation or interest posted extensively. But that thread is also a kind of must-read to understand what we see in the AlphaHRV CIQ datafield. No real documentation exists from the developers.

Before I summarize what I've learned from the postings I want to correct myself... The "DFA Alpha 1" datafield referenced above with the BLE connection, crazy LT2 Heart rate etc should read "AlphaHRV". The other datafield was a much, much simpler thing.

1) The confusing subject of ANT+ or BLE connections: In the thread you posted, one of the developers (Inigo_Tolosa) clarified it all. First in message 29 (just add /29 to the original url) where he talks about the technical side. Then in nr 49 about different user cases. Basically, if all we care about is the CIQ field, then both connections work equally well. Constriction is that if we choose ANT+ for the CIQ, then the Garmin device must use BLE to the HR strap, and vice versa. However, if we want the Garmin native RR-stream (HRV) written cleanly to the .fit file for later analyzing in external apps like Runalyze, Kubios etc, then Garmin should use BLE to the strap [First turn on in FR955 Menu -> System -> Data Recording -> Log HRV On | Off. Also: Frequency -> Every Second].

His own recommendation for AlphaHRV using ANT+ and Garmin BLE to the strap also seem to stem from the convenience of then having two clean recordings to compare when debugging problems or anomalies.

2) The AlphaHRV CIQ datafield is, from what I can tell, a logger without analyzing capabilities. It does not 'learn' from our previous sessions (except for the new option, training "Readiness"). We have to analyze curves and numbers in external software and find the thresholds ourselves. The developers have a private non-public computer program, but they have also published some kind of scripted pages for paying members of intervals.icu which draws more comprehensive curves with intersecting lines where 'things happen', so to speak. Using the RRa1 graph in the CIQ field during an exercise we can see (in very, very small font) some kind of curve in relation to Heart Rate. When the curve shoots diagonally upwards - 'hockey stick' handle - something has happened. But both Garmin and Runalyze show this RRa1 thingie over time (not along an HR axis). It is a curve going diagonally up, in a likewise unhelpful way as the Alpha1 curve is going down...

3) And speaking of Alpha1 while running: The second developer (Luisma_Gallego_Soy_P) has said in post nr 223 of the url I supplied that "The impact against the ground makes the measurement of dfa-alpha-1 not correct, you have to be careful with this measurement." In fact, he puts caveats at many places of that forum thread. Example: [Msg 19] "Thresholds are not calculated through Dfa-alpha-1 and even less with standard values of 0.75 and 0.5" And yet, those are the exact values put in as default in the CIQ Settings: "Threshold 1 (alpha-1) 0,75 Threshold 2 (alpha-1) 0,5". That is why people like me can see a screaming RED curve segment at 120 bpm with an a1 of 0.30 or so 10 minutes into an easy run! No wonder we deem the datafield crap (if we haven't read up on it). The 0.75/0.50 is mentioned several times in the thread as having been debunked, and still, the CIQ uses it as default...

Luisma has much higher regard for Respiratory Rate and correlation with Lactate [still Msg 19], but we have to find the rate ourselves. Settings have 0,0 for both VT1 and VT2. He says that any value put in for "VT1, VT2, FTP, VO2MAX, LT1/2, HR" [Msg 381] should be seen as "anchor" points for a moving target - even in the same session. In fact, reading all his comments at times led me to think "Then what use is there for your datafield!?"

Conclusion

I have now used the AlphaHRV datafield 4 consecutive days during a 20 minutes easy Out&Back run on rather level smooth terrain (asphalt, ca 22 meters Ascent/Descent) - recovering from a long sickness period, this is all I can manage. When the RRa1 graph throws up a 'hockey stick' handle at the same time as a1 in itself falls to the RED bottom numbers of 0.30 to 0.20 and my HR only is at 120-130 while the RespRate is at an even 40-46/min the whole session, this tells me that the datafield can be removed from my watch. I lack software to analyze curves and already know basic lactate thresholds.

Original text was too long. Here's closing paragraph:

But I have come around to the value of having an 'impartial' judge of effort and intensity in real time as a means of holding myself back while once again building up Aerobic Base. Therefore I ordered a Suunto Race S yesterday and look forward to using ZoneSense.

Thank you for the thorough analysis! I learnt a few key points in there, in particular about the connection type, the issues with the standard values and the challenges when running...

I tried to use the Kubios HRV software package to complement and refine the data analysis, but I found it too complicated. The identification of changes in correlation is an art, in particular when the data is so noisy to start with, and the results are not consistent from one ride to another. Or maybe I am not qualified enough...

In the end, I abandoned my quest for direct personalized measure of VT1. I am just using HR zones and train in low zone 2 for "VT1 proximity" objectives.

Sorry for the off-topic commment but:

soptunna said:

New AlphaHRV version (Oct 2022)
forum.intervals.icu/.../20966

As you are only using HRSS, you should see something like ConnectIQ(1/2) and have the oportunity to select one more IQ datafield.
But I would bet that you will see ConnectIQ(2/2) and no choice to select any one else.
Maybe, this activity profile is corrupted in some way. I suggest you remove it and create a new one from scratch

Garmin strikes again! The watch getting confused about how many CIQ fields are actually installed has been an ongoing problem since CIQ was first released (almost 10 years ago).

Also pretty depressing to see a thread on a modern forum platform with hundreds of replies spanning several years. It would be almost impossible to navigate such a thread on this forum platform :/

Art of correlation. Exactly. When you describe trying to use Kubios it conjures up an image of medieval flagellants whipping themselves bloody. That's why I'll go the ZoneSense way and just enjoy the analysis done for me in the background. With me as the subject. Not generalized. Not one fixed number. Like your VT1 proximity on steroids.

FlowState :-)) 

I'll try to remember... Getting the watch Tue 3/12. Rest of that week will be devoted to configurations, reading ducumentation and web-postings about best practice asf. I usually read extensively before I use any hardware.

Others have of course used it and posted about the experience on forum.suunto.com and in the reddit /r/Suunto area. Those I will try to avoid so as not to influence my own immediate reactions. Though, I do know that the algos will establish a baseline in ZoneSense, which will take perhaps a week of activities... Not sure about the exact timeline since I have not read the exact instructions.

That´s OK, I'll remind you if necessary :-). Enjoy Your new watch!

Hi soptunna, any first impressions?

The Suunto Race S arrived early on Saturday 30/11 and initial reading/configuration was done before day's end. There was one snafu however, concerning firmwares. On watch menu claimed "Watch is up to date" [FW 2.35.36 from Aug 7th; current _should_ be 2.37.48 from Oct 2nd], while the Suunto telephone App (SA henceforth) erred out with "Failed to check for updates" every single time I tried that path. Web search found other such cases where Support suggested the usual reboots and app uninstallments. One user even returned the watch for replacement... I decided to chill out and wait. Possibly Suunto servers were under strain, having weekend hickups or a newly registered watch needed a 'queue' period. 24 hours later there was no problems getting the new FW (though this was after my first run activity). Installment took ca 30 minutes writing from SA to the SRS and a further 10 minutes for the actual watch update. About the same time a Coros Pace 2 FW-update historically has taken, so I wasn't particularly nervous.

_Regarding Specific Thresholds_

Before we enter the ZoneSense dimension I feel it prudent to provide my Lactate experience, which I've written about previously in this forum. A couple of years ago I did the expensive treadmill run where they pricked a finger for blood and increased the pace every four minutes until both LT1 and LT2 were detected (similar to Aerobic and Anaerobic Threshold [AeT/AnT], VT1/VT2 etc - unless you talk to a real sports scientist). At the time the numbers were 147 and 163 bpm (my HRMax is 186; as actually seen). While waiting for the first threshold I kept asking: "Are we there yet?". "Nope", the test-person responded, until she suddenly said: "Now! You're at LT1" - and this was before she even had analysed the blood sample. Later I learned to hear and distinguish this very special breathing pattern myself; going from deep slow breaths to quick shallow ones. Though, for me and perhaps for everyone, there is a quirk. Having passed LT1 the breathing slows down again, but with a deeper breath than before. Repeat falling below and going over LT1 does not result in the original quick and shallow pattern. Depth becomes the main distinguishing character with a rather even frequency.

In the forum posting nine months ago (something like February 2024) I said: "148 bpm as LT1 is correct for the present date since I can hear a distinct change in my breathing pattern when running uphill and I cross that heart rate". A couple of months later [almost finished a 16 week HalfMarathon Level-2 plan by Brad Hudson; "Run Faster..." (2008)] the breathing indicated ca 149-150. Reduced training and illness has practically destroyed my conditioning since then (both 'Aerobic Base' and 'Aerobic Endurance') but surprisingly enough the LT1 still seems to remain at ear-suggested 149-150 bpm.

An old LT2 number detected by Garmin is 163 bpm (they put crossover Easy(Z2)/Aerobic(Z3) at 145). Similarly old one by Coros is 164 bpm (relevant aerobic crossover in their 6-zone system is auto-set at 148). Suntoo, finally, remains at HRMax-derived estimates. Initial age-based configuration (I am 64) set a max heart rate low enough to put me at AeT when getting out of bed and at AnT when reaching the bathroom - hyperbolically speaking. Naturally I changed HRMax to 186. Their AnT then increased to 162 bpm with AeT at 143. Not bad for guessing...