Related

Giving up on Garmin DSW / HM Training Plan - switching to Training Peaks and 8020 Plan

MatsR
1 month ago

I eventually gave up trying to follow Garmin DSW and purchased an 80/20 HM running plan and a premium subscription to TrainingPeaks.

Initially, during the autumn, my problem was that the watch overestimated my Lactate Threshold and Pace by a wide margin. I did a lab-test in October to get accurate data and set the LT HR to the lab value. But the pace seemed to be stuck on higher values and could not be changed. I was not able to complete LT runs at the DSW recommended pace while the lab tested pace was OK.

Eventually this resulted in overtraining and injuries. I backed off and started doing only Easy runs at around 80 - 85% of the lactate threshold. The trainings come back as close to zero training effect and "No benefit". Not very helpful.

I feel I can no longer trust any suggestions from the watch nor the training feedback. What I get back from TP in terms of running stress and fitness at least seems consistent with how I feel.

I bought my FR965 after 20 years with Polar. Initially I was very impressed. Today I am very disappointed.

I should maybe add that I have a 20 year background as a consultant in embedded SW development processes. I am very familiar with agile development. But what we seem to lack here is making better use of the beta tester feedback (I am a beta tester). And to postpone a quarterly release if the SW is not up to acceptable standards.

  • 0 1 month ago

    As it stands now FR965 is only reliable as a GPS device and a recorder of external heart rate monitor. Oh, and a time watch, of course. But I did not pay 500EUR for that. These functionalities are worth 100-150EUR at most. Anything above that is just a rip-off and a money-grab from Garmin. They will go out of fashion eventually. Existing Garmin users will not buy any more new devices seeing all the problems they have had with them. New users/buyers will be returning them to their retailers, because people want a device that simply works as advertised without having to have a degree in IT or some sort of software/hardware hacking background.

  • 0 1 month ago

    I’ll definitely agree that the training recommendations from Garmin are hit and miss.  Best I can say is that the training load calculations are in the vicinity of what you’ve done, but always listen to your body first.  And- I’m jealous that other people (meaning DC Rainmaker and nobody else), can seem to get accurate HR data while running and cycling from the OHR on the back.  I always always always need to use an external HR monitor.  Yes, even on an indoor bike.

    Just curious, having never used the paid for subscription to TP.  How does it assess the effects of sleep, stress, HRV and such on recovery?

  • 0 30 days ago in reply to morey000
    morey000 said:
    Just curious, having never used the paid for subscription to TP.  How does it assess the effects of sleep, stress, HRV and such on recovery?

    I do not think it does. I use 8020 pace based training and all sessions seems to be based off the LT pace without adjustment to you current level of recovery. But as Garmin seems to be all over the place with regard to running stress and recovery I am not sure I would trust that either.

    Here are my two latest runs and the Running Stress from the three source I have.

    Yesterday - 40 minute - Easy Run

    TP - 43

    Stryd - 34

    Garmin - 13

    Tuesday - 2x20 min at LT pace ...

    TP - 63

    Stryd - 58

    Garmin - 175

  • 0 30 days ago

    i agree completely. In the meanwhile for me the FR's function is primarily to collect the data from my Polar strap and to send it to other applications. If everything i hear abount the usage of the metrics is "listen to your body" and this listening says something different that the watch itself, i can directly switch to just listen to my body and ignoring the watch.

  • 0 30 days ago in reply to Woody

    Agree. I also use a Polar H10 and Stryd gives me a second source for instant pace and power. But being a data nerd I cannot help being frustrated when I see something I do not understand.

  • 0 30 days ago in reply to MatsR

    Another data point from today. Easy run at the low end of target pace. Heart rate - 39% in LT Zone 1, 52% in Zone 2

    Garmin - running stress: 0, Recovery time 0 Laughing

    Training peaks - running stress: 41

    Stryd . running stress: 31

  • 0 28 days ago in reply to MatsR

    yeah- those are very different training loads.  Clearly Garmin scores a LOT more training load for intensity.  I guess the right method is:  Look at the numbers for fun, then listen to your body.  

  • 0 28 days ago in reply to MatsR

    as a two-generation Stryd user, I can advise you to check whether you need a calibration factor, as it is possible that your actual pace will be different from what is shown on the watch (this is if you are training for pace and not running power). for me, the daily recommendations are quite adequate (both for running and for cycling). the lactate threshold and heart rate zones are also quite adequately determined (if you focus on the perception of the load).

  • 0 27 days ago

    100% agree

    If we keep posting here how much money Garmin wastes (though it's not clear in this case as in the Garmin ecosystem this would be free)

    I guess your next watch might not be an expensive Garmin or maybe won't be Garmin at all. Posting again then (and probably after every watch purchase forever,) will give them some indication

  • 0 25 days ago in reply to flocsy🤠

    I have actually been checking up Suunto and Coros. I do not min paying premium prices for a product like the FR965, but if the features that you pay premium for suddenly stops working properly I get angry.