for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Garmin

219 watchers

puzzler May 2020 8:16am, 27 May 2020 1,134 posts	0 puzzler My 645 predicts half in 1:19:38 and marathon in 2:46:25! If only.
chunkywizard May 2020 8:45am, 27 May 2020 7,927 posts	0 chunkywizard I think the 645 isnt using the same prediction firmware as the 245/945. The 645 was the first of the X45 devices to be released and so didnt get some of the enhancements.
larkim May 2020 11:16am, 27 May 2020 11,155 posts	0 larkim On a related note, does the Garmin-derived VO2Max figure report in Garmin connect or elsewhere after every run? Can be useful to track it if you are supplying the watch with good HR data. The visibility of VO2Max was disabled on my watch, but by uploading to RunAnalyze I can see that it is still being reported. It was a fairly haphazard series of numbers whilst I had problems with the HRM, but since I moved to one which doesn't glitch at all (Polar OH1+) tracking that VO2Max has appeared to be a credible report of how things are progressing. Might have to ask for it as a feature on here actually, as the only real reason I use RunAnalyse is to see that!!
Badger May 2020 11:32am, 27 May 2020 12,293 posts	0 Badger Connect only shows it rounded to the nearest integer, and only reports the most recent value and what it considers to be the weekly and monthly values (which IMS are the last values the watch came up with for each week and month). It's not displayed with individual runs. As you know if you're using Runalyze, the watch is actually storing the values to two decimal places, and its messages to you about improving or worsening when the number it displays stays the same are based on those decimal places (going from 51.49 to 50.51 it'll tell you you're losing fitness even though the value displayed is still 51). I assume that's meant to filter out fluctuations, and even with good HR data the numbers do vary depending on temperature, surface, hilliness & also as you go from not really reaching steady state, steady state, knackered with increasing distance.
Sigh May 2020 12:44pm, 27 May 2020 6,401 posts	0 Sigh Question: I've just checked my Garmin entries for Max HR. My user settings are Max HR of 184, which I think I got from a flat-out race finish a couple of years ago now. I've then looked on Garmin Reports, at "Running - Max Heart Rate" - my average max HR over the last 12 months is 181, the range across each month being a low Max HR of 174 in April 2020 and a high Max HR of 192 last September. Unfortunately I can't click through from the report to find the 192 to see if it was a spike or genuine. This year's Max HR from running (by month) have been 180, 185, 180, 174, 180. Based on that lot, should I change my Max HR or leave it as 184 as being 'close enough'?
larkim May 2020 12:48pm, 27 May 2020 11,159 posts	0 larkim With the caveat about weather / terrain / flattness etc, I'm quite keen now on keeping an eye on VO2Max - even if it isn't "right" as an estimate of my VO2Max, it's at least a consistent summary metric to keep on top of.
Gobi May 2020 12:51pm, 27 May 2020 69,797 posts	0 Gobi I'd drop it to 180, the 192 would be discounted as an outlier , the 174 balances out the 185
Gobi May 2020 12:54pm, 27 May 2020 69,798 posts	0 Gobi ps. I should have said I do a similar sort of tracking and have always dropped mine. I have trained on/around Heart Rate for many years. Larks et el - the VO2 max stuff is a guide for you so trending against it is fine. Having been tested properly my running VO2 came in some 8 points lower than the Garmin predicts
Sigh May 2020 12:56pm, 27 May 2020 6,402 posts	0 Sigh Thanks, Gobi.
larkim May 2020 12:59pm, 27 May 2020 11,160 posts	0 larkim That sounds about right Gobi - mine is being reported as in the high 58s at the moment, and even when I've been fit, yet on my knees at the end of a well paced 10k race I wouldn't be much above 55 on the tables, and a lab test could well be different again.