Garmin
214 watchers
Feb 2023
3:31pm, 15 Feb 2023
688 posts
|
Minimag
My Fenix 6 had trouble this morning, wouldnt sync with the phone. I rebooted the watch, and it did sync eventually, but lost my overnight heart rates. It has also been playing up a bit the last few days. I do have wifi enabled, will turn it off.
|
Feb 2023
3:33pm, 15 Feb 2023
40,489 posts
|
EvilPixie
Minimag mine had been playing up last few days too not aware of having wifi on |
|
Feb 2023
3:33pm, 15 Feb 2023
40,490 posts
|
EvilPixie
it was! so I turned it off :-D
|
Feb 2023
11:13am, 16 Feb 2023
20,240 posts
|
larkim
With VO2Max calc'd by the FirstBeat stuff on a Garmin, are the simple "prediction" tables on the older generation watches the same for men and women? My better half has had one of the watches that calc'd VO2Max in the background without displaying it for years, and now has a 45S which whilst it doesn't show it on the watch does report it on the desktop app for Connect. I was just curious as to whether a straight read across from something like the VDOT tables (which are pretty similar, if not quite identical, to the Garmin predictor tables) applied equally? e.g. I'm at about 54-55 at the moment so my watch is showing 18:48/39:01/1:26:18/3:00:04 which whilst pretty optimistic is at least in the right ballpark from where I've been when well trained. JD's VDOT tables would have 18:40/38:42/1:25:40/2:58:47 for 54 so again pretty close to the Garmin formulation. Hers is reporting 45-46, and the watch doesn't show "predictions". But reading across the JD VDOT table for 45 would give 21:50/45:16/1:40:20/3:28:26. Those are wildly out from anything that she looks like she can achieve (her current 5k best would be about 25:30, she ran a 10k a couple of months ago in 53:00). I wasn't sure whether the gap was due to a M/F discrepancy on the tables, or whether she is just super fit but has terrible economy!! But I've not seen any VO2Max tables which make a distinction between male and female numbers, other than ones which say that for a given level of fitness and age, men should have higher VO2Max due to physiology. |
|
Feb 2023
11:17am, 16 Feb 2023
20,241 posts
|
larkim
I'm aware that to a degree I'm misconflating VDOT with VO2Max - maybe because mine appear pretty well in line as far as the measurements I've ever seen.
|
Feb 2023
12:57pm, 16 Feb 2023
2,693 posts
|
Steve NordRunner
It's just that the number Garmin gives is in most cases somewhere from wildly to slightly optimistic. Also, VO2 max is by no means a perfect predictor of performance. If time predictions are needed it's better to try to do it from known race times. It's not that you need different tables for each sex. I get the feeling that newer watches are a bit less OTT. My current gen Epix has gradually converged towards reasonable time numbers that I know I can do for distances from mile to half-mara. But the Garmin VO2 max number is still probably optimistic compared with other sources. I tend to treat it in isolation, and use it to give me an idea of relative changes within its own little world, e.g., whether I'm gradually improving over a few months. |
|
Feb 2023
1:12pm, 16 Feb 2023
20,245 posts
|
larkim
Has anyone compiled the "old" tables that Garmin was obviously working from? As her watch doesn't actually do predictions, would be at least amusing to see what they did actually say. Obviously if she had a better watch she'd get the benefit of the better tuned predictions on the 245 and upwards. [Since my first posting above I've realised the error of my ways, in that VDOT from JD was definitely *not* VO2Max, but velocity at VO2Max and was therefore intended to be a personal measurement for the individual; whatever their VO2Max actually was, it was an expression of their velocity at that max, so inherently an efficiency measure. It's because mine are pretty similar absolute numbers that I've conflated them together (badly). ] |
Feb 2023
1:16pm, 16 Feb 2023
39,564 posts
|
SPR
Here you go: cicerunner.wordpress.com
|
|
Feb 2023
1:20pm, 16 Feb 2023
20,247 posts
|
larkim
Thanks SPR I knew I'd seen it somewhere in the past. That table then is somewhere between the two - at 45 it's a chunk slower than the VDOT tables but still quite a bit faster than she could achieve. I'll sugar coat the news  Maybe she's got untapped potential though!! I've drawn her attention to VO2Max on the watch though because I do think, however flawed the absolute number might be, it does seem (to me at least) to track medium term improvements in underlying aerobic fitness pretty reliably. |
Feb 2023
1:21pm, 16 Feb 2023
2,440 posts
|
tipsku
I have talked about this in another thread, I think. My Garmin gives me 52 which is close to lab measured values of 56.7 and 56.8 three years apart from each other. If you look those numbers up in the vdot tables, it gives me really utopian numbers: #, 5k time, 10k time, HM, mara 52: 19:17, 39:55, 1:28:31, 3:04:36 56: 18:05, 37:31, 1:23:00, 2:53:20 Now the lab measured values just indicate how much oxygen I can use at maximum but that doesn't mean that my muscles, my biomechanics, my running efficiency let me run that fast. My recent 10k time gives me a vdot of 45, so that's where the whole system is. I'm glad to know that I have the potential to run much faster based on the Vo2 max, even a sub 3 marathon would be possible, but I don't know if I ever get strong and efficient enough for that. |
Related Threads
-
Garmin 735xt problem
Jan 2021
-
Garmin and Windows 10
Jun 2016
-
Help pls - what’s latest equiv to garmin vivoactive HR?
Jan 2024
-
Inporting Garmin historic data
Dec 2023
-
Garmin Connect IQ apps and widgets etc
Jan 2023
-
Polar Precision data
Jan 2022
-
PSA - Potential GPS watch stocking filler bargain?
Sep 2021
-
Running Apps Discrepancies
May 2021
-
Are replacement ANT sticks really *that* much?!
Sep 2013
-
SpreadEveryone: The Fetchland Excel wire
Oct 2024
