DopeyBadger
Imagathoner
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 10,345
Is that runalyze chart a premium feature or free?
Free! It syncs with my garmin data and makes the calculations based on that data. You have to click into Marathon Shape to see the numbers. There's a big disclaimer on it:Is that runalyze chart a premium feature or free?
I haven't spent much time looking at the predictions that are not the marathon, but I agree that it is VERY aggressive based on that value alone. I've also noticed it's ever changing. I was checking it after every run for about a week or so but that became maddening. For example, since I took the last screenshot on Sunday, my optimum marathon time has dropped by 2 minutes. At this point, the tracking is just for fun. If come January I find that it's forecasts are similar to my performance, then I might take it more seriously in the future.Interesting, this is what it gives me.
View attachment 795019
I'd say it seems overly aggressive on my abilities across the board. Thirty seconds better on 5k PR, nearly a minute on 10k PR, 2 min on HM PR, and 14 min on M PR. Seems like the weekly mileage value is based on roughly half a year. So it wants me to average 57 miles per week for 6 months to hit that 100% marathon shape number. Thats about 1500 miles in 6 months. I did about 1400 miles in the 6 months prior to my 2022 marathon, and 1150 miles prior to 2021 marathon. I've got about 1475 miles in the 2024 plan.
I find this one interesting as well.
View attachment 795020
Seems like it is trying to use my data to fit a model to better predict the outcome.
I had never clicked around enough to see that second graph but that is interesting. In my case, you can see that in all of them runalyze would have predicted a faster time than how I performed. In your example, you at least met or exceeded expectations for some races.
I removed W&D from the race results as well as most of the other Disney races since even though I take them more seriously than most, I'm still stopping for a few photos. I decided to keep the WDW marathon since that's the only race I have for that distance. None of the numbers changed! Now I'm even more curious how it's coming up with this V02max (shape)...Try editing out your fun run races, or at least set them to a "D" priority. My feeling is that there is some sort of calculation going on to try and "fit" your performances to a model. So when you have a 3:30 Wine and Dine HM, it thinks you were actually trying and that's reflective of your fitness.
If that doesn't change anything, then yea, I'm with you. It seems odd that you never meet or exceed expectations based on the data it's evaluating. Something else feels like it must be off.
Have you marked any activities as races? I have zero idea how this thing works, but I would be interested if your times change once you have some "races" in the dataset.So I gave this thing my data, and for me the prediction chart seems to underestimate my fitness. This is current, but I have literally run significantly faster than all of these this year (up to HM, which was on Sunday so you would think it could figure that one out even if my slow summer runs confused it):
View attachment 795960
I did, and the predictions actually got slower (those are the ones I posted)Have you marked any activities as races? I have zero idea how this thing works, but I would be interested if your times change once you have some "races" in the dataset.
That's wild. Congrats on being an over achiever!I did, and the predictions actually got slower (those are the ones I posted)![]()
Based purely on HR, which you may not hit maxHR (and even if you did, since the time is so short it drags the average down). So I wouldn't put too much stock there.Just noticed it thinks I'm capable of a 5 minute mile![]()
Which brings me to a question....how often should one update their max HR and HR zones? I don't rely on this data but I do note it. Currently, all of my zones are based on a maxHR of 196 but in the last 12 months the highest my HR has been is 193. It was 196 in Feb of 2022 during a mile time trial.
I removed W&D from the race results as well as most of the other Disney races since even though I take them more seriously than most, I'm still stopping for a few photos. I decided to keep the WDW marathon since that's the only race I have for that distance. None of the numbers changed! Now I'm even more curious how it's coming up with this V02max (shape)...
I’ve had this device since June 2021 so we’re good there as well.theory your maxHR will continue to drop as you age. Maybe by 0.5-1 bpm per year. So something in 2022 is probably still relevant. But something in 2017 probably not as much. It's also important to realize that HR reliant data should all be self contained to a single device. So if you get a new HR measuring device, I'd consider throwing out any of that data because one HR monitor might be higher or lower than the other leading to some misleading data.
You are so much more observant than I am. How can my marathon and mile avg hr be within 1bpm of each other? Even the maxes are similar, 181 for the mile and 179 for the marathon.Could just be nothing, but I wonder how much the calculation is struggling with how whether you run a 5k or a HM your HR is very similar across the board. All of your races seem to be around the 176-178 range regardless of distance. Compare that to my HRs in races and you can see as low as 141 for a marathon and as high as 161 for a 10k.
You are so much more observant than I am. How can my marathon and mile avg hr be within 1bpm of each other? Even the maxes are similar, 181 for the mile and 179 for the marathon.
I’ve always perceived myself as more of a distance runner and struggle to go fast. Is this finally some data that backs that up? Or am I just underperforming at the shorter distances?![]()
Could be weather. The temp was basically the same but much more humid for the wdw marathon. It still seems weird to me, intuitively I would expect the shorter distances to have higher averages because they have a smaller percentage of time at an easy pace.Temperature differences?
What's your resting HR?
Could breathing be a more limiting factor with shorter racing for you than most other people?
I mean regardless either way, you've shown nothing in your endurance performances to suggest a 5:14 is a reasonable expectation. That's the equivalent of a well trained 6:34 min/mile marathon runner.
I'm kind of surprised the % didn't change since I actually met the 46 miles per week goal this week but if we've learned anything in the last couple of weeks, it's that these calculations make no sense![]()
Six months ago there were a couple weeks were I hit 40 mpw but I was mostly in the low 30s. The calculation is a 6 month average so it might just take awhile for it to move much. I've only ran greater than 46 miles twice this year; 47 last week and 46 the week of the marathon in January. In my head, it was a weighted average but as far as I can tell only the long run is weighted.Hope you heal soon.
What were you doing roughly 6 months ago and was it roughly 46 miles? I think the 46 mile goal is a running 6 month average. So if what you did 6 months ago is roughly equal to what you did this week, then they would just swap each other out.