Searched the forum and didn’t see anything. This is a wrist-based run power app in Garmin Connect. Seems legit as long as it remains consistent on its own algorithm.
I’m still rocking the Forerunner 945 with no intention of switching to a Garmin that now supports wrist-based run power (e.g., FR 955). Thoughts on this run power app greatly appreciated!
Searched the forum and didn’t see anything. This is a wrist-based run power app in Garmin Connect. Seems legit as long as it remains consistent on its own algorithm.
I’m still rocking the Forerunner 945 with no intention of switching to a Garmin that now supports wrist-based run power (e.g., FR 955). Thoughts on this run power app greatly appreciated!
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2022/06/running-power-comparison-garmin-stryd-polar-coros.html
Coming from a cycling background and years training and racing with power there just is not an equivalent for running. There are just too many variables that make up power to have one number in real time provide which one of them is suffering. I prefer to focus on one at a time, like cadence and then after review my stride length.
Coming from a cycling background and years training and racing with power there just is not an equivalent for running. There are just too many variables that make up power to have one number in real time provide which one of them is suffering. I prefer to focus on one at a time, like cadence and then after review my stride length.
There’s literally power in running too. Its newer and probably not perfect and who knows if it ever will be short of implanting some sort of chip in your muscle but people are working towards it and it does seem to be pretty good.
How do you come into a thread about running power and claim there isn’t such a thing? Then suggest two alternatives in cadence and stride length that measure completely different things to power. That’d be like if I said I don’t like cycling power so I focus on cadence and tire pressure instead.
Coming from a cycling background and years training and racing with power there just is not an equivalent for running. There are just too many variables that make up power to have one number in real time provide which one of them is suffering. I prefer to focus on one at a time, like cadence and then after review my stride length.
There’s literally power in running too. Its newer and probably not perfect and who knows if it ever will be short of implanting some sort of chip in your muscle but people are working towards it and it does seem to be pretty good.
How do you come into a thread about running power and claim there isn’t such a thing? Then suggest two alternatives in cadence and stride length that measure completely different things to power. That’d be like if I said I don’t like cycling power so I focus on cadence and tire pressure instead.
Not looking to compare bike vs running pwr metrics. You can’t… understood. Just wondering of the run-specific metrics on its own. That is, consistency within the app itself.
I never said there wasn’t power for running. I said it isn’t close to as useful as cycling. Running power or more accurately efficiency is a result of: stride length, cadence, ground contact time, vertical oscillation, etc.
One number isn’t gong to tell you, were you lacking.
I followed the development of Stryd for over a year and also got many offers from users looking to sell as it wasn’t as helpful as they had hoped.
Not sure about the app itself but I have been using Stryd for a few years and love it. Is it perfect? No. Is pace perfect? Not even close. Using power is a way better metric than pace/HR for running for me. But just as anything if you live by the number you die by the number. It was the same with cycling power for me. I used it but if my power was off in a workout something was going on and I had to adjust. Same with using my Stryd power. I have a power target for all my runs. Works amazingly and used to train for the Chicago Marathon and helped me pace that thing just about perfectly. I think about of people on this forum seem to hate Stryd for some reason or try to compare it to cycling power like it is apples to apples.
I never said there wasn’t power for running. I said it isn’t close to as useful as cycling. **Running power or more accurately efficiency is a result of: stride length, cadence, ground contact time, vertical oscillation, etc. **
One number isn’t gong to tell you, were you lacking.
I followed the development of Stryd for over a year and also got many offers from users looking to sell as it wasn’t as helpful as they had hoped.
This is the reason I think there’s little utility to knowing run power. It’s a lot more dependent on other physiological factors than cycling and on the flip side pace is far more relevant in running than cycling so we can just focus on that.
I agree it’s still a neat concept.
Running power is a calculation, bike power is (more or less) measured. That’s the biggest difference. In cycling we can measure what the force on the crank is an convert that into a power metric but in running we need some estimations and a calculation of a lot of factors combined to create a model that tells us some metric.
You can compare this process to the live cda measurements like Notio etc. They use a similar concept. You can only get proper output in situations where all variables are equal, so it will never be a gold standard and totally reliable. Does it mean it’s useless? No! It simply means you’ve got a lot of interpretation to do when looking at the output. Because of this some people will tell you it’s great and other will tell you it’s worthless. IMO it’s neither, you will have to think really hard about the moments this data tells you valuable info and when you have to ignore it.
I’ve used the Garmin running power functionality and it is ok. It is sensitive enough that if I do a track workout on a windy day, it can detect higher and lower power when going upwind or downwind, without telling it about any wind conditions. However, training rigidly can be pretty brutal, and often perceived effort is the most sane option when you consider stress, recovery, daily weather, etc…
I think what is more beneficial than “power” for running, is kinematic feedback – and something like Runscribe’s system is great. I was able to figure out why I was getting tight lower legs using the data it provided. Turns out certain shoes promoted too much of a forefoot strike, and consciously readjusting to a more midfoot/heel strike actually opened up reliable distance running with no leg pain, even in shoes that previously exacerbated the issue within the first mile.
Now that I don’t have any discomfort, I “just run” without the sensor, but should an issue arise, I’d mount the sensors for a few runs and have a look.
I’ve used the Garmin running power functionality and it is ok. It is sensitive enough that if I do a track workout on a windy day, it can detect higher and lower power when going upwind or downwind, without telling it about any wind conditions. However, training rigidly can be pretty brutal, and often perceived effort is the most sane option when you consider stress, recovery, daily weather, etc…
Thanks. Do you use it with the “Run Power Model” app or via Garmin chest strap etc/now “built-in” wrist model?
To the other commentators: Yeah, I don’t think anyone should be holding their breath while relying on any run power “data.” If anything, it can be just some other metric to have fun with. I’m noticing my “power” going up along w/going uphill and increased heart rate. Just fun stuff.
Coming from a cycling background and years training and racing with power there just is not an equivalent for running. There are just too many variables that make up power to have one number in real time provide which one of them is suffering. I prefer to focus on one at a time, like cadence and then after review my stride length.
There’s literally power in running too. Its newer and probably not perfect and who knows if it ever will be short of implanting some sort of chip in your muscle but people are working towards it and it does seem to be pretty good.
How do you come into a thread about running power and claim there isn’t such a thing? Then suggest two alternatives in cadence and stride length that measure completely different things to power. That’d be like if I said I don’t like cycling power so I focus on cadence and tire pressure instead.
there are too many points to measure in a runner. leg drive, arm drive, toe off. For instance I have a violent arm swing compared to my legs. Bike power data is all collected at one single point
there are too many points to measure in a runner. leg drive, arm drive, toe off. For instance I have a violent arm swing compared to my legs. Bike power data is all collected at one single point
Running also has a single point. It’s just harder to measure well at that single point. Some people swing back and forth on the bike. That is also not captured by bike power meters. That concerns physiological efficiency more than gross power output at the point of force delivery to the ground/pedals.
Just a general reply/question and not to you specifically.
I get that there are many variables into running and it’s not the same as bike power. But. is the issue that they want complete accuracy. For me the value is that it provides fairly consistent reproducibility as my running style isn’t changing all that much. Meaning I do the same runs and the same zone 2, 3 or 4 workouts. And most of these workouts are on asphalt. So in this scenario, isn’t there some utility in this. I’ve tracked vertical oscillation, length stiffness, running efficiency for the past few years and they don’t change all that much. I don’t need it to be completely accurate, I just need it to be precise for me which is helpful in race pacing. Plus using HR and rpe as secondary factors, it seems pretty consistent. Perhaps I’m missing something.
Just a general reply/question and not to you specifically.
I get that there are many variables into running and it’s not the same as bike power. But. is the issue that they want complete accuracy. For me the value is that it provides fairly consistent reproducibility as my running style isn’t changing all that much. Meaning I do the same runs and the same zone 2, 3 or 4 workouts. And most of these workouts are on asphalt. So in this scenario, isn’t there some utility in this. I’ve tracked vertical oscillation, length stiffness, running efficiency for the past few years and they don’t change all that much. I don’t need it to be completely accurate, I just need it to be precise for me which is helpful in race pacing. Plus using HR and rpe as secondary factors, it seems pretty consistent. Perhaps I’m missing something.
I’ve been running with power for a limited amount of time, but in that time I’ve found that my power has been consistent for my easy day runs. So consistent that I am going to lock in a power range for the watch to alert me in case I deviate out of the range. Like you said, I’m not concerned if the number is accurate, as long as it is consistent then I can use it effectively in training. I haven’t completed enough tempo runs for me to feel comfortable using power during those efforts. Hopefully with a few more workouts I’ll be able to dial into that range as well.
Oh do a few more tempos with power and your running will change. Again never used that app but the Stryd has been amazing for tempo, threshold, vo2 that now I don’t pay attention to pace at all. I can now better go by feel since using power since I can tune into effort more going uphill and dealing with wind.
I have used the Stryd and found it useful
.
I’ve been running with power for a limited amount of time, but in that time I’ve found that my power has been consistent for my easy day runs. So consistent that I am going to lock in a power range for the watch to alert me in case I deviate out of the range. Like you said, I’m not concerned if the number is accurate, as long as it is consistent then I can use it effectively in training. I haven’t completed enough tempo runs for me to feel comfortable using power during those efforts.
My question wrt the specific app. 😊