I purchased a Wahoo Tickr X heart rate monitor primarily for use with Trainerroad (awesome, by the way). So far so good with the heart rate monitor, although I’m curious if anyone has any links to sites which will explain how I can understand the motion analytics that the Tickr X provides while running (smoothness, up/down, left/right, forward/backward, ground contact, oscillation). What does it all mean, and what can I do with this information?
Looks like these metrics may be fairly useless judging from the lack of responses. Thought I’d bump the question once…
I don’t think useless is the reason, I think it is lack of knowledge…similar to cycling metrics that are now available, great stuff to know, but now what?
You will see some of this data become more of a mainstay once more AG athletes/coaches know how to interpret and take advantage of it…some of it might be for the dogs, but others not so much. You will see specialized coaches in a particular field take advantage of these metrics, as they most likely have been using similar advanced metrics already.
One of the more interesting use-cases might be to use the accelerometer data to distinguish between riding and running in CX.
Regarding the new running dynamics stuff Jack Daniels did a video for Garmin, its neat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNCnKpLUoAw
I got a Tickr recently as well but have only done one run with it. It’s on my to do list to play around with it and see what it adds but my initial run gave me the impression the numbers are what they are and there’s not much you can do to change them.
Been wondering the same thing. I like using the TickrX when I wind up indoor cycling at the gym due to the cadence function. I have used the run dynamics for a few weeks and I have found the smoothness score worsens when am doing something artificial with my stride in attempt reduce vertical oscillation and ground contact time. Again, I’ve only had a few weeks of data to work with but it does seem that keeping my cadence e in the optimal range produces the best results which is good to know…but I guess I didn’t need such an expensive HRM just for cadence. Would like to hear what other people have found.
I think the Tickr X benefits extend to things like recording without having a watch … a recorded running device that measures time and HR for $100 is reasonable way to enter the ‘Keeping records of your workouts’ market but at a very basic level. I think you can also get a pace / distance via the accelerometer if you set it up? I can’t remember. If you can then that’s an added benefit.
Cadence on a spin bike is ok if you spin.
Without knowledge, the run metrics data is fairly useless.
I don’t see how this device would be beneficial to much of the ST crowd though.
I purchased a Wahoo Tickr X heart rate monitor primarily for use with Trainerroad (awesome, by the way). So far so good with the heart rate monitor, although I’m curious if anyone has any links to sites which will explain how I can understand the motion analytics that the Tickr X provides while running (smoothness, up/down, left/right, forward/backward, ground contact, oscillation). What does it all mean, and what can I do with this information?
Think of run smoothness as the inverse of the total area under the curve (the curve being motion in each of the planes). More movement in any plane = less smoothness. Vertical oscillation seems to be fairly accurate. It is simply how much you move up and down in the vertical direction when you run. I calibrated it using video analysis software with a calibration function. Also, ground contact time was very accurate. I used a Kistler Gaitway treadmill with a force platform to verify and it was spot on, so was cadence. You can play around with these on the treadmill. I liked using an IPAD on a tripod stand next to the treadmill so I could use the device as a biofeedback platform. You can change run cadence and see what happens to vertical oscillations (should be reduced) and ground contact time for instance. You can also play around with increasing your run smoothness by simply using biofeedback. What remains to be determined is what happens when you increase run smoothness? Is run economy affected? Are ground reaction forces reduced? (my n=1 pilot testing says yes)
I guess as a starting point it is nice to hear the Tickr is accurate - but the question remains what to do with the number. Trying to change posture or stride to improve your numbers seem a little risky from an injury perspective, and it’s still unclear if that would make you a better or more efficient runner. I plan on using it during my indoor runs this winter, stream it to my ipad and watch it ‘live’ and just track if anything changes over time as fitness increases, weight goes down, etc.
I guess as a starting point it is nice to hear the Tickr is accurate - but the question remains what to do with the number. Trying to change posture or stride to improve your numbers seem a little risky from an injury perspective, and it’s still unclear if that would make you a better or more efficient runner. I plan on using it during my indoor runs this winter, stream it to my ipad and watch it ‘live’ and just track if anything changes over time as fitness increases, weight goes down, etc.
In general, you should not change your run form unless you need to. The hard question is, do you need to? However, I have done lots of video analysis of run gait and almost all novice runners look better at a higher cadence at zone 2 speeds (steady run pace). It is a place to start.
Changing run gait is a complex business. In my hands, the TICKR was just another tool that could provide some information that was sometimes very useful. However, I had lots of other tools including video, force platforms, a metabolic cart, and basic muscle testing and movement screening. Nobody knows yet what happens when you use biofeedback to teach yourself to run smoother, which is the primary metric in the TICKR. I am really interested in that study but left my previous job before I could get it done myself.
I guess as a starting point it is nice to hear the Tickr is accurate - but the question remains what to do with the number. Trying to change posture or stride to improve your numbers seem a little risky from an injury perspective, and it’s still unclear if that would make you a better or more efficient runner. I plan on using it during my indoor runs this winter, stream it to my ipad and watch it ‘live’ and just track if anything changes over time as fitness increases, weight goes down, etc.
In general, you should not change your run form unless you need to. The hard question is, do you need to? However, I have done lots of video analysis of run gait and almost all novice runners look better at a higher cadence at zone 2 speeds (steady run pace). It is a place to start.
Changing run gait is a complex business. In my hands, the TICKR was just another tool that could provide some information that was sometimes very useful. However, I had lots of other tools including video, force platforms, a metabolic cart, and basic muscle testing and movement screening. Nobody knows yet what happens when you use biofeedback to teach yourself to run smoother, which is the primary metric in the TICKR. I am really interested in that study but left my previous job before I could get it done myself.What sort of study were you thinking? Short term (say, difference in metabolic cost) or injury prevention, long term performance improvement, ?
thank you. your reply, along with many others, is helping to clear things up for me.
I guess as a starting point it is nice to hear the Tickr is accurate - but the question remains what to do with the number. Trying to change posture or stride to improve your numbers seem a little risky from an injury perspective, and it’s still unclear if that would make you a better or more efficient runner. I plan on using it during my indoor runs this winter, stream it to my ipad and watch it ‘live’ and just track if anything changes over time as fitness increases, weight goes down, etc.
In general, you should not change your run form unless you need to. The hard question is, do you need to? However, I have done lots of video analysis of run gait and almost all novice runners look better at a higher cadence at zone 2 speeds (steady run pace). It is a place to start.
Changing run gait is a complex business. In my hands, the TICKR was just another tool that could provide some information that was sometimes very useful. However, I had lots of other tools including video, force platforms, a metabolic cart, and basic muscle testing and movement screening. Nobody knows yet what happens when you use biofeedback to teach yourself to run smoother, which is the primary metric in the TICKR. I am really interested in that study but left my previous job before I could get it done myself.What sort of study were you thinking? Short term (say, difference in metabolic cost) or injury prevention, long term performance improvement, ?
I was thinking simple. I would look at changes is run analytics on the TICKR, cadence, stride length, and metabolic cost VS control.
Has anyone tried to save and analyse data post run? How do you do it?
I ran today and saved the data with the Wahoo app, but didn’t have my screen visible while I was running so couldn’t see smoothness metrics. Upon opening the csv file I had exported i have several metrics tied to the analytics:
ma_smoothness
ma_smoothness_x
ma_smoothness_y
ma_smoothness_z
ma_gct
ma_vertosc
ma_jerkx
ma_jerky
ma_jerkz
i assume ‘ma’ means motion analytics and gct means ground contact time. vertosc will be vertical oscilation.
What do the other parameters refer to? I also noticed the numbers seem ‘stuck’ at times (refreshing every second in the first 30 minutes but after that refreshing only every couple of minutes). The strap itself seemed to work fine as long as HR was concerned (also collected my HR via my Garmin).