You know this, how?
AGAIN, look at what was said above in this thread. That is not true
I think this has been posted about lots of times so far:
Edit 2/23/22
Potential game changer - it appears this app takes advantage of a higher Ant+ sample rate than the Garmin native device. The result being - no more rate related missed beat artifact. I have confirmed this in my own recording and another from a friend. At this point we can have the best of both worlds - Ant+ to the alphaHRV app, bluetooth to the watch and Fatmaxxer.
Muscle Oxygen Training: AlphaHRV - the first native Garmin DFA a1 data field
Guess what, there is nothing special about this app. TR can easily read the Ant+ data the same as this app. TR does not need to read it like garmin devices and produce bad data. Stop assuming Ant+ data must be wrong
The H7 was considered good at the beginning of all the alpha 1 talk:
The H9/H10 may be better but that doesnât mean the older stuff wasnât good enough but researchers will try to just get the best data they can get. This is still new so more work on record the best data possible and analyze than in figuring out what devices produce good enough data. That comes later
Cycling and running are very different. The extra bouncing around and movement against a shirt (think swinging arms) running can cause more artifacts though some of that may be more strap related then electronics related.
1 Like
TR should look at HR and HRV, its been useful for me. The challenge is that things like HR zones are highly individualized (versus power zones below ftp). Didnât listen to the recent HRV podcast segment but did see the thread. I did a quick search and didnât see an obvious HRV feature request thread. You should start a feature request thread!
And regarding what I said⌠within a ride viewing of Performance Condition simply gives me an opening to be mentally weak if inclined. I look at it post-ride for big picture trends of fitness increases. Iâve been playing with HRV since HRV4Training app came out, first with iPhone camera, then HRM, then Apple Watch using breath app. Garmin 530 has been logging HRV per-ride for about 2 years, recently spent some time feeding rides into my MacBook Pro using the Collab Python script to output DFA a1. The short of it is that Iâve faith in using that Garmin feature as a trend/signal for potential slow fitness increases, and no faith in trying to use morning HRV as a readiness signal to influence what I do in the afternoon. But everyone is different, thatâs just me.
The Garmin ftp estimator uses hrv/hr/power and machine learning. My ftp is 270ish, did 32-min at 276 about 2 months ago. In the last 7 days I did a climbing ride with Garmin auto estimating 264 ftp, over-unders on Monday with Garmin auto estimating 260 ftp, and Wed night worlds doing a 14+ minute sub-threshold hero pull and Garmin auto estimating 267 ftp. Garminâs ftp estimate is reliably a bit on the low side, unless I go out and do a 50-70 minute long effort, but almost always within 10W. The Garmin auto FTP estimate is simply another signal that my slowly-getting-stale long test is still relevant (its a supplement to swagging estimates using interval power-to-HR).
Anyways, the point being that Garminâs use of hr/hrv/power and machine learning has been working well for me. Just like some of Apple iPhone on-device ML features. From where I sit it appears to do a good job at telling me when my Tuesday endurance ride was a little too high and is seen as tempo instead of low aerobic. But I canât prove that one.
Any idea how you get Alpha HRV working? It says to play with these setting but clicking on âEnter configâŚâ doesnât do anything.
You selected ble
Yes, but it doesnât matter. I cant enter anything into either.
My take on this is that any useful actual feature from TR using HRV is years out, and probably at least a year after they start collecting HRV data. If they have little to no HRV data for indoor workouts, this really hampers analysis and development of âMLâ based features. HRV may or may not be all that useful for TR, but they canât even start to answer that question without data.
This, along with interested users being able to get HRV data out of TR recorded files, is behind my suggestion that they start collecting this sooner rather than later. No UI changes required, little to no added support burden. If the started collecting the data tomorrow the soonest I would expect a feature based on HRV data would be mid 2023.
Regarding other things to do with HR, I expect using HR data for AT or redlight/greenlight stuff is a higher priority that improving analytics that just give users numbers.
1 Like
I donât know if it has something to do with the amount of sympathetic drive from being stressed, but, sometimes when my HRV is low I have the best workouts I ever have. RPE is super low despite a high power output. Its obviously not something sustainable but its an observation Iâve noticed about myself on occasion on quite a number of rides. HRV4Training Pro also indicates in the insight section âyour HRV doesnât appear lower after hard workouts, resting heart rate might be a better proxy to gauge recovery after hard daysâ which I thought was an interesting data point too.
1 Like
Two late nights in a row, travel last week, and a lot of work stress.
Oddly enough this morning I had my highest HRV in a couple weeks.
But I was tired and felt like absolute crap on the bike, Garminâs Performance Condition called it like I felt:
-6 is pretty ugly, donât often see it that low. End of ride my Garmin told me âYour training load is at a good level, but your fitness is decreasing. Your body may be struggling to recover, so be sure to pay attention to your overall health including stress, nutrition and rest.â
Yup. No more going to bed after 1am⌠Not a great condition to be in for my first early season kitchen sink ride. Endurance dropped to the floor around 2 hours. On the bright side I set season high 1-sec and 5-sec power records after 3 hours and 1700kJ 
Going to bed early.
1 Like
Iâd always thought that my Garmin just generated junk numbers for me but reading what youâve got to say about then I think Iâll give them another go. Doyou goth whole hog with sleep data from them as well or is it just workout related stuff?
1 Like
Just cycling workouts on the 530 (morning HRV on Apple Watch). Another ftp estimate at the end of ride - 265 - which was surprising given the grab bag of short efforts.
Others may not see the same results, itâs using HRV/HR/power, but this 530 and Garmin dual HRM is working well with my training. Nothing earth shattering, just reinforced I need to get more sleep after staying up too late a few times this week. Didnât need a computer to tell me that, not wanting to push out upper endurance after 2 hours was a good enough signal.
What does your ride look like?
Endurance plus short efforts, power in the pic above.
2 Likes
Right between 5 and 6 sounds like ISMâs zone 2.
1 Like
Or what happens when I follow Coach Isaiahâs zone2 power (range) target 
1 Like
Lydiardâs âbest aerobic paceâ 
Yep. I said it and now everyone hates me. Iâll go away nowâŚvoluntarily LOL
To be fair, I have also heard Jim Miller and KM mention it. Not sure how Miller prescribes it. KM on a few occasions has said something to the effect: âif I just send someone out on an endurance ride by RPE they often just find this pace/powerâ.
To me this has always been intriguing because when i first started a number of coaches (not Miller or KM) made it a point to say in seminars: I donât like to have my riders reach for top of Zone 2 (Cusick, for example).
Well, I didnât start the season at the top of zone2 power. Sorry I never read or followed anything Lydiard, know the name but nothing else. KM says ride to RPE. The adaptations here are driven by relatively low intensity muscle and heart contractions. Pushing power out over time, in my mind, is in response to the anticipated gains (lactate curve moving down and to the right). There is also a performance angle IMHO.
Yeah, I understand. No real reason to read Lydiard necessarily unless youâre interested in history. Any contemporary coach has already incorporated much of his philosophy into their practice, whether they know it or not.
I think I was being too subtle with my humor. âlydiard best aerobic paceâ is just a slightly snide way of old_but_not saying âthis stuff is nothing newâ. âIâve seen it all beforeâ. Or the more common refrain (common on running forums): âbut Lydiard already figured this outâŚno science neededâ. Or we cyclists: âI didnât get it from ISM, I got it from insert other cool guyâ. Weâre all learning the same stuff at different times.
Of all the coaches that could be used as a guidepost about feel and RPE, I reckon heâs the guy. He even prescribed some sweetspot training (3/4 effort). 
And no one can say for certain that "Lydiard best aerobic pace** was aerobic threshold, or that AeT is even a thing.
My point is we can and should revisit and challenge ideas. A bunch of smart coaches saying stay away from training this way; another set making it central to their model. And then I always want to know why. What is it that both of you are getting right, but calling the other way wrong? Because I want to do that.
4 Likes