Total Immersion Forums  

Go Back   Total Immersion Forums > Freestyle
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-22-2014
sclim sclim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,499
sclim
Default

@machelett: If you're a serious runner, you might consider getting the Sportiiii made by 4iiiis. I think that maintaining a high cadence in running is as important as efficient stroke/low cadence is in swimming. However training for higher cadence can be problematic. Using the Tempo Trainer in running doesn't work for me because there are footing and terrain and slope considerations that make micromanagement necessary and would throw off the micro timing. Having the cadence relayed back to you in real time is the most effective way for me. However in the initial stages, having to look at your wrist computer frequently can be distracting, and possibly hazardous. The Sportiiii is a sunglasses-mounted array of 7 LEDs, each previously calibrated to a segment of a range of HR, pace and cadence, which can be switched on the fly to display which parameter you want. I prefer to set up the LEDs each to correspond to a range segment of ONE integer wide number of strides per minute, and it can keep me in a very narrow range of variance in training or even a race. I have never heard of anyone else doing it this way, but it worked so well for me, I thought I'd mention it.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 11-23-2014
machelett machelett is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 68
machelett
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sclim View Post
PS I just bought a Wahoo Kick'r Bike trainer.
Nice! I've read about it any it is indeed appealing, compared to the TACX Flow that I have owned for a number of years now.
I will probably not upgrade because I won't be riding my bike indoor much this winter. I'll focus on running and swimming and when I actually feel the need for a ride on my road bike or the triathlon bike, I'll simply deal with the weather or wait for a clear day. I feel that I should take as many opportunities to get out as I can. Besides, on the trainer I tend to sweat like a pig. It isn't half as bad when I'm outside.

I'm fortunate enough to live in a area where it's perfectly practical to use the bike as a means of transportation and so I do that whenever possible, for example to get to the pool or ride into town.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sclim View Post
If you're a serious runner, you might consider getting the Sportiiii made by 4iiiis. I think that maintaining a high cadence in running is as important as efficient stroke/low cadence is in swimming. However training for higher cadence can be problematic. Using the Tempo Trainer in running doesn't work for me because there are footing and terrain and slope considerations that make micromanagement necessary and would throw off the micro timing. Having the cadence relayed back to you in real time is the most effective way for me. However in the initial stages, having to look at your wrist computer frequently can be distracting, and possibly hazardous. The Sportiiii is a sunglasses-mounted array of 7 LEDs, each previously calibrated to a segment of a range of HR, pace and cadence, which can be switched on the fly to display which parameter you want. I prefer to set up the LEDs each to correspond to a range segment of ONE integer wide number of strides per minute, and it can keep me in a very narrow range of variance in training or even a race. I have never heard of anyone else doing it this way, but it worked so well for me, I thought I'd mention it.
At the moment, I run about 30 miles every week but I don't consider myself a serious runner. I lack speed and talent and my joints don't handle high volume and high intensity well. I won't even start to mention the missing cruciate ligament in my left knee and other similar problems. ;)

I wear glasses much of the time but when I head out for a run, I put in contact lenses and enjoy not having anything sitting on my nose. Therefore, the Sportiiii wouldn't be for me.
Apart from that, after having monitored it for a few years, I can quite well sense the current cadence when running. My estimate usually isn't more than two steps per minute off, which is good enough. If I wanted to kick it up a notch beyond my capability to assess the cadence and make sure I hit it consistently, I could use the metronome function (audio or vibration) of the Forerunner 920XT.

That much said, your way of using the LED array is quite clever! Two thumbs up! :)

Last edited by machelett : 11-24-2014 at 11:27 AM. Reason: Typo
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 11-24-2014
sclim sclim is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,499
sclim
Default

30 miles a week is well into serious territory by most normal people's standards, cruciate or non cruciate :) Enjoy your new toy! (As far as I'm aware, the swim features are essentially the same as the 910XT -- am I right?)
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 11-24-2014
machelett machelett is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 68
machelett
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sclim View Post
As far as I'm aware, the swim features are essentially the same as the 910XT -- am I right?
I don't own a 910XT but from what I have read, I have not noticed any major differences between the 910XT, the 920XT, and the Garmin Swim.
What differs is that with the 920XT the pool size can be set as low as 17 m (20 m for the 910XT and the Swim). Apparently, the 910XT does not offer a drill mode, which the other two implement.

I'm pondering on whether I should take the Garmin Swim or the 920XT to the pool in the future. The 920XT's display is much easier to read but the unit is bigger; plus, I don't have to worry about charging the Swim. On the other hand, if I don't use the Swim anymore, I can get rid of the ANT stick. Right now, I'm leaning towards using the 920XT and selling the Swim.
Decisions, decisions...
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 11-24-2014
Talvi Talvi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lappeenranta, Finland
Posts: 1,675
Talvi
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by machelett View Post
... I'm pondering on whether I should take the Garmin Swim or the 920XT to the pool in the future. The 920XT's display is much easier to read but the unit is bigger; plus, I don't have to worry about charging the Swim. On the other hand, if I don't use the Swim anymore, I can get rid of the ANT stick. ...
You have two wrists. Wear both. Compare and contrast.
__________________
A psychological disorder is: "Any personal construction which is used repeatedly in spite of consistent invalidation."
~ George Kelly

"The water is your friend.....you don't have to fight with water, just share the same spirit as the water, and it will help you move."
~ Aleksandr Popov
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 11-24-2014
machelett machelett is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 68
machelett
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talvi View Post
You have two wrists. Wear both. Compare and contrast.
There's nothing for me to learn by wearing them both at the same time. I have all the information that I need to make up my mind; all that is left is to actually do that. ;)

Last edited by machelett : 11-24-2014 at 11:43 AM. Reason: Typo
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 11-24-2014
Talvi Talvi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lappeenranta, Finland
Posts: 1,675
Talvi
Default

The big technical issue with swim watches is the way they register a new length, but there are also simple design issues.

As far as the technical issue is concerned, Garmin seems to be without any serious rival as far as I can see. Tom Tom entered the market but seems to have an larger problem than even v.2.x of the Garmin formware. With v.2.x, registering lengths was hit and miss especially (and as acknowedged by their techies on their forum) you are a TI swimmer. Poolmate doesn't work at all for SPLs lower than about 16 (from memory - could be 14).

Happily v.3.0 of the Garmin 910 firmware fixed the major part of the problem - with it the watch(es) now count lengths pretty flawlessly. But that isn't the same as saying the problem is fixed. And the problem ripples out into every other part of the data gathering.

For whatever reasons, real or imagined, the algorithm used to interpret the accelerometer output(s) requires a period of time in which something different occurs e.g a turn PLUS a glide. For the watch then, a new length is "begun" about 6m after the turn. Its algorithm then makes a guess in order to compensate for this, with predictable results. There may be a real problem or there may be inadequate pressure from the market. As v.3.0 solved a substantial part of the problem with no impact on the system overall my opinion leans to the latter.

This view is reinforced by the design issues. The arithmetic for instance is incorrect, something which must be inexcusable. If I swim 25m in 30.00 secs then my 100m pace is 2:00.00 mins if the watch shows otherwise it is absurd, yet it does so and at all interval lengths. The only reliable data is the duration of an interval and (almost always anyway) the total number of lengths.

Recently I've realised that the watch display truncates SPL for intervals, rather than rounding. This leads to inaccurate feedback during a session. I am unable to imagine any excuse for this as there is room on the display. The stroke count generally seems pretty reliable excpet for this but obviously it needs interpreting as it's only for one arm.

Stoke identification is another matter as it relies on quite detailed assumptions about stroke patterns. For me it's a frill that could be dispensed with and perhaps that would help get a better algorithm for the turn.
__________________
A psychological disorder is: "Any personal construction which is used repeatedly in spite of consistent invalidation."
~ George Kelly

"The water is your friend.....you don't have to fight with water, just share the same spirit as the water, and it will help you move."
~ Aleksandr Popov
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 11-24-2014
machelett machelett is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 68
machelett
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talvi View Post
This view is reinforced by the design issues. The arithmetic for instance is incorrect, something which must be inexcusable. If I swim 25m in 30.00 secs then my 100m pace is 2:00.00 mins if the watch shows otherwise it is absurd, yet it does so and at all interval lengths. The only reliable data is the duration of an interval and (almost always anyway) the total number of lengths.
I have not experienced any such issue with my devices, the Garmin Swim and the 920XT. I only had one opportunity to test the 920XT in the pool but I cannot see any deviation from what I got from the Garmin Swim, which appeared solid.

I agree that stroke type recognition is not very reliable--with the Garmin Swim at least. The 920XT got it right so far but it's probably just a matter of time.
Whenever I switch to strokes other than freestyle, I simply log that as drill so that I can be sure that I'm only comparing freestyle metrics.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 11-27-2014
danm danm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 76
danm
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talvi View Post

This view is reinforced by the design issues. The arithmetic for instance is incorrect, something which must be inexcusable. If I swim 25m in 30.00 secs then my 100m pace is 2:00.00 mins if the watch shows otherwise it is absurd, yet it does so and at all interval lengths.
I have the Garmin Swim and used it for more than one year without noticing anything like that. What pace does it give you for 25m in 30:00?

And, are you sure it is 30:00? The main display doesn't show hundreths. 30 seconds shown there can be anything between 29:51 and 30:50, so there may be up to a second difference which could explain the inconsistencies you see.
(Apologies if you already know that, but to see time in seconds and hudredths of a second you need to create a custom screen and choose interval time as an option. On my custom screen I have interval pace, time and SR and pace is always correct taking into account time by the 100's of a second)

Last edited by danm : 11-27-2014 at 09:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 11-29-2014
Talvi Talvi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lappeenranta, Finland
Posts: 1,675
Talvi
Default

To clarify, I have the 910. I ave neither rhe 920 nor the Swim.

There are many arithmetic issues with the 910, but maybe they're not that obvious.

In the History, for every interval there is a summary. This gives total strokes measured and the total time, together with the "average" SPL and the "average" Pace. The "averages" given are truncated, not rounded.

The time between presses of the Start/Stop button etc are accurate, as far as I have been able to gauge using the stopwatch on my phone (!). The time of intervals given is therefore correct. The times of individual lengths are "unreliable" due to the complexity of the algorithm to detect the turn ans the fact that the watch has to make its best guess for the moment at which the turn actually occured.

It is not possible with the 910 to dictate the format of data displayed so the trucation of interval data during a swim leads to poor ionformation. An interval pace could be shown as 2:04 and then 2:05 for the next, a difference of 1 second. The real averages could actually be 2:04.99 and 2:05.01, a difference of 0.02 sec, or 2:04.00 and 2:05.99, a difference of 1.98 secs.

A rounding function and a trucating function take almost or precisely the same computing power, and the display has room for the additional digits to be displayed.

With SPLs, as the stroke count is small by comparison to the pace seconds the truncation error is proportionately increased. For two intervaks the data shown on the watch could be 8 SPL and 9 SPL, i.e 16 spl and 18 spl. But the real data could be 8.99 SPL and 9.01 SPL at one extreme or 8.01 SPL and 9.99 SPL at the other. Rounding would show that the first pair of intervaks were both swum at 18 spl whereas the second pair of intervals would have been swum at 16 spl and 20 spl.

Having to read data off the watch and enter it into a calculator at the end of the swim to see what actually happened during intervals is .. frustrating.

p.s
I am trying to learn to count. Pretty unsuccessfully, but when I do count and check with the watch, the numbers are the same. However, as you'll understand from the above explanation, it is only possible to check the count for 25m intervals.
__________________
A psychological disorder is: "Any personal construction which is used repeatedly in spite of consistent invalidation."
~ George Kelly

"The water is your friend.....you don't have to fight with water, just share the same spirit as the water, and it will help you move."
~ Aleksandr Popov
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.