Only my Polar watch. Took a closer look (not so long ago) at Supersapiens but decided it is a bit to pricey for a hobby. Whoop would be interesting as well but I dont like taking up a subscription for that kind of data.
Whoop user for 4 years, but beginning to realise I’m not getting any new information about training, recovery and effort. I also tried Supersapiens but found that a complete waste of time. ‘Discovered’ that if you eat rubbish you get a short-lived sugar spike, whereas good clean eating gave longer-lasting more gradual increases in blood glucose - what a shock!!!!??!!
I think that’s still true to some extent but I’ve done some testing with my Apple Watch Ultra and Wahoo Tickr and was pretty surprised the Ultra was within 1 bpm for 99% of my workouts.
Not any more if you have a watch built in the last 5 years, but people who try to sound smart on the internet continue to say this and repeat it as thought its current.
@@dontcallmechiefit’s still true for some people, hair in the watch area and skin color affects the accuracy of HR readings. My garmin from 2022 is garbage with OHR while cycling or high intensity running. It’s ok for easy runs.
The sweat sensor seems quite useful if it measures salts lost as well. This metric can be really useful for longer events: am I hydrating enough? Do I need salts? Electrolytes? If it was cheap and easy to use this can be beneficial to a broad range of users, not only professionals.
Garmin of course. Stryd run pod is always with me. It's very good to have a target power that takes into account uphill downhill. Min/km is almost useless if you dont run a flat course all the time. I have a lactate device i use regularly on the tacx to watch the progress. I also use a beeper on swimming to practice a higher rpm. Also a temp sensor for the shoe to get a accurate temp reading so i can compare
I love my Garmin watch, combined with a chest strap HRM, and find the data very motivating in my day to day training. That said I only really pay attention to the more basic data and unless you are a pro, or a very, very serious amateur, I honestly cannot see the need for any of the quite costly and intricate data measurements that most amateurs don't know what to do with anyway. There will of course always be those who feel a need to have all the latest gadgetry, and the manufacturers are naturally happy to take their money, so the development of wearable tech will continue for many years and decades to come. Remember that the first mobile phones more or less required a backpack to be carried around and they ended up being so small that you could hardly see the buttons before the smartphone arrived, offering so much more than just a phone, and I bet we will see the same happening with wearable tech.
Information is only worth as much, as we can understand it or use it. I find using a heart rate monitor during training a burden, I try to use it to gauge my perceived effort, then go with that, and look at the actual values when I get home. Anything more than that I feel would be over my head, bu I do listen to my body, and I try to get better at that.
I tried Supersapiens, but would suggest it’s not worth it. The existing nutrition plans on e.g. British Cycling and ‘common sense’ are probably more relevant and effective. What it tells you is if you scoff a Mars Bar then your blood sugar spikes and it’s not good for you - who would have thought?!!!! But if you eat whole grains, pasta, clean - well you have a more sustained blood glucose for your event etc. Genuinely didn’t need a seriously expensive sensor for that - probably why Supersapiens are exiting the market!
As a median-performance age grouper, these technologies don't seem like they'd be as helpful as a regimented coaching / training plan (price point, difficulty of usage and interpretation, etc). Hopefully the companies can start to consolidate and simplify them!
CGM doesn't measure blood glucose but from interstitial fluid. Which may differ quite a lot sometimes, and depending on conditions usually lag about 15-30min from true blood glucose.
What wearable tech have you tried? ⌚
Just my Garmin watch really.
Only my Polar watch. Took a closer look (not so long ago) at Supersapiens but decided it is a bit to pricey for a hobby. Whoop would be interesting as well but I dont like taking up a subscription for that kind of data.
Been using Moxy for a year, it’s completely changed how I train. Just had my best results for a decade
Whoop user for 4 years, but beginning to realise I’m not getting any new information about training, recovery and effort. I also tried Supersapiens but found that a complete waste of time. ‘Discovered’ that if you eat rubbish you get a short-lived sugar spike, whereas good clean eating gave longer-lasting more gradual increases in blood glucose - what a shock!!!!??!!
Surprised HR chest monitors werent mentioned for zone training. They are so much more accurate than watches.
I think that’s still true to some extent but I’ve done some testing with my Apple Watch Ultra and Wahoo Tickr and was pretty surprised the Ultra was within 1 bpm for 99% of my workouts.
Not any more if you have a watch built in the last 5 years, but people who try to sound smart on the internet continue to say this and repeat it as thought its current.
@@dontcallmechiefit’s still true for some people, hair in the watch area and skin color affects the accuracy of HR readings.
My garmin from 2022 is garbage with OHR while cycling or high intensity running.
It’s ok for easy runs.
The sweat sensor seems quite useful if it measures salts lost as well. This metric can be really useful for longer events: am I hydrating enough? Do I need salts? Electrolytes? If it was cheap and easy to use this can be beneficial to a broad range of users, not only professionals.
Garmin of course. Stryd run pod is always with me. It's very good to have a target power that takes into account uphill downhill. Min/km is almost useless if you dont run a flat course all the time. I have a lactate device i use regularly on the tacx to watch the progress. I also use a beeper on swimming to practice a higher rpm. Also a temp sensor for the shoe to get a accurate temp reading so i can compare
I love my Garmin watch, combined with a chest strap HRM, and find the data very motivating in my day to day training. That said I only really pay attention to the more basic data and unless you are a pro, or a very, very serious amateur, I honestly cannot see the need for any of the quite costly and intricate data measurements that most amateurs don't know what to do with anyway. There will of course always be those who feel a need to have all the latest gadgetry, and the manufacturers are naturally happy to take their money, so the development of wearable tech will continue for many years and decades to come. Remember that the first mobile phones more or less required a backpack to be carried around and they ended up being so small that you could hardly see the buttons before the smartphone arrived, offering so much more than just a phone, and I bet we will see the same happening with wearable tech.
Well done on your longest run Andy! 👏👏 I think you'll do it in 2:20 or less 😁 All the best of luck 🍀
The UK gets bad weather reputation but here in the south of England we don't get nearly as much rain as you guys say.
Yes we do! It’s been raining here in Hampshire since around Oct 23!!!
Ive seen a mate using a power meter on his foot! Seemed like an awesome metric
Stryde? Yeah, I've looked into it and I want it.
Information is only worth as much, as we can understand it or use it. I find using a heart rate monitor during training a burden, I try to use it to gauge my perceived effort, then go with that, and look at the actual values when I get home. Anything more than that I feel would be over my head, bu I do listen to my body, and I try to get better at that.
Always interested in cgms but never can find where to buy one without a prescription
I tried Supersapiens, but would suggest it’s not worth it. The existing nutrition plans on e.g. British Cycling and ‘common sense’ are probably more relevant and effective. What it tells you is if you scoff a Mars Bar then your blood sugar spikes and it’s not good for you - who would have thought?!!!! But if you eat whole grains, pasta, clean - well you have a more sustained blood glucose for your event etc. Genuinely didn’t need a seriously expensive sensor for that - probably why Supersapiens are exiting the market!
As a median-performance age grouper, these technologies don't seem like they'd be as helpful as a regimented coaching / training plan (price point, difficulty of usage and interpretation, etc). Hopefully the companies can start to consolidate and simplify them!
No and don't intend to.
CGM doesn't measure blood glucose but from interstitial fluid. Which may differ quite a lot sometimes, and depending on conditions usually lag about 15-30min from true blood glucose.