Been using a Stryd footpod since 2020. I live in an a quite hilly area, so power really helps with intensity control and with calibrating your sense of effort. When my power duration curve is decently filled out it gives me a tool to estimate what power to aim for for different durations of effort. I am an analytics guy, so power is also excellent for post run analysis and comparison across time. Pace is useless for that as the terrain influences it way too much.
Power with Stryd gives the best results for me. Without a “standard” for power, each company measures it differently. Stryd helped me so much and I am really grateful. It helped me win my age group in first marathon and crushed for a BQ. Pair it with a Garmin and if you really read those stats, it can be a big help in training
Initially got Stryd to overcome GPS dropouts in the forest while following pace-based plans. Then transitioned onto power-based plans and loved the freedom it gave me to do structured workouts on varied and hilly terrain. I think the most important thing for me is that it means you take on harder bits at a slower pace, helping prevent injury. These days I seem to be finding it a bit harder to stay within the recommended power range and am less focused on targeting constant power (both may be due to switching more towards ultra training - maybe my power recommendations are a bit off due to lots of slow long runs). However, it is still a useful reminder to slow down on long runs and up hills and it still helps with interval and tempo workouts, even if I don’t always stick perfectly to the power recommendations. I quite like their library of structured workouts too as it enables some variety to keep things fresh. Preferred their old training plans though.
I am not using it yet, but was gonna look into it to incorporate it, specially after my failed 10k pb attempt last week, i was doing fine till km 6 having run a little hill with wind while maintaining my race pace, i almost emptied my tank, i think using power would have saved me some energy to get a pb on the second half. Thanks Sarah and the running channel team.
If Garmin really believe running power is that effective why don't they give power as an option along with pace and heart rate in their suggested workouts
I really don't know the real reason why GPS companies in general or Garmin in particular don't do what you say... but I suppose it's because the power calculation device in this company (or others) is a separate device. On the other hand, rhythm and/or heart rate are not essential since the rhythm is detected by the GPS capacity of the watch, and the heart rate by the optical sensor of the watch or the chest strap (which sometimes has come in a pack with the own GPS watch, especially in the past when the optical sensor did not come with the watch). As I say, it's a guess on my part.
@@AH87saxo but it's not a separate device, it's on the watch? To me it's just another useless feature unless Garmin make using it easier, which is a shame, as the video says it has it's benefits
It might not be in their suggested workouts but it is a target option when setting up your own training session in the connect app. I find it really useful when training for shorter distance races.
When I switched back to running from cycling for the Alpecin Gran Fondo team, the first thing I went looking for was a power meter for running. I ended up with a Stryd and I do like it. Personally I would think it would be a bit more accurate than the Garmin version as it is mounted to your shoe and measures how hard you land and push off. So, I use this for running as well. I found it to be a great way to make sure I don’t set off too fast. 😉
I used running power for pacing my last 10k race which had some rather hilly sections and it seemed to work well for me (got a pb 🥳 so must have been doing something right). Set my watch to alert me if I was pushing too hard on the earlier hills so I could back it off a bit. The last bit of the race had a final hill colloquially called the 'Crimple Killer'... I passed quite a few people on that hill and I think I was the only one smiling 🤣
Since your watch has running power I'm assuming it also has the pace pro functionality. You might also be interested in that as when you insert a course it will also give you the ability to set your pace depending on the incline, with sliders for your preference to take a hill easier or harder, or what actually should count as change in incline or not. Example, you want to run 4min/km on a 10km but there is 1 hill with 4% climb for 400m and downhill 2% for 800m. It'll suggest to take the hill up at 4:20min/km and down at 3:50 (this evens out to 4min/km). If you're running a really hilly course you can even choose to set autolap to incline change as you might only be able to run that 4min/km on the few flats in between. Once the incline changes enough the watch will lap and tell you "X pace for the next X meters"
I am a cyclist and runner and have been using power in running for the last 5 years if not longer (since garmin released thier data field). The value power gives you is not in pacing, its in understanding what is happening physiologically at each zone, so you understand what is being used from a oxygen perspective, lactic acid build up, etc.. so you can adjust your form or speed to recover or conserve depending your strategy. So its great for figuring out form improvements, what to eat or drink and how to adjust to scenarios midrace without the need to do much thinking. So its a very powerful tool and you cannot compare as you all have your own way of exerting energy, just tis consitent to you in your current form. Foot > Chest > Wrist (based Power meters)
This is really interesting! Concerned about accuracy, so a foot pod would be really useful to make sure it is measured properly. I’ll definitely look into using it though.
A cycling power meter is a electro-mechanical device that can accurately measure power through the crank / pedals, I don’t think a smartwatch can really get close to this accuracy, whereas heart rate sensors are quite accurate, even better with a chest strap, so I would prefer to base my efforts from a combination of heart rate and perceived effort.
The entire reason cyclists use power is because speed (ie pace) is a bad metric for a cyclist, because it's dominated by the wind. Runners are much less effected by the wind, so they just don't have that problem. Find a nice flat route and as long as it's not blowing a gale, your pace will be a very accurate indicator of your intensity. No magic pretend watt algorithms required.
IMO heart rate is just a different measurement. Power is more of an alternative to pace (or GAP) if anything. Pace is nice in that it is absolute, power is nice, in that it takes into account all of the things that pace alone does not. It probably isn't super accurate, but the most important variables are pace and gradient, which shouldn't be very far off, then they just add GCT and vertical oscillation to fine tune the figure a bit. And in the end, it doesn't really need to be accurate, it just needs to be consistent.
Funny i just added power to my data yesterday (fenix 5 through the connect IQ app). Too early to know if it's something I'll grow to love or not. Despite all the training advice and data metrics a bit of me still thinks if you want to achieve a certain race time then you need to run to that pace irrespective of the course or the weather or how much caffeine you've had or which pair of shoes you have on etc. For those of us who just like running and aren't busily periodising for 1 or 2 key races a year is it really all that important.
Awesome video about running power! What do you guys think about making an updated video on running drills such as A/C skips, B skips and butt kicks (should you do them?) and any other drills?
I will start looking at it. My watch says that my critical power is 293W but I haven’t paid any attention to it. I do agree that it should be a better realtime indicator than HR or pace.
I’ve always found Garmin’s power pretty useless. I use Stryd and it can be good for pacing races and tempo runs, but I also find that pretty useless for intervals and other faster workouts.
@@runningchannel in Garmin’s case, the fact it’s just a number with no real context. I also have doubts about its accuracy both from a HRM and wrist, but I can’t say I’ve tested it thoroughly. Stryd’s power-duration model is quite good, and seems to predict race paces pretty well, but even then trying to run to a certain power is really awkward for any intervals shorter than 4 or 5 minutes. I end up just judging those intervals by feel.
Power could be useful as an alternative to pace based workouts on hilly terrain but I’d never use it to replace HR on base runs or threshold runs where I’m trying to train a specific energy system
I began to incorporate power on hill reps as I'd get instant feed back on effort... Ive now switched to coros 'effort pace' which takes in to account gradient and combined with my foot pod is instant like 'Grade Adjusted Pace'
I used 'effort pace' in my last half marathon over a few big undulations (700m elevation gain), paced it perfectly with a strong finish and PB just quicker than my predicted time.
I'm currently following a power based training plan for the Chicago marathon, using Stryd foot pods. Seems better than Garmin's implementation but means you have to buy the Stryd pod(s) Followed a power based plan for Lisbon half in March too hoping the race would 'prove' how effective it was or not but then was hot on the day which impacted the race so couldn't be sure Felt fit and strong since & pb'd Cork marathon with non power plan since but might just be down to the s&c aspect of the power plan So will see how it goes over next few weeks
When I get the alerts on the completion of each mile of kilometre it lets me know the average power but apart from that I never check it, seems a really good metric to use to show how we're doing on our runs though.
As others, I also find the power estimate on my Garmin watch pretty inaccurate. For example I created a hill rep workout based on power zones. If I use pace or heart rate for a hill workout that wouldn't work as it was explained in the video already, so I thought it will be the perfect use for the power zones. First time I used the workout I chose a pretty steep hill, tried to stay in the zones, I managed it quite OK. Next time I did it on a less steep hill, and my power readings were much higher. To stay in the zones, I had to maintain lower RPE. The third time the incline was changing between the intervals. On the steepest part I was not able to reach zone 5 with max effort, but when I needed zone 3 on a less steep part, I accidentally went into zone 5, even though it didn't feel that hard. This way it's pretty useless unless the incline doesn't change during the workout, but then the pace is also a good base for the intervals. Maybe foot pods would give better measurement, but we will not hear about that here, because the sponsor of the video doesn't make foot pods.
I'm on my third (and last) Stryd footpod, but I only use it for accurate instant pace, after calibrating each individual footpod because Stryd isn't as accurate on distance as it claims to be. At first I tried to use it for power, but I never did see a useful correlation between power and perceived effort, so I gave up. My heart rate varies widely from day to day over the same routes and I don't like to push it too high on warmer days just to hit consistent power numbers.
I know must be a dinosaur, a luddite or a MR LLATE (Make Rick Look Like A Tech Expert),or all three. I just don’t get the need so many metrics in running, especially for non-beginners. Do you really need a stat from a watch to tell you that you’re running hard, keeping the same pace uphill is difficult or you’re knackered? I can understand why cyclist might use it as rides are usually much longer and the effort difference between up and down hill (and wind etc) is much greater. I know many will find comfort in numbers but wonder how many hold themselves back because the numbers are too high. While that might stop people having a horrible experience and recording a DNF, it could also stop then having a "flyer" when for some reason they are able to much faster than expected. Given the importance of the mind when running, would be interesting to see impact on performance if a “data” runner was (without their knowledge) given a watch that always under/over reported data. Anyway, shouldn’t be a grumpy old man as love this channel and podcasts -and recommend it to everyone who so much as glances at a pair of trainers!
The numbers should always be supporting, at least they are for me. As many times as I'm thinking "wow, that's tough" in a workout and look at my watch to see I'm in high zone 4 or zone 5 (confirmation), just as many times do I think "wow, that's tough", look at my watch, and have it tell me I'm in zone 1 (obviously wrong and it's amazing how even a high-end Garmin like the Fēnix 7 Pro is terrible at heart rate sometimes). The stamina function on Garmin watches is similar. I think it works pretty well for pacing shorter road races like marathons, but on the first ultra I ran, my stamina was supposedly down to 5% by km 40, but I still made it to 76km. So take it all with a grain of salt. But on the other hand, I've started races where I was feeling fine, looked at my watch and saw that my heart rate was wayy too high and was then able to hold back, saving myself from going out too fast. Those times when how you're feeling isn't quite reliable (like at the start of a race), it's nice to have something objective to fall back on to make sound decisions. In training, though, after a few years of serious running, I can generally accurately gauge my rate of effort and, off of that, my heart rate, and I don't really need a watch for that. I mostly have the watch for navigation and to measure distance and time now.
@@livewire1957239 I agree that for some (many?) people the sats can be a useful tool to complement other factors, especially “feel.” I do think that the usefulness depends on the mind-set of the person. Consider the example of someone feeling really good and when they look at the stats, they indicate that they are working harder than planned. If the reaction is “wow! I am doing great today” then that’s great. But if it is “on no, I am working far too hard, I’ll regret this later” this could mean potentially slowing down unnecessarily or it becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy. I guess my main worry as that too much data leads to an overly mechanistic approach to performance. Stats/science cannot explain the 100% of performance difference between Olympic finalist (or even the performance difference between an Olympian and an occasional part runner). As humans we are wonderfully more complicated that a bio-machine on legs. Having said that, I do understand how such stats can be useful for elites in training as they are constantly pushing the boundaries of what is humanly possible. But this is not the case for your average (or even well above average) runner.
@@livewire1957239 I can see how some may find the stats and tech a useful complement to their running efforts. I think the benefits will depend on individual’s mindsets though. For example, consider a runner who is feeling really good and ahead of PB schedule. They look at the watch at it indicates that they are working harder than ever before. If the reaction is “Wow I really am doing well today,” then that’s great and will spur them on. If it “Oh no! I better slow down” that could lead to missed opportunities or self-fulfilling thoughts of disaster. I think my main issue is that all the stats encourage too much of a mechanistic approach to running. All the physiological analysis in the world cannot explain the performance difference between an Olympian and a very good runner (or even an occasional park runner). Humans are much more than an engine on legs. I do see the role of all the stats for elites’ training as they are constantly on the edge of pushing beyond what is possible. But for most runners, I feel that they mean you miss out on that joy (or pain) of knowing you achieved a surprising result.
Since when did you add Laura Muir to your crew? I also noticed the power wattage on the run results but didn't really pay much attention not knowing how the numbers should be interpreted to make it meaningful for my runs. This video will definitely help from now on. Thanks.
For this critical test, I'm surprised you're not using the external HR Monitor. Wrist based is rarely on point. I'd like to see a video on this, the difference between using the external HR monitor vs just the wrist based.
Running with power is far superior to running by HR or Pace. I have been running exclusively with power for 5 years, and would never go back to using inferior methods. But I don't think a watch-based measurement of power is going to give me the accuracy I need. Stryd foot pod is the way to go. There is a reason power is the dominant training method for cycling. The principles for running are the same, we are just catching up with the science in the running world.
Cycling power does not reflect speed. I can be pumping out 800W uphill and be ridding at 8MPH or 25 MPH on a flat stretch of road. The EFFORT i am putting into ridding is the same though. I use power to compare efforts needed during runs and rides. If a 5k today was slower than a previous one i can compare the effort put in (average power) and see if the terrain was the cause. I also use rhe Stryd pod and looking at my watch is not affecting the power reading.
For my part, it has been years since I bought a 1st generation Stryd (in the app I am considered a “pioneer”…. or something like that) Although I have never really used the data from my Stryd as a guide to train or “compete”?🙄 ”… I suppose that the delay in the indication of your heart rate (it has also happened to me many times, that when going up a hill or a slope, many times the increase/peak of the heartbeat has warned me when I was already up or down) It must possibly be... the truth is that I have no plausible or reasonable reason, and I would speak without knowledge 🤦🏻♂️🙈🤷🏻♂️ Today the latest generations of Stryd take into consideration the wind that you encounter on your outings, that helps because neither the rhythm nor the heart rate or the power that you have to develop when you have adverse weather conditions is not the same, and in terms of power headwind or gusts affect quite a bit…👀
Nice I would love a trainer to help me run more officially I do a lot of leg workouts arms and abs and then next day I do the run a fast 10k and then the day after my strength training a long distance marathon like run
I have a Stryd but stopped using it. I live in mostly flat area (Netherlands) so power equals pace most of the time. The watch, a Garmin, kept beeping at me when I did not use the Stryd so I deleted it from the setup.
Yeah, very hilly where I am in Scotland, so quite different. Plus the improvements they’ve made in these 2 years in the pods and app (on Apple Watch & iPhone anyway) have been great for me.
But what's your ftp & watts / kg? 😀 As a cyclist, power is very useful, but as a runner, I find it interesting but not as relevant as grade adjusted pace.
Been using running power (Stryd) since 2018/19. tried out the Garmin power and it's very inaccurate, Stryd is significantly better. I only ever run to power these days, HR / pace is too variable based on terrain that it negatively impacts the workout. Once you go power, you never go back
I used Stryd for moths, but stopped using. Still have it lying around. I live in a mostly flat area, so pace and hr is all I need, also the setup with Garmin was not very easy. Watch kept beeping at me when I wasn't using the Stryd.
I'm a cyclist turning into a runner and I don't even use power when cycling. In my opinion, it's just too expensive and offers little (if any) advantage in comparison to training to HR for someone who isn't professional.
I’ve been using Garmin watches for over 15years now and couldn’t run with out it with very interesting stats but don’t you think technology is over taking and taking the fun out of running and puts more pressure on yourself ? 🤷♂️
Yes xx All of my chip timed pbs were obtained when I was refusing to buy into the watch circus... I gave in and wouldn't be without it now but interestingly my performance has lessened, perhaps also due to ageing but also a little bit must be the inability to just run like a child without checking stats (I do love a start) perhaps a 'naked running week' should be an annual event or a 'naked running' festival.. People will still get chip times but I would love to analyse the data afterward x
If your threshold power is 330W and your "easy" runs are at 300W, it seems that power measurement is equally bad to heart rate in making your easy runs easy.
So.. I have a couple of hilly 30 milers booked in for next year , wondering how I could incorporate this into my training, I have taken my life from chasing pbs but now I tend to run smart for distance and tend toward a run 10min walk 2 min to enable me to keep going on and on and on ( it's more challenging than traditional walk the hills) would I benefit??? Hmmm x
Power is supposed to behave that way. However, in real life, sometimes it goes all over the place. It doesn't correlate as accurately as cycling power does.
The main reason is not used in running is because there is no way to actually measure it. Running power is a total guess estimate from the watch based on your pace, your weight, course grade, and more…, it can’t be accurate, it can’t consider wind, drafting, how much weight you are carrying etc… there is no strain gauge. It cannot be accurate. Cycling power is based on actual strain gauge, if properly setup, it is accurate.
Run power can be compared to your metabolic fitness with a few max effort runs. As long as the data is consistent then it is still useful for training and racing.
@@wemorgan it can be useful for sure, but unless it’s measured using an actual gauge, it won’t be accurate, it’s just an estimate and will vary wildly based on external conditions.
Been using a Stryd footpod since 2020. I live in an a quite hilly area, so power really helps with intensity control and with calibrating your sense of effort. When my power duration curve is decently filled out it gives me a tool to estimate what power to aim for for different durations of effort. I am an analytics guy, so power is also excellent for post run analysis and comparison across time. Pace is useless for that as the terrain influences it way too much.
Power with Stryd gives the best results for me. Without a “standard” for power, each company measures it differently. Stryd helped me so much and I am really grateful. It helped me win my age group in first marathon and crushed for a BQ. Pair it with a Garmin and if you really read those stats, it can be a big help in training
Initially got Stryd to overcome GPS dropouts in the forest while following pace-based plans. Then transitioned onto power-based plans and loved the freedom it gave me to do structured workouts on varied and hilly terrain. I think the most important thing for me is that it means you take on harder bits at a slower pace, helping prevent injury. These days I seem to be finding it a bit harder to stay within the recommended power range and am less focused on targeting constant power (both may be due to switching more towards ultra training - maybe my power recommendations are a bit off due to lots of slow long runs). However, it is still a useful reminder to slow down on long runs and up hills and it still helps with interval and tempo workouts, even if I don’t always stick perfectly to the power recommendations. I quite like their library of structured workouts too as it enables some variety to keep things fresh. Preferred their old training plans though.
Yup. Stryd pod is awesome! My run time have improved massively since I've switch to using running power
I am not using it yet, but was gonna look into it to incorporate it, specially after my failed 10k pb attempt last week, i was doing fine till km 6 having run a little hill with wind while maintaining my race pace, i almost emptied my tank, i think using power would have saved me some energy to get a pb on the second half. Thanks Sarah and the running channel team.
Stryd is awesome. Made training so easy
Been using Stryd for a couple of years and does not rely of GPS so really accurate.
If Garmin really believe running power is that effective why don't they give power as an option along with pace and heart rate in their suggested workouts
Exactly my thoughts.
I really don't know the real reason why GPS companies in general or Garmin in particular don't do what you say...
but I suppose it's because the power calculation device in this company (or others) is a separate device.
On the other hand, rhythm and/or heart rate are not essential since the rhythm is detected by the GPS capacity of the watch, and the heart rate by the optical sensor of the watch or the chest strap (which sometimes has come in a pack with the own GPS watch, especially in the past when the optical sensor did not come with the watch).
As I say, it's a guess on my part.
@@AH87saxo but it's not a separate device, it's on the watch? To me it's just another useless feature unless Garmin make using it easier, which is a shame, as the video says it has it's benefits
@@AH87saxo cycling power meters are all separate devices, but you cannot get daily suggested workouts without them
It might not be in their suggested workouts but it is a target option when setting up your own training session in the connect app. I find it really useful when training for shorter distance races.
When I switched back to running from cycling for the Alpecin Gran Fondo team, the first thing I went looking for was a power meter for running. I ended up with a Stryd and I do like it. Personally I would think it would be a bit more accurate than the Garmin version as it is mounted to your shoe and measures how hard you land and push off. So, I use this for running as well. I found it to be a great way to make sure I don’t set off too fast. 😉
Congrats on 700K! I use my watts for cycling but have never looked at it for running, I tend to just go off feel and pace
Thank you so much! Do you think you'll have a look at it now?
I used running power for pacing my last 10k race which had some rather hilly sections and it seemed to work well for me (got a pb 🥳 so must have been doing something right). Set my watch to alert me if I was pushing too hard on the earlier hills so I could back it off a bit. The last bit of the race had a final hill colloquially called the 'Crimple Killer'... I passed quite a few people on that hill and I think I was the only one smiling 🤣
Really glad it worked so well for you!!
Since your watch has running power I'm assuming it also has the pace pro functionality. You might also be interested in that as when you insert a course it will also give you the ability to set your pace depending on the incline, with sliders for your preference to take a hill easier or harder, or what actually should count as change in incline or not.
Example, you want to run 4min/km on a 10km but there is 1 hill with 4% climb for 400m and downhill 2% for 800m. It'll suggest to take the hill up at 4:20min/km and down at 3:50 (this evens out to 4min/km).
If you're running a really hilly course you can even choose to set autolap to incline change as you might only be able to run that 4min/km on the few flats in between. Once the incline changes enough the watch will lap and tell you "X pace for the next X meters"
@@CardboardGenie Sounds like a great feature but not everyone uses Garmin 😉
Disappointed not to have Rick giving us his knowledge on Power in this video. That would have been much more entertaining 😂
We need that x
@@emmarunyeard6832 Pulse NINJA!!!!!
I am a cyclist and runner and have been using power in running for the last 5 years if not longer (since garmin released thier data field). The value power gives you is not in pacing, its in understanding what is happening physiologically at each zone, so you understand what is being used from a oxygen perspective, lactic acid build up, etc.. so you can adjust your form or speed to recover or conserve depending your strategy. So its great for figuring out form improvements, what to eat or drink and how to adjust to scenarios midrace without the need to do much thinking. So its a very powerful tool and you cannot compare as you all have your own way of exerting energy, just tis consitent to you in your current form.
Foot > Chest > Wrist (based Power meters)
This is really interesting! Concerned about accuracy, so a foot pod would be really useful to make sure it is measured properly. I’ll definitely look into using it though.
Congratulations. Thanks for sharing your journey. What an incredible accomplishment. You’re an inspiration.
A cycling power meter is a electro-mechanical device that can accurately measure power through the crank / pedals, I don’t think a smartwatch can really get close to this accuracy, whereas heart rate sensors are quite accurate, even better with a chest strap, so I would prefer to base my efforts from a combination of heart rate and perceived effort.
The entire reason cyclists use power is because speed (ie pace) is a bad metric for a cyclist, because it's dominated by the wind. Runners are much less effected by the wind, so they just don't have that problem. Find a nice flat route and as long as it's not blowing a gale, your pace will be a very accurate indicator of your intensity. No magic pretend watt algorithms required.
IMO heart rate is just a different measurement.
Power is more of an alternative to pace (or GAP) if anything.
Pace is nice in that it is absolute, power is nice, in that it takes into account all of the things that pace alone does not.
It probably isn't super accurate, but the most important variables are pace and gradient, which shouldn't be very far off, then they just add GCT and vertical oscillation to fine tune the figure a bit.
And in the end, it doesn't really need to be accurate, it just needs to be consistent.
Funny i just added power to my data yesterday (fenix 5 through the connect IQ app). Too early to know if it's something I'll grow to love or not.
Despite all the training advice and data metrics a bit of me still thinks if you want to achieve a certain race time then you need to run to that pace irrespective of the course or the weather or how much caffeine you've had or which pair of shoes you have on etc. For those of us who just like running and aren't busily periodising for 1 or 2 key races a year is it really all that important.
This was a fantastic video and example!
Awesome video about running power! What do you guys think about making an updated video on running drills such as A/C skips, B skips and butt kicks (should you do them?) and any other drills?
Very interesting. Never used power. Will need to look into it to see how it might help.
Let us know what you think!
I will start looking at it. My watch says that my critical power is 293W but I haven’t paid any attention to it. I do agree that it should be a better realtime indicator than HR or pace.
Very interesting. Not sure I can get this on my watch (Garmin 945) but I will look into it. Great info as always 👌
Good item. Well covered 👍
I’ve always found Garmin’s power pretty useless. I use Stryd and it can be good for pacing races and tempo runs, but I also find that pretty useless for intervals and other faster workouts.
That's interesting, why do you find it useless?
@@runningchannel in Garmin’s case, the fact it’s just a number with no real context. I also have doubts about its accuracy both from a HRM and wrist, but I can’t say I’ve tested it thoroughly. Stryd’s power-duration model is quite good, and seems to predict race paces pretty well, but even then trying to run to a certain power is really awkward for any intervals shorter than 4 or 5 minutes. I end up just judging those intervals by feel.
Power could be useful as an alternative to pace based workouts on hilly terrain but I’d never use it to replace HR on base runs or threshold runs where I’m trying to train a specific energy system
I might start using this for intervals. Near my house it is quite hilly so I usually drive to somewhere more flat if I'm doing intervals.
Let us know how you find it!
I began to incorporate power on hill reps as I'd get instant feed back on effort...
Ive now switched to coros 'effort pace' which takes in to account gradient and combined with my foot pod is instant like 'Grade Adjusted Pace'
I used 'effort pace' in my last half marathon over a few big undulations (700m elevation gain), paced it perfectly with a strong finish and PB just quicker than my predicted time.
I'm currently following a power based training plan for the Chicago marathon, using Stryd foot pods. Seems better than Garmin's implementation but means you have to buy the Stryd pod(s)
Followed a power based plan for Lisbon half in March too hoping the race would 'prove' how effective it was or not but then was hot on the day which impacted the race so couldn't be sure
Felt fit and strong since & pb'd Cork marathon with non power plan since but might just be down to the s&c aspect of the power plan
So will see how it goes over next few weeks
When I get the alerts on the completion of each mile of kilometre it lets me know the average power but apart from that I never check it, seems a really good metric to use to show how we're doing on our runs though.
As others, I also find the power estimate on my Garmin watch pretty inaccurate.
For example I created a hill rep workout based on power zones. If I use pace or heart rate for a hill workout that wouldn't work as it was explained in the video already, so I thought it will be the perfect use for the power zones.
First time I used the workout I chose a pretty steep hill, tried to stay in the zones, I managed it quite OK. Next time I did it on a less steep hill, and my power readings were much higher. To stay in the zones, I had to maintain lower RPE. The third time the incline was changing between the intervals. On the steepest part I was not able to reach zone 5 with max effort, but when I needed zone 3 on a less steep part, I accidentally went into zone 5, even though it didn't feel that hard.
This way it's pretty useless unless the incline doesn't change during the workout, but then the pace is also a good base for the intervals.
Maybe foot pods would give better measurement, but we will not hear about that here, because the sponsor of the video doesn't make foot pods.
Interesting..
Is the power metric more accurate then wrist based heart rate monitor?
Thanks for sharing 😊
I'm on my third (and last) Stryd footpod, but I only use it for accurate instant pace, after calibrating each individual footpod because Stryd isn't as accurate on distance as it claims to be. At first I tried to use it for power, but I never did see a useful correlation between power and perceived effort, so I gave up. My heart rate varies widely from day to day over the same routes and I don't like to push it too high on warmer days just to hit consistent power numbers.
I know must be a dinosaur, a luddite or a MR LLATE (Make Rick Look Like A Tech Expert),or all three. I just don’t get the need so many metrics in running, especially for non-beginners. Do you really need a stat from a watch to tell you that you’re running hard, keeping the same pace uphill is difficult or you’re knackered? I can understand why cyclist might use it as rides are usually much longer and the effort difference between up and down hill (and wind etc) is much greater.
I know many will find comfort in numbers but wonder how many hold themselves back because the numbers are too high. While that might stop people having a horrible experience and recording a DNF, it could also stop then having a "flyer" when for some reason they are able to much faster than expected. Given the importance of the mind when running, would be interesting to see impact on performance if a “data” runner was (without their knowledge) given a watch that always under/over reported data.
Anyway, shouldn’t be a grumpy old man as love this channel and podcasts -and recommend it to everyone who so much as glances at a pair of trainers!
The numbers should always be supporting, at least they are for me. As many times as I'm thinking "wow, that's tough" in a workout and look at my watch to see I'm in high zone 4 or zone 5 (confirmation), just as many times do I think "wow, that's tough", look at my watch, and have it tell me I'm in zone 1 (obviously wrong and it's amazing how even a high-end Garmin like the Fēnix 7 Pro is terrible at heart rate sometimes).
The stamina function on Garmin watches is similar. I think it works pretty well for pacing shorter road races like marathons, but on the first ultra I ran, my stamina was supposedly down to 5% by km 40, but I still made it to 76km. So take it all with a grain of salt.
But on the other hand, I've started races where I was feeling fine, looked at my watch and saw that my heart rate was wayy too high and was then able to hold back, saving myself from going out too fast. Those times when how you're feeling isn't quite reliable (like at the start of a race), it's nice to have something objective to fall back on to make sound decisions.
In training, though, after a few years of serious running, I can generally accurately gauge my rate of effort and, off of that, my heart rate, and I don't really need a watch for that. I mostly have the watch for navigation and to measure distance and time now.
@@livewire1957239 I agree that for some (many?) people the sats can be a useful tool to complement other factors, especially “feel.” I do think that the usefulness depends on the mind-set of the person. Consider the example of someone feeling really good and when they look at the stats, they indicate that they are working harder than planned. If the reaction is “wow! I am doing great today” then that’s great. But if it is “on no, I am working far too hard, I’ll regret this later” this could mean potentially slowing down unnecessarily or it becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy. I guess my main worry as that too much data leads to an overly mechanistic approach to performance. Stats/science cannot explain the 100% of performance difference between Olympic finalist (or even the performance difference between an Olympian and an occasional part runner). As humans we are wonderfully more complicated that a bio-machine on legs. Having said that, I do understand how such stats can be useful for elites in training as they are constantly pushing the boundaries of what is humanly possible. But this is not the case for your average (or even well above average) runner.
@@livewire1957239 I can see how some may find the stats and tech a useful complement to their running efforts. I think the benefits will depend on individual’s mindsets though. For example, consider a runner who is feeling really good and ahead of PB schedule. They look at the watch at it indicates that they are working harder than ever before. If the reaction is “Wow I really am doing well today,” then that’s great and will spur them on. If it “Oh no! I better slow down” that could lead to missed opportunities or self-fulfilling thoughts of disaster. I think my main issue is that all the stats encourage too much of a mechanistic approach to running. All the physiological analysis in the world cannot explain the performance difference between an Olympian and a very good runner (or even an occasional park runner). Humans are much more than an engine on legs. I do see the role of all the stats for elites’ training as they are constantly on the edge of pushing beyond what is possible. But for most runners, I feel that they mean you miss out on that joy (or pain) of knowing you achieved a surprising result.
Since when did you add Laura Muir to your crew?
I also noticed the power wattage on the run results but didn't really pay much attention not knowing how the numbers should be interpreted to make it meaningful for my runs. This video will definitely help from now on. Thanks.
Let us know how you get on with using it as a metric?
For this critical test, I'm surprised you're not using the external HR Monitor. Wrist based is rarely on point. I'd like to see a video on this, the difference between using the external HR monitor vs just the wrist based.
I use power instead of pace because I live in a really hilly area and its almost impossible to stay at the same pace
I use perceived effort with a HR alarm just in case it goes too high.
Running with power is far superior to running by HR or Pace. I have been running exclusively with power for 5 years, and would never go back to using inferior methods. But I don't think a watch-based measurement of power is going to give me the accuracy I need. Stryd foot pod is the way to go. There is a reason power is the dominant training method for cycling. The principles for running are the same, we are just catching up with the science in the running world.
Got a new challenge idea! Join forces with Global Triathlon Network and well.. all do a triathlon, maybe in costume though or something to jazz it up!
sorry did Sarah say her favourite was strength ... had to replay 3 times
Use heart rate all the time. With a chest strap it works really good for me. Know myself well enough so I don't see an use case for power in running.
Cycling power does not reflect speed. I can be pumping out 800W uphill and be ridding at 8MPH or 25 MPH on a flat stretch of road. The EFFORT i am putting into ridding is the same though.
I use power to compare efforts needed during runs and rides.
If a 5k today was slower than a previous one i can compare the effort put in (average power) and see if the terrain was the cause.
I also use rhe Stryd pod and looking at my watch is not affecting the power reading.
For my part, it has been years since I bought a 1st generation Stryd (in the app I am considered a “pioneer”…. or something like that)
Although I have never really used the data from my Stryd as a guide to train or “compete”?🙄 ”…
I suppose that the delay in the indication of your heart rate (it has also happened to me many times, that when going up a hill or a slope, many times the increase/peak of the heartbeat has warned me when I was already up or down) It must possibly be... the truth is that I have no plausible or reasonable reason, and I would speak without knowledge 🤦🏻♂️🙈🤷🏻♂️
Today the latest generations of Stryd take into consideration the wind that you encounter on your outings, that helps because neither the rhythm nor the heart rate or the power that you have to develop when you have adverse weather conditions is not the same, and in terms of power headwind or gusts affect quite a bit…👀
Nice I would love a trainer to help me run more officially I do a lot of leg workouts arms and abs and then next day I do the run a fast 10k and then the day after my strength training a long distance marathon like run
Power has been my primary guide, with Stryd, since June 2022. Completely changed my approach to training and racing, all positively.
I have a Stryd but stopped using it. I live in mostly flat area (Netherlands) so power equals pace most of the time. The watch, a Garmin, kept beeping at me when I did not use the Stryd so I deleted it from the setup.
Yeah, very hilly where I am in Scotland, so quite different. Plus the improvements they’ve made in these 2 years in the pods and app (on Apple Watch & iPhone anyway) have been great for me.
If I use an HRM strap along with my garmin, does it still use how hard I’m swinging my arm to measure power?
But what's your ftp & watts / kg? 😀 As a cyclist, power is very useful, but as a runner, I find it interesting but not as relevant as grade adjusted pace.
Should I upgrade myself to electrical power one of these days?
Is this feature only available on select Garmin watches?
yes, mostly watches about 4yr older or less
* immediately scrolls to power stats *
hahaha and what did you find?
@@runningchannel that I need to spend some time on understanding all this new info!
same
Been using running power (Stryd) since 2018/19. tried out the Garmin power and it's very inaccurate, Stryd is significantly better. I only ever run to power these days, HR / pace is too variable based on terrain that it negatively impacts the workout. Once you go power, you never go back
I used Stryd for moths, but stopped using. Still have it lying around. I live in a mostly flat area, so pace and hr is all I need, also the setup with Garmin was not very easy. Watch kept beeping at me when I wasn't using the Stryd.
10 min threshold reps is brutal
I really want to use power, but my watch doesn't support it, so I can only view it on the app afterwards.
Compatible watches start at about £200
👍
I'm a cyclist turning into a runner and I don't even use power when cycling. In my opinion, it's just too expensive and offers little (if any) advantage in comparison to training to HR for someone who isn't professional.
That's interesting! Do you use anything other than HR?
I’ve been using Garmin watches for over 15years now and couldn’t run with out it with very interesting stats but don’t you think technology is over taking and taking the fun out of running and puts more pressure on yourself ? 🤷♂️
Yes xx All of my chip timed pbs were obtained when I was refusing to buy into the watch circus... I gave in and wouldn't be without it now but interestingly my performance has lessened, perhaps also due to ageing but also a little bit must be the inability to just run like a child without checking stats (I do love a start) perhaps a 'naked running week' should be an annual event or a 'naked running' festival.. People will still get chip times but I would love to analyse the data afterward x
How can 2 person of same weight and height, running at the same pace product different power? What is left, heart rate?
they will likely have very similar power. Heart rate does not influence power.
If your threshold power is 330W and your "easy" runs are at 300W, it seems that power measurement is equally bad to heart rate in making your easy runs easy.
I imagine the Power metric won't take a headwind into account for running where Heart Rate will.
The STryd does take wind into account, they say.
Is HR the only metric you use?
Garmin Power has always been very much higher that the Stryd footpod power, as Stryd are the experts what is Garmin doing wrong?
as long as you dont try to mix the data and that Garmin is consistent, then you're ok to train with Garmin power
no running power with 6x pro....which cheapest watch using it?
Garmin 255 has power. Or you can buy a Stryd footpod to pair to your 6x and use that power instead
@@wemorgan what about POLAR H9 too?
@@tadejdanev5030 no, that's only for heart rate, it wont give power to your Garmin watch I believe
@@wemorgan thanks :)
@@wemorgan so 255 is the cheapest power watch and everything that comes with it...vertical etc......
My Garmin says I only run in power zone 5 😅
❤😮❤
Yes, same for me😂
I don't quite understand it (need the Rick presentation 😂) but I reckon I need to get on board and try it x
So.. I have a couple of hilly 30 milers booked in for next year , wondering how I could incorporate this into my training, I have taken my life from chasing pbs but now I tend to run smart for distance and tend toward a run 10min walk 2 min to enable me to keep going on and on and on ( it's more challenging than traditional walk the hills) would I benefit??? Hmmm x
Power is supposed to behave that way. However, in real life, sometimes it goes all over the place. It doesn't correlate as accurately as cycling power does.
a footpod would help with that
Not used it only heart rate and pace
Think you'll try it out?
@@runningchannel I think I will when I can find out how to set it up on my garmin fenix 6x pro
The main reason is not used in running is because there is no way to actually measure it. Running power is a total guess estimate from the watch based on your pace, your weight, course grade, and more…, it can’t be accurate, it can’t consider wind, drafting, how much weight you are carrying etc… there is no strain gauge. It cannot be accurate. Cycling power is based on actual strain gauge, if properly setup, it is accurate.
Run power can be compared to your metabolic fitness with a few max effort runs. As long as the data is consistent then it is still useful for training and racing.
@@wemorgan it can be useful for sure, but unless it’s measured using an actual gauge, it won’t be accurate, it’s just an estimate and will vary wildly based on external conditions.
Power from Garmin is not user friendly, using a Stryd power meter is so much more reliable and user friendly.
I juss canny doo it captain, I juss doon have the poo-wer!
😂😂😂😂😂
blutooth power meter insoles incoming
Hopefully Rick doesn't watch this. His blissful ignorance of terminology amuses me to no end.
I don’t have a garmin.
Do you have any running watch?
@@runningchannel I use my Apple Watch.
@@BruceWayne-us3kw Apple watch has run power too
@@wemorgan mine doesn’t. It’s an older model.