Messages

1

TopoFusion Pro / Automerging Garmin .tcx with Laps?

« on: December 10, 2008, 04:20:16 PM »

Hi there,

I use the GOVSS feature to track and plan my running training volume, but there's a large inconvenience in the workflow I use as it stands right now.

I use Garmin trainging center to auto-download and organize my track logs, and export workouts as .tcx to analyze in Topofusion. I also use an autolap feature to get automatic 1 mile laps taken.

Unfortunately, a .tcx with laps taken appears to topofusion as a number of separate tracks within the same file. I can use the merge tool to connect them before analysis, but this is somewhat cumbersome for repeated loops or out-and-backs.

Could there be an option added to the merge tool to automatically merge multiple tracks within one file sorted by time? Or a detection routine that would merge on .tcx import if the files are seperated by only a single sample/few seconds?

Actually, another small annoyance is that the GOVSS analysis doesn't warn you if you're analyzing a file with multiple tracks, and returns info based only on the first track within that file. Took me a while to figure out my GOVSS numbers were only for my first mile of each run! '>

Thanks for any input on this,

Ethan O'Connor

2

Archived - Feedback and Comments / GOVSS -- Underestimating Power??

« on: October 03, 2006, 07:47:19 AM »

Interesting -- so this is a calculation of some sort of "net power" excluding base metabolism and inefficiencies in converting metabolic power to locomotive power...

This makes the numbers make quite a bit of sense, since typical running efficiencies are around 35-40%, and my base metabolism over 21.3 minutes should be around 30 calories, so:

(85 / .35) + 30 = 272 calories, which is right in line with traditional calculations for that effort.

Cool! I guess then my only remaining question is again on the mismatch between AveragePower * Time and the calorie calculation. It's a small mismatch but I think Average Power would have to mean something other than I expect for that mismatch to occur. Just trying to get my head around all of this since I think I'm going to take the plunge and base my training on it for the next 6 months as an experiment.

3

Archived - Feedback and Comments / GOVSS -- Underestimating Power??

« on: October 02, 2006, 11:16:31 PM »

Ah -- I had a thought while in the shower after the run analyzed above. I didn't have 1-per-second logging turned on. Could that fact interact with your implementation in such a way to cause this sort of problem? If so, maybe a check for the trackpoint interval and a warning in the run dialog would prevent some confusion. If not, never mind '>

4

Archived - Feedback and Comments / GOVSS -- Underestimating Power??

« on: October 02, 2006, 10:20:15 PM »

Hi there,

I'm really excited about the GOVSS feature -- it seems like a great tool for tracking total training intensity over time and it fits with what I feel is the way I want to evaluate my runs.

I do have a question about the power estimates being given, however. Here's an example from a run I just finished:

Distance: 2.49mi
Time: 21:21.0
My Height: 1.76m
My Weight: 70kg

Average Power: 265.82W
KCal Expended: 85.16

Which is waaay below the traditional rule of thumb of 100KCal per mile. My initial thought was that the calorie calculation was off, but it is at least roughly consistent with the average power:

265.8W * 21:21.0 = 81kcal

So, I guess there are two questions:

Is a 155 pound man running at an 8:30 pace really only burning 250 calories an hour? The figure from the method of McArdle et al (from _Exercise Phsiology 3rd Ed._, Lea and Febiger eds., 1991) would be about 286 calories and 805 calories per hour (http://www.sdtc.com/cal.html)

And, less critically, why the discrepancy between the power*time (81kcal) and the calories expended reported by TopoFusion (85kcal)?

Thanks for any insight!!! TopoFusion rocks '>

5

Archived Support / Will the new Garmin 305 Forerunner be supported?

« on: March 14, 2006, 09:39:53 AM »

A quick test seems to indicate that the Forerunner 205 works fine with 2.85! Thanks!

6

Archived Support / Will the new Garmin 305 Forerunner be supported?

« on: March 10, 2006, 03:14:35 PM »

I got my 205 in the mail today -- if you need any beta testing of support for it just let me know!

It's _awesome_, by the way, at least as regards the promises of better reception. I live in an urban area (Cambridge, MA, near Kendall Square) and the 201 was almost unusable for me. The 205 locks on in <30 seconds in my house, and doesn't seem to get tripped up by some pretty harsh urban canyoning around my neighborhood. It held lock in my bank, so I tried going into an office building. It lost lock, but gained it again in under 5 seconds when I left the building more than 20 minutes later!

7

Feature Requests / Feature Request: Terrain Distance Effect

« on: September 26, 2005, 12:20:17 PM »

You're definitely right that the effect is often way smaller than you might intuit... but there are some trails around here that average 45% for a mile at a time and > 70% for .3 miles or so. I can admit that maybe the slope-adjusted distance isn't really relavant for understanding your performance on these kinds of trails, but it'd be cool to get topofusion's results to better match up with the guidebooks' when I'm showing friends '>

Thanks as always for the great software...

Ethan O'Connor

8

Feature Requests / Feature Request: Terrain Distance Effect

« on: September 26, 2005, 10:17:53 AM »

Hi there,

I've been doing some runs and hikes lately where the terrain effect on distance is quite significant (average slopes of > 30% for extended stretches); would it be possible at some point to add a "calculate over-ground distance of path" option to the climbing analysis dialog (or elsewhere)?

Thanks,

Ethan O'Connor
ethan.oconnor@gmail.com