Good luck getting accurate power measurements for running.
But using power, 87-94% of FTP isn't a narrow range?
This is where I will sort of defend power. I can do this, on the treadmill or flat with no wind. But I know, I know, I probably could do this with pace, or HR on the control of the treadmill.
It's difficult (as others) to hit this range just using power alone, into the wind or if it's very hilly. You might be lucky, you might not be. Just about everyone would concede Stryd need to work on this and come up with a better universal solution or algorithm.
But it is bit crazy to imply sirpoc doesn't understand power or that he hasn't tried to make it work, or user error. (many posts on trying to fix the problems, including him and Hard2find contacting Stryd direct from memories of the early days?).
Hills (not wide) are where running power has the greatest potential. Unfortunately, Stryd changed their algorithm in response to consumer sentiment, such power on the flat vs. uphill vs. downhill is no longer directly comparable.
Hills (not wide) are where running power has the greatest potential. Unfortunately, Stryd changed their algorithm in response to consumer sentiment, such power on the flat vs. uphill vs. downhill is no longer directly comparable.
Do you have any more information on this? I feel like something changed but I have never heard anything from Stryd. To the point where I stopped using the latest version for NSM on rolling terrain. Why would they do this?
>>Hills (not wide) are where running power has the greatest potential. Unfortunately, Stryd changed their algorithm in response to consumer sentiment, such power on the flat vs. uphill vs. downhill is no longer directly comparable.
The whole point of measuring power is to compare it to runs/rides in different conditions. If that doesn't work then it's useless. Same with wind - if it doesn't work with strong wind then it's useless. If you are running on flats with no wind then you can just use power in W/kg = speed in m/s. To improve on this simple equation you need a device that gives reliable measurements in the wind or uphill/downhill.
>>But using power, 87-94% of FTP isn't a narrow range?
It may seem so but in practice any range with few % tolerance is very easy to hit with a working PM.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
>>Hills (not wide) are where running power has the greatest potential. Unfortunately, Stryd changed their algorithm in response to consumer sentiment, such power on the flat vs. uphill vs. downhill is no longer directly comparable.
The whole point of measuring power is to compare it to runs/rides in different conditions. If that doesn't work then it's useless. Same with wind - if it doesn't work with strong wind then it's useless. If you are running on flats with no wind then you can just use power in W/kg = speed in m/s. To improve on this simple equation you need a device that gives reliable measurements in the wind or uphill/downhill.
>>But using power, 87-94% of FTP isn't a narrow range?
It may seem so but in practice any range with few % tolerance is very easy to hit with a working PM.
This is BS. Stryd works great if you know how to use it, as Steve points out. User error accounts for almost exclusively all known issues. Steve is very good and knowledgeable and can coach you to use it properly. People being simply technologically simple isn't his or Stryd's fault.
This is BS. Stryd works great if you know how to use it, as Steve points out. User error accounts for almost exclusively all known issues. Steve is very good and knowledgeable and can coach you to use it properly. People being simply technologically simple isn't his or Stryd's fault.
What does this mean? I saw Steve also make this comment.
How can you have user error for a power meter? You should just connect it to your device and it just work.
I'm not even trying to play devil's advocate. All I do with a cycling power meter is just connect it, press calibrate and off I go. No user input or chance for user error required.
. There is no such thing as running power in a true sense
Power is a physical concept, defined as the rate of doing work. The latter is defined force times distance (displacement). Are you saying that runners don't apply any force or create any displacement of their body mass? If so, you must live in a different universe from everyone else.
Hills (not wide) are where running power has the greatest potential. Unfortunately, Stryd changed their algorithm in response to consumer sentiment, such power on the flat vs. uphill vs. downhill is no longer directly comparable.
Do you have any more information on this? I feel like something changed but I have never heard anything from Stryd. To the point where I stopped using the latest version for NSM on rolling terrain. Why would they do this?
It was over a decade ago, so seemingly unrelated to your recent experience.
The change was made to make the reported power data align more closely with metabolic demand and hence users' perception of effort. Unfortunately, it means that the reported data aren't strictly physics-based, as you would think they would be.
. There is no such thing as running power in a true sense
Power is a physical concept, defined as the rate of doing work. The latter is defined force times distance (displacement). Are you saying that runners don't apply any force or create any displacement of their body mass? If so, you must live in a different universe from everyone else.
Apologies. What I meant was there isn't anything that can measure running power, in the true sense one would expect.
>>Hills (not wide) are where running power has the greatest potential. Unfortunately, Stryd changed their algorithm in response to consumer sentiment, such power on the flat vs. uphill vs. downhill is no longer directly comparable.
The whole point of measuring power is to compare it to runs/rides in different conditions. If that doesn't work then it's useless. Same with wind - if it doesn't work with strong wind then it's useless. If you are running on flats with no wind then you can just use power in W/kg = speed in m/s. To improve on this simple equation you need a device that gives reliable measurements in the wind or uphill/downhill.
>>But using power, 87-94% of FTP isn't a narrow range?
It may seem so but in practice any range with few % tolerance is very easy to hit with a working PM.
This is BS. Stryd works great if you know how to use it, as Steve points out. User error accounts for almost exclusively all known issues. Steve is very good and knowledgeable and can coach you to use it properly. People being simply technologically simple isn't his or Stryd's fault.
As yet another Stryd owner for years (three generations of the pod) it has been useful to me, but there are issues with the power reporting when running in rolling terrain and gusty headwinds.
Your condescending tone reminds me of the Stryd owner Angus. Are you him?
This is BS. Stryd works great if you know how to use it, as Steve points out. User error accounts for almost exclusively all known issues. Steve is very good and knowledgeable and can coach you to use it properly. People being simply technologically simple isn't his or Stryd's fault.
What does this mean? I saw Steve also make this comment.
How can you have user error for a power meter? You should just connect it to your device and it just work.
I'm not even trying to play devil's advocate. All I do with a cycling power meter is just connect it, press calibrate and off I go. No user input or chance for user error required.
The pod is sensitive to placement and not being “loose” as well as not having anything blocking the air pressure sensor. Common problem for me is thin shoe laces which gives the pod a loose fit, but I solved that by putting a thin strip of rubber between the pod’s foot cradle and laces.
Power is a physical concept, defined as the rate of doing work. The latter is defined force times distance (displacement). Are you saying that runners don't apply any force or create any displacement of their body mass? If so, you must live in a different universe from everyone else.
Apologies. What I meant was there isn't anything that can measure running power, in the true sense one would expect.
And once again you would be wrong. There are multiple such devices on the market, not just Stryd. The only point of debate might be their precision and accuracy.
However, even that isn't really up for much contention, as there are multiple scientific studies validating such sensors (with Stryd typically being the best)
Lol, what a silly question. You don't run 3:46 on only vanilla ice cream.
For the sake of my sanity I'll choose to believe this was downvoted because of the condescending way you wrote this and not that 6 people believe you can run 3:46 with no speed work....
For the sake of clearness when it comes to the voting here at LRC I personally think it made LRC worse.When you are at a sect thread like this you will always be downvoted if you tell something doesn't agree with the sect's views. LoL
Apologies. What I meant was there isn't anything that can measure running power, in the true sense one would expect.
And once again you would be wrong. There are multiple such devices on the market, not just Stryd. The only point of debate might be their precision and accuracy.
However, even that isn't really up for much contention, as there are multiple scientific studies validating such sensors (with Stryd typically being the best)
As I recall the studies I’ve seen shows higher a correlation to oxygen consumption while running on treadmills and no wind in a lab.
I’m not a cyclist but I for sure can understand their frustration with the Stryd pod.
just the practical considerations of using power in running vs cycling make it not a viable option
in cycling you have power on a fixed location, not on your wrist
same reason you cant keep staring at you bpm in most case applies even more here
sure, if you have it displayed and youre on a treadmill maybe, but again its viability in the field is limited by this as well as all the other shortcomings laid out above