Garmin and wko+

mloc123

Anyone using wko+ with their garmin data? Seeing some problems with the data breakdown, is there a problem with Garmins 'smart' recording and wko+?

tunney

mloc123 wrote: »

Anyone using wko+ with their garmin data? Seeing some problems with the data breakdown, is there a problem with Garmins 'smart' recording and wko+?

Garmin records junk. Its utterly utterly useless for any sort of proper data analysis. I use WKO and while I would love to use the ATL/CTL/TSB aspect of it for running there isn't a chance of doing so with Garmin data.

WKO say that the latest builds of WKO 3.0 are better at dealing with it but I've not upgraded as they've stopped supported 64bit XP pro.

mloc123

tunney wrote: »

I use WKO and while I would love to use the ATL/CTL/TSB aspect of it for running there isn't a chance of doing so with Garmin data.

This is what I was hoping to use it for alright. I only noticed the issues when I created a chart to break down a run into time spent in each hr zone, a 65min run totaled about 30 mins... this I presume is wko taking each sample as a second apart when each sample can be a few seconds apart.

This is on the latest build, pity

tunney

mloc123 wrote: »

This is what I was hoping to use it for alright. I only noticed the issues when I created a chart to break down a run into time spent in each hr zone, a 65min run totaled about 30 mins... this I presume is wko taking each sample as a second apart when each sample can be a few seconds apart.

This is on the latest build, pity

While WKO could deal with it better it is a problem with Garmin first and foremost.

mloc123

tunney wrote: »

While WKO could deal with it better it is a problem with Garmin first and foremost.

I understand that, I don't see why they won't include sample rate as a user option

tunney

mloc123 wrote: »

I understand that, I don't see why they won't include sample rate as a user option

Option a) : They skimped on memory and it can't store much per second
Option b) : If stored per second people could see the utter junk it records.

mloc123

tunney wrote: »

Option a) : They skimped on memory and it can't store much per second
Option b) : If stored per second people could see the utter junk it records.

hah, still not convinced on the HR data then? I don't see the same spikes since swapping to the old style strap but I still think my cheap sigma HRM does a much better job.

tunney

mloc123 wrote: »

hah, still not convinced on the HR data then? I don't see the same spikes since swapping to the old style strap but I still think my cheap sigma HRM does a much better job.

Total cack.