Parkrun Ireland

TRR

digger2d2 wrote: »

And a fair few of the pages are stuck together

Digger you are on fire this evening. Every thread you've posted in is filthy

ciah

dj30 wrote: »

I just did my second parkrun in Marlay park this morning. Fantastic event and great organisation as it always seems to be.

Just wondering if anyone else was using a GPS tracker watch? While I was delighted with my time (<23 minutes), both times I have done the run, my watch has measured it at around 4.85km instead of 5k. I know it doesn't sound like much - but would need to add about 45-50 seconds to my time if my watch really is accurate (which is a time I'd be less happy with)

I'm sure this is an inaccuracy in my watch rather than the course, and would be quicker to rely on the methods the organisers use to measure the course, but would be keen to hear other's experiences.

When I got my Garmin 910XT, I noticed that when I zoomed in on a run route in Garmin Connect that a lot of corners were being cut. I changed the default logging on my Garmin from "automatic" to "per second" which resolved this issue.

Krusty_Clown

ciah wrote: »

When I got my Garmin 910XT, I noticed that when I zoomed in on a run route in Garmin Connect that a lot of corners were being cut. I changed the default logging on my Garmin from "automatic" to "per second" which resolved this issue.

Per second recording doesn't change the overall accuracy of the GPS recording. The watch will always capture a track-point every second, however with smart recording enabled, the watch will simply discard many of the additional trackpoints, but retains the information that was used to calculate distance/pace etc. It makes for a smaller track-log. It should improve the accuracy of the drawing on Garmin Connect in Satellite view, but should not change the overall distance or pace. I got 3.12 miles (5.02 kms).

ciah

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Per second recording doesn't change the overall accuracy of the GPS recording. The watch will always capture a track-point every second, however with smart recording enabled, the watch will simply discard many of the additional trackpoints, but retains the information that was used to calculate distance/pace etc. It makes for a smaller track-log. It should improve the accuracy of the drawing on Garmin Connect in Satellite view, but should not change the overall distance or pace. I got 3.12 miles (5.02 kms).

Interesting. My Garmin manual only states "Smart Recording - records key points where you change direction, speed, or heart rate". Must check the accuracy by running a the 100m of a running track back and forth a few times in both modes to verify that distance recording is consistent.

Krusty_Clown

ciah wrote: »

Interesting. My Garmin manual only states "Smart Recording - records key points where you change direction, speed, or heart rate". Must check the accuracy by running a the 100m of a running track back and forth a few times in both modes to verify that distance recording is consistent.

More on the subject here. Essentially it just means that you can fit more activities (trackpoints in the watches memory (more important for legacy devices which didn't have a lot of memory) but also ANT+ transfers are a lot smaller (and faster). It also gives you greater resolution in your data, if you perform very detailed analysis (e.g. in tools outside of Garmin Connect/Training centre).

Donny5

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

The watch will always capture a track-point every second, however with smart recording enabled, the watch will simply discard many of the additional trackpoints, but retains the information that was used to calculate distance/pace etc.

Are you sure about that? That would be very unusual behaviour for a GPS chipset. Updating is an expensive operation, and in the interests of battery life, it's likely that the chipset will only update when necessary. Storing the results of the update are extremely inexpensive comparitively, so it would be a very strange choice for the receiver to operate at 1Hz, use the information for pace and distance but then discard the data point.

It's much more likely that the setting is changing the update rate of the chipset, something that is commonly done.

Krusty_Clown

Donny5 wrote: »

Are you sure about that? That would be very unusual behaviour for a GPS chipset. Updating is an expensive operation, and in the interests of battery life, it's likely that the chipset will only update when necessary. Storing the results of the update are extremely inexpensive comparitively, so it would be a very strange choice for the receiver to operate at 1Hz, use the information for pace and distance but then discard the data point.

It's much more likely that the setting is changing the update rate of the chipset, something that is commonly done.

We should probably move this conversation over to the Garmin thread, but... The function does not have its roots in battery-saving, but rather in memory-efficiency (from a point in time when memory was more costly). The Forerunners will record a track-point at 1Hz frequency (for accuracy) but discard the additional track-points (while maintain the distance/speed totals/data).

The only occasion when smart recording will adversely affect the accuracy of a track-log is when it is analyzed in another tool (like Sportstracks) which will recalculate the totals, based on the available track-points and result in a discrepancy. If you are going to use a tool like Sportstracks, you should not use smart recording.

belcarra

So, Smart Recording is the reason why the graphs in GC are sparse for the main part but then towards the end of the run they often become much more detailed, yes?
I always wondered what led to that effect...

RunningKing

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

The only occasion when smart recording will adversely affect the accuracy of a track-log is when it is analyzed in another tool (like Sportstracks) which will recalculate the totals, based on the available track-points and result in a discrepancy. If you are going to use a tool like Sportstracks, you should not use smart recording.

Exceptional - I use Sportstracks and always found my interval splits off when compared to GC.
Must try to rectify that!

Whats the lotto numbers Krusty?

Krusty_Clown

belcarra wrote: »

So, Smart Recording is the reason why the graphs in GC are sparse for the main part but then towards the end of the run they often become much more detailed, yes?

Ehm.... That's because you are slowing down.

RunningKing wrote:

Whats the lotto numbers Krusty?

I'm seeing a '7'.

Nappy

Well done to the guys who set this up!

My sister in england runs these over there all the time and was raving about them. Looking forward to making my debut this saturday.

Van.Bosch

Macroom now has a page on the website, starts 18th May. Great to see this start to spread around the country.

Nappy

Anyone got an idea when we should get the results for the Marlay parkrun. I did my first run today. Are we emailed?

Thanks

RedRunner

Nappy wrote: »

Anyone got an idea when we should get the results for the Marlay parkrun. I did my first run today. Are we emailed?

Thanks

I do the Malahide one and usually get an email later in the day and also results posted up on the website. No sign of our results yet but they'll be definitely out today,they always are.

Skid X

Nappy wrote: »

Anyone got an idea when we should get the results for the Marlay parkrun. I did my first run today. Are we emailed?

Thanks

They usually send the e-mail out by the early evening.

The results will appear at this link slightly quicker, still showing last week's race run at the moment.

http://www.parkrun.ie/marlay/results/latestresults/

opus

Just got an email about the first parkrun in Cork, well in Macroom but still!

http://www.parkrun.ie/castledemense/

UltraRunPaul

Hi, Griffeen Valley Parkrun will be kicking off in Lucan on 15/6/13. We're on Facebook and http://www.parkrun.ie/griffeen/

Hope to see you there!

gerard_65

A record turnout of over 400 in Marley was greeted with a glorious summer morning. Still not able to race but enjoyed scanning. A few boardies (and ex-boardies) who I didn't have time to chat to but good to see them back.

Letyourselfgo

gerard_65 wrote: »

A record turnout of over 400 in Marley was greeted with a glorious summer morning. Still not able to race but enjoyed scanning. A few boardies (and ex-boardies) who I didn't have time to chat to but good to see them back.

Nice hair cut
I was a bit dizzy after the race so sorry for not chatting and thanks for your efforts, great day out.

AJAYC

gerard_65 wrote: »

A record turnout of over 400 in Marley was greeted with a glorious summer morning. Still not able to race but enjoyed scanning. A few boardies (and ex-boardies) who I didn't have time to chat to but good to see them back.

Thanks again for helping, hopefully roles will be reversed soon, I'm due to put on the high viz top soon.

KillianByrne

Thoroughly enjoying Parkrun in Marlay with no 'goal races' to train for. The dog & I had great fun working our way around in the sunshine at a super leisurely pace this morning.

Willo2011

Hi
Just wondering has anyone done the Marley Parkrun and the Malahide one and if so, how did the courses compare? I've done the Malahide one and the course is a bit undulating so hoping the Marley course is faster. Planning on doing it Saturday morning. Tks

gerard_65

Willo2011 wrote: »

Hi
Just wondering has anyone done the Marley Parkrun and the Malahide one and if so, how did the courses compare? I've done the Malahide one and the course is a bit undulating so hoping the Marley course is faster. Planning on doing it Saturday morning. Tks

Marley has one fairly steep hill about 150m long. First couple of k's are mainly flat, the last couple are flat or downhill. Because of the middle k its not a PB course, but its a nice run. If you hold a bit back for the last couple of k you'll be flying to the finish.

plodder

Another option is Griffeen park in Lucan which is starting this week. Don't know the course though.

UltraRunPaul

plodder wrote: »

Another option is Griffeen park in Lucan which is starting this week. Don't know the course though.

Here's the course for Griffeen. http://www.parkrun.ie/griffeen/course/ It's two laps, flat and fast, but has a foot bridge on a tight bend that will sloe the fast runners down for a wee bit!

Gringo78

Is the course map and description shown on the parkrun ireland site for Marley wrong? Doesn't seem to tie in with some Garmin connect tracks.

huskerdu

Gringo78 wrote: »

Is the course map and description shown on the parkrun ireland site for Marley wrong? Doesn't seem to tie in with some Garmin connect tracks.

You're right. I just looked at the map, and it is not correct. The description seems more correct, but I didnt check it very carefully.

One the map, its the first 1/1.5km which is wrong. Once it gets to the perimeter of the golf course, I think its right from there.

liamo66

huskerdu wrote: »

You're right. I just looked at the map, and it is not correct. The description seems more correct, but I didnt check it very carefully.

One the map, its the first 1/1.5km which is wrong. Once it gets to the perimeter of the golf course, I think its right from there.

The map on the parkrun.ie/marlay site is wrong, this was the original course we were planning to run, the course was changed a few weeks before our first run. Reminder to self: Send correct course to parkrun HQ

ultra_other

I see that a parkrun even is starting in Westport in September http://www.parkrun.ie/westport/ :D thanks for the organisers of this event, good to see one west of the Shannon.

wrstan

Popped my Parkrun cherry this morning in Malahide.

Beautiful course, amazing turnout, and the volunteering and stewarding is really impressive. Thanks!

Definitely won't be my last.