Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
ScottSpoo

Avatar / Picture

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #1 
Wow, I can't believe it's been that long since I posted, I really have to do a better job.  I have definitely been using the device though! 
At this point the usability has increased quite a bit, with the only complaint still battery life.  I have to continuously leave it on the charger except when I'm not using it, b/c if I decide to go for a run or bike when I get home, and have had the device off the charger while at work, it'll most likely not last. 

Overall, I believe I have gotten a lot of repeatable data.  The only issue I had was when wearing my compression tights for the first time running, and putting the sensor under those without using the sleeve I have been otherwise.  The first run with them took some learning to get them place right to hold the sensor down, as it had a tendency to creep up towards my knee-pit at first.  The 2 runs after that though, I was able to put it on properly even without the sleeve. 

As you can see in the summary of all the data below, the overlap is pretty good, although still a little noisier than HR.  The trend graph, to me, hasn't really displayed any revelations yet.  Perhaps someone else can see something interesting? 

I think that most of the low minimum SmO2 values have come when there has been an issue, so at this point, I don't see that aspect to be a reliable measure of the workout.  I was hoping I'd notice a difference in baseline SmO2 between the days when I have a fast pace and those when I have a slow pace, but that hasn't necessarily been revealed yet. 

I did get a full data set during a MTB race, and you can see it is quite different from normal riding... although difficult to compare since I haven't ridden and raced the same courses.  I am still looking forward to getting in another 5K and have the sensor work this time, as my race paces are drastically faster than my training pace. 

Please point out anything anyone else may see. 


Data is  attached as a Zip for full review also.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Fig8_history.JPG, Views: 24, Size: 105.14 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Fig8_trend.JPG, Views: 22, Size: 84.40 KB 

 
Attached Files
pdf Exercise_summary_-_2012-10-24.pdf (1.31 MB, 14 views)
zip Sept-Oct_Exercise_data.zip (5.49 MB, 12 views)

ScottSpoo

Avatar / Picture

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #2 

Going to stay on top of it....

Here is tonight's run, an extended version of Figure 8 route.  I lost watch paring shortly into the run, and tried to re-pair, but it wouldn't even try really, just went immediatly to "off."  Is this the beginning of a low battery?   Or would it have something to do with it being 35 deg out?

Smooth data, and you can see the steady decline as my pace increases towards the end. 

I'd appreciate any comments from others analysis.


Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: Oct26single.JPG, Views: 21, Size: 82.79 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Oct26multi.JPG, Views: 17, Size: 103.41 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Oct26trend.JPG, Views: 16, Size: 84.46 KB 

 
Attached Files
xlsx 33_-_Run_-_ExFig8_-_2012-10-26.xlsx (776.58 KB, 15 views)

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #3 
Scott, I like your data collection . They are great .
 So here a simple question  from my side, working since 30 years in the field of physiological bio markers and its use in actual practical application.
 A portable live  information of  NIRS was always my dream and MOXY is  on the verge to deliver a great tool , which needs some tweaking as so often but it is the future of many physiological  training units.
 Here the critical questions to all readers>
 What do you do now  with this print out and what will change as you work out.
 How do you use the MOXY to really design physiological based intensities  and what is the  goal.
 The problem MOXY will parse is, that many people  collect great graphs like they do with other equipment but there is no  change in the idea of workout intensities.
 A great example is the fact , that  we try to find a connection to lactate and or lactate threshold or possibly VO2 numbers, when in fact we compare local immediate   feedback with indirect feedback's.
 Respiration as a part of oxygenation reaction ( O2 Diss curve ) greatly affect  tissue saturation reactions and as such will in many case show very different trends. Same is true for Lactate numbers.  We have  hundreds of data's showing this very impressive. So the key here to get a successful integration of MOXY is do avoid  mistakes we made in the past by hanging on classical ideas like  lactate threshold or % of VO2 max for intensity  information but take MOXY for what it is . A great new optimal feedback based on local information  and don't make the mistake to try to justify it with no applicable ideas like the great study on here, where lactate  1 mmol increase is used to justify  a  MOXY trend. We can later discuss why  but experience will show, that any  group opposing  MOXY will have a great handle to take it  apart in a blink of an eye. If  we use MOXY as what it is and  define new  ideas and intensities based on the  information we gather and try to avoid  connection to outdated  once good ideas you  avoid a lot of headache.
 We run internally educations  and in the spring we again will run education on NIRS in Europe. MOXY would be the way top go to integrate this in  physiological coaching ideas. Cheers Juerg  att is a physiologically based workout to find the  level, where oxygenation starts dropping and where we have the highest oxygenation level. So the  NIRS guided the workout and the watt  was just an information to see what  happens.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: 101_50_to_300_w_and_O2_reaction.JPG, Views: 28, Size: 43.88 KB 

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net