Register Latest Topics

  Author   Comment  

Development Team Member
Posts: 8
Dear MOXY users,

I am very keen to understand where is SmO2 /tHb testing moving and if it is moving at all.

Let me explain the topic: I consider myself as an early adopter of all the endurance sports related gadgets (HRMs, PMs, MOXY, BSX, Smart trainer, etc.) and solutions (1x11, Oval, Rigid, etc.) I was first or at least one of the first to acquire or try all these and many more in my country. In addition I was involved racing MTB/Road for the past 15 years and have some results so it is not only about theory.

Every new solution is going through phases (development, early adopters, fans, mass production, death, etc.), but the most important step here is if the idea is going to be brought from early adopters/fans to mass. Since acquiring MOXY I did almost 200 assessments, checked multiple hypotheses, accumulated tons of valuable data for future analysis and so on. Unfortunately I have quite a sad feeling about MOXY.

Once acquired (early 2016) it took some time to read all the available material, acknowledge the possibilities and define best suitable protocols for my testings and hypotheses. In that time there were some webinars, communication and new information posted. However for the last 12-18 months it feels like the sad sunset of the very great gadget: there is no active community, there is no webinars, there is no new information/blog entries published, email communication is mostly one way, etc.

My only positive guess about the situation would be that the device is great that it found it way to academic researches, however as I know from the local situation - there are multiple MOXies bought, but they are not used as there is no support and they invite me to share the data collected and to provide insights on how to use MOXY/Peripedal.
Also all know, that the team is working on M&A project and hopefully it will give a fresh restart.

So is it only me missing meetings and discussions while all others feels very comfortable?

Development Team Member
Posts: 34
I understand your feelings but perhaps the technology came before an acknowledged accepted use. The initial claims (and still perpetuated by Humon) have not been conclusively proven despite many years of experience. But one of the reasons I started my blog on sensor usage was not only to debunk misleading information but maybe find a valuable use case scenario.
Don't give up just yet.

Development Team Member
Posts: 32
Not really a specialist in this field, so maybe not the answer you are looking for, but a few thoughts:

For me, SmO2 continues to be a very useful guide that no other tool provides in continuously optimizing workouts to my personal physiology and to judge my limit (i.e. when to attack or back off) in real world cycling - but possibly not something for the average cyclist. If I was coaching someone, I'd probably see some merit in having data from one or two SmO2 sensors during all activities. Which is to say that I think it's a very useful tool and I don't see that much of an issue with the current situation (maybe except for the price point). The next step up in physiological sensing would for me be a VO2 mask and 3D motion tracking - but those are both costly and uncomfortable to use. (Well, a simple, comfortable respiration sensor - without a mask - is also on my wish list.)

While I think that the main possibility is in everyday activities (as noted above) and less in testing, I would agree that as a "testing" device to be used in specific test procedures I haven't found that much use for SmO2. Interpreting 5:1:5 isn't that simple and the conclusion often leaves me wondering what limiter was identified - if a test (or a sequence of tests) identified specific limiters (and potential for improvement) for VO2 or for FTP etc I would likely find it more useful.

Would somewhat disagree that mass adoption is important for all solutions - solutions should solve a meaningful issue at an affordable-enough price point. Some solutions will always find more - or less - adoption than others.

As a device, I would love to see a future SmO2 sensor integrated with acceleration/pose and EMG measurement as it is often not clear whether changes in SmO2 came from a change in load or motion or pose when used outside of a test protocol. Integrated HR/HRV (and maybe also SpO2) measurement would also be nice to simply reduce the number of sensors to charge and connect.

That said ... would love to hear other opinions.

Regards, Takura
Previous Topic | Next Topic

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter -