This doesn’t make sense to me. How is the GAP slower than the actual pace.
Please correct me if my train of thought is wrong here.
What if you select the entire run? My guess is that GAP and Pace are quite close.
The explanation would then be that selections are handled the same way for Pace and GAP, including stopped time while in the overall calculation, Pace excludes stopped time and GAP includes it. See image below where I selected the whole run.
@david : Can you confirm this?
It can be slower than actual pace if you took it easy on the downhills. Intervals.icu uses a model similar to Strava for GAP:
Did you check this?
For me GAP is usually a decent amount slower than actual pace and does not match strava’s GAP.
@david Have you been able to check if my assumption is correct?
If so, it’s probably better to have pace and GAP handled the same way for activity metrics.
Sorry I missed that. GAP should also excluded stopped time. I will have a look at that as soon as I can.
You are correct. GAP is including stops. I have updated it to exclude data with pace less than 1/10 of the average pace for the whole activity. Your run on the 23rd Feb now has GAP the same as pace. I checked some of my wife’s runs (up steep hills) and her GAP improved a little.
Will deploy the fix Tues AM GMT+2. Tx for figuring this out!
1 Like
I need to delay that deployment for a day or two. Will post here when done.
1 Like
I see that the change was made and reprocessed all older runs and walks to get correct GAP.
Thanks!
Cool. So does it look good? I want to update GAP for everyone if so. Hopefully that 1/10 of average pace threshold isn’t going to leave out stuff.
For my use-case it does indeed look good. I either continuously speedwalk and run or have regular stops depending on my dog being on or off leash…
It might influence hikes with a lot of steep terrain, but normally people will not use GAP on those activities.