The estimation uses the WKO5 system which is based on ACM, so it is the same as any estimation if there is no interval data associated with vo2max it will not estimate anything. They are estimates based on power and heart rate models.
1 Like
Hello, thats good work for sure. AeT is pretty much the same as a lactate test. 1st threshold HR is perfect. I donāt really know whats mss (?). For me itās like a really really extensive SS. 285 watts, in lab got 260 LT1 and 310 LT2. 285 watts probably I can mantain it steady state for 1h45mins-2h if I really want it. MAP itās way too high, something like 20-30 watts higher. Got 445, can mantain it 4-5minuts but Iāve got a really high Wā and iām strong anaerobic. With metabolimeter my MAP itās something like 410 watts.
1 Like
Couple of questions:
Do the calculations use more than a single activity to calculate the data that shows on a given activity?
Are these fields calculated on intervals, or externally somehow?
Does it store any data externally?
The calculations use data from your activities and your PDC mmps.
They are calculated with intervals data, there is no access to any of your data from any other platform.
Save data externally? No data is saved externally, we use intervals resources to calculate everything.
This is a calculated field like the many others that have been shared by the different users of intervals, the fact of sharing them is to improve the calculation through your feedback, at no time save data, in case of any doubt you are free not to put the calculated fields.
3 Likes
Wondering if your AeT has any relation to Decoupling. Compared to a recent Zone 2 ride I recently did which had .1% decoupling, my Power is 16% higher than your AeT estimate and happens(?) to be exactly what I have calculated as the bottom of my Zone 2. HR was almost dead on.
I recalculated today and also when your post had just come out. Only 34 rides in last 4 months have power and I donāt follow a very rigid training plan. No ramp tests, one ftp test in there, infrequent intervals. Probably not much help. Just thought maybe the AeT might be close.
Iāve added each of the fields and re-analyzed all activities for the past several years. You are welcome to follow me on intervals.icu (Iām assuming that would allow you to see my calculated data) if that would be helpful. Iām recovering from a broken collarbone so fitness declined as I was off the bike for two weeks but itās coming back.
1 Like
As a trailrunner I work mainly with HR instead of pace and power.
This is because pace is not very usefull in the mountains and power for runningā¦well you know :-).
I would therefor be brilliant if the field āHR AeTā for running could also be made available.
Is that something that can be done?
Thanks for the consideration!
Gr Johan B
2 Likes
Seems to be spot on for me. Thank you for sharing this!
Just one question, which power curve is used for your calculation of AeT? 30/42/84/90 days?
30 days to try it out, probably will do it with 90 days
Initially it will not be available for the time being, although I can consult with members of my team to see how it could be adapted.
3 Likes
Thanks for your reply.
Your efforts for consultation are much appreciated!
1 Like
here the MSS and Pvo2 seems pretty much spot on with reality.
but the AeTs are both kind of in middle Z2, according to my standard zones, but they donāt relate: i need more power than 191w to reach a consistent 133hr, like 205-210wā¦ so itās considerable moreā¦ and 133hr is totally doable.
1 Like
ā¦ itād be awesome if we have something similar for running. i didnāt even try to run them with running activities, because the data itās very different, power curve, TTEs, AeT HRā¦ steady state in running is a different animal.
5 Likes
Values more or less where I would expect them to be.
My AeT HR is at exactly 143.88 for over 50 activities, whereas AeT Power, PVO2max and MSS are fluctuating a bit. Is that expected behavior?
143 is also exactly the exact value of the Z2-Z3 border as defined in ICU. Might be a coincidence thoughā¦
Some fluctuation in values is to be expected. Remember that this is an estimation based on power curves, vo2max, heart rate, it is not āscientificā but to have a guide and then adjust.
Anyway, with the feedback Iām receiving, modifications will be made to adjust everything better.
I am very grateful if you try it and comment.
Between all of us we have to make intervals the software par excellence of training analysis and planning.
2 Likes
Thanks responding.
I understand this isnāt scientific, but just found it suspicious that absolutely no change in AeT HR was detected.
When you adjust the fields, will we have to add them again or do we have to re-analyze the activities? How do we make sure we are always looking at the most recent version?
1 Like
The heart rate in VT1, VT2 and maximum, usually has very little variation, there are cases that if there is but it is usually very poorly trained athletes. When there are modifications I will put it in this post. Probably next week there will be some adjustment.
1 Like
My Aet suddenly jumped by 16 watts. Thursday it was 206w and after next training session on Saturday it was 222w. Still a good bit shy of the watts Iād do at a steady state at estimated HR AeT of 146bpm.
1 Like
Iām seeing similar power jumps (up & down) in my data from the last year. The jumps seem to occur at a multiple of 30 days, hence I think that the data is influenced by one particular activity within those 30 days. I didnāt had the time yet to investigate a bit further.
1 Like