Has anyone found any of Garmin’s training load or recovery metrics useful?
Curious how these line up with Training Peaks PMC.
Like what is in the new 945 and other devices
2 Likes
I’ve had it for nearly two years and haven’t noticed a correlation or find it relevant. The recovery time is all over the board and doesn’t mean you actually need that amount of time. I’ve felt great well below the recovery time from a previous workout.
The performance condition I find can vary based on how you start your ride and intensity. If super easy I almost find I get a poor condition score. Plus heart rate has outside variables based on stress, sleep, heat and etc.
I’m a big proponent of the PMC chart and just knowing on feel. I know there has been a lot of good conversations about the Whoop.
Maybe someone else can chime in with the Garmin metrics.
I’m the same as Coach Jake - PMC Chart + a good night’s sleep, WinningInTheKitchen and my power output from a well designed training plan.
I think these ‘recovery metrics’ in the Fenix are just a feature their marketing team added in their to sell more watches 
Here’s our read, watch and listen training tip on all sorts of recovery techniques https://fascatcoaching.com/tips/recovery/
I’m with you on listening to the body for feeling how well you are recovered. There are a lot of signals built in to our bodies. The PMC chart still amazes me - Really follows the KISS principal. However, even that chart needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
Frank, how does Whoop (which you have advocated) differ from what Garmin is doing? Why doesn’t the same logic above apply to Whoop?
What I’m hoping for is a KISS type approach to recovery metrics. As the PMC chart is to training load. Whoop seems like they are on to something, but I don’t like the subscription model nor have a second device on my wrist in addition to a watch.
Thanks guys for the responses.
1 Like