Long time Garmin fan that just can’t ignore the smartwatch features from Apple any longer. Purchased an Ultra 2 in February, and I’ve gone back-and-forth between that and Epix 2 Pro, about 3-4x. Apple smartwatch features are amazing and having a cellular device on my wrist has been freeing for runs & hikes. But oh how I do miss the fitness data. Have been using Athlytic app as a workaround. Really hoping that Apple listens to this feedback from Ray.
The easiest switch for me from Garmin is going completely phoneless on my workouts. Watch Ultra + Cell = GOAT. I've easily gotten used to not having some of the deeper features Garmin has.
@@CinnabonMcTastysame, I let go of the packaging of the numbers for the freedom to not carry my phone . All the data is there it’s just not interpreted like Garmin does.
Garmin will be having a really hard time now, fencing off Training Load from their entrance level devices and even the Venu series. Competition is good!
@@cappaculla i get 3 days? bet you never had one. i read that online LOL... and garmin is not competition for apple, one is a smart watch other a sport/fitness watch
@@z3ro7o I have owned Apple Watches in the past; never had one last longer than a day. The battery would not even last longer than 3 hours during a long run; I had to switch to Garmin for them.
I doubt garmin is ever going sweat and worry about trying to compete with apple. You are comparing apples and oranges. Apple watch is a smart watch that mimics having a mini version of a phone, while garmin is a sport focused watch that prioritizes data metrics and how to improve without downloading any third-party apps.
@@Bakuran1987anecdote alert - ten+ years a Garmin user (and still use my 1030), but the watches are dead to me since I'm not _just_ interested in sporty sportiness. The Apple watch does 80% of the sport stuff my Fenix could do and 100% of the stuff I want to do that the Fenix can't even do with apps. Unless Garmin pivots and joins an ecosystem, their watches will eventually be the biggest fish in the tiniest niche sea. If their business model can cope with that, then cool. They also have to keep looking over their shoulder as existing and potential competitors tread on their specialized territory (what would happen if DJI, say, decided to move into this arena?)
I’ve been on the beta and have to say I’m impressed with their first attempt at training load. Agree if they implement your suggestions it will make this even better. Busy week??? Oh boy we must have some cool releases coming😂!!
Since we're at it, I would also love to see a strength training mode where you can indicate your work and rest time, as well as automatic recognition of the number of repetitions, such as push-ups, like Garmin.
This is great to see. I just switched from an Apple Watch to Garmin watch. I recently bought a Garmin cycling computer and I wanted to be able to track all of my activities into 1 Ecosystem. Recording with both the Apple watch to get health data + the Garmin to get more specific training data was a total pain. Happy to see all of the new Apple features are already on my Garmin 😅
I might actually try using this instead the Garmin. To me the 28 days average line on the Apple Watch seems to line up roughly with the upper ende of Gamin's training "tunnel". Kind of simplifies it… Is the lower tunnel threshold really important to know? But yeah, we want numbers! :)
One of these days (months, years?), Apple will finally change the cross country skiing to also include GPS. Unfortunately I don't think Cupertino has loads of snow, so they might not think that it's a pressing issue, but as someone that would like to use just one app for fitness tracking, the fact that cross country skiing mode doesn't track GPS is just sad.
Question: does training load take into account activities recorded not using an Apple Watch? For example, if I record a bike ride on my Wahoo Roam, and the data from this then gets shared with the Apple Fitness and Health apps, can an effort score by applied either automatically or manually to allow this activity to contribute to training load? Or, does an activity have to be recorded on the Watch to count? This is my biggest frustration/consideration I'm having at the moment for purchasing a new watch. Garmin allows you to import activities recorded on other devices (like my Wahoo), but that activity just sits in the Garmin Connect app doing nothing, as for some reason Garmin won't allow the data from the third party activity to contribute towards body battery, HRV, etc.
Hi! Thanks again for your really excellent work. Please forgive me for pointing out, that mixing a subjective measure like an RPE with an objective measure of training load is nonsensical from a methodological standpoint. From my point of view, introducing a purely subjective measurement as a separate line which you can correlate with objective data would be more helpful. But each to their own. Looking forward to more stuff from you. Cheers!
Thanks! While I generally prefer an objective measure, the reality is that all watches today that use an objective measure are only measuring at best half of the load (aerobic only, versus muscular). Check out the study I linked above, which outlines how well the subjective measurements work. (www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2017.00612/full)
@@Dcrainmaker Hi! I do absolutely agree that RPE is a valuable addition to assessing physical activity even in the times of the WWW (Wonderful World of Wearables). However- due to its limitations- (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164849/pdf/40798_2024_Article_729.pdf), looking at it separately seems to me more promising. As a means of objectifying work during a long low aerobic exercise-such as a hike- I could imagine measuring work (ok.. it's difficult for outdoor pedestrians activities ) over time factoring in total weight and elevation gain. In the end, you would be able to measure calories spent... which could be interesting... have a great day!
Zones seem the standard HRR calculation, but your Max HR seems very low, which would explain that your zones would be lower than usual. Not really surprised, I’ve always found the Apple Watch unreliable on resting HR and max HR.
Yup, I'd agree max HR seems low - but alas, that's what Apple has selected using automatic. And IMHO, this feature is specifically designed for mainstream audiences that aren't going to know their zones otherwise.
@@kieran368 no, it doesn’t. It estimates a max HR based on some formula and keeps that estimation no matter how many activities you do surpassing that estimation. In example for me it estimates a max HR of 179 but my max HR is 189-190 (according to my previous watch from Garmin and also lab tested).
Yes!! They literally have this data already in Apple Health... would be nice if they just used it... thankfully mine is close to all the age-based formulas, but if you're not, they're so off
Does workouts recorded with other devices like Garmin affect to the apple's training load? In my case I use a Garmin Edge to record cycling workouts and the AW for the rest.
I definitely agree that I’d like to be able to alter effort scores on my Garmin. My example would be some of the yoga classes I do. On one hand they rarely get my heart above what Garmin considers to be inactive and yet after a 60 minute class I can be completely exhausted for apparently no training load and 0 hours recovery time. At the same time, it will have recorded a high stress score so it knows I wasn’t just chilling out for an hour.
@@bery7028 Not really needed if you use a chest HRM imo (there's tons of cheap options available) which is always gonna be more accurate than optical HRMs.
Is it still in beta? When will it available to users? Excited about this and the new sleep tracking update, i will finally be able to track my naps lol
Awesome video! Will training effort / training load work with the WorkOutdoors app? Or do you have to use the fitness app which is default on the watch?
I think once an athlete starts using TP for training load - and most if not all do - the Garmin/Apple/whatevah RPE metrics instantly become cute little nice to haves. I know RPE can be accurate, so can evaluation based on TSS, acute and chronic training loads. And though I love my watch, I don't use it for overnight monitoring because - well the battery needs to be charged at some point and I have an Oura for that.
is it not the idea behind low HR long duration that despite feeling spent by the end of it, you still recover much easier/quicker and so the training load is lower? Obviously please correct me, I am a massive ignoramus when it comes to tracking / evaluatiny my own exertion unless it is at the very extremes. Also that is one beat up iPhone!
Unfortunately, not really. The difference is Aerobic load vs Muscular load. In effect, none of these companies account for muscular load, except in Apple's case, you can basically sidestep that by simply bumping up the Effort Rating.
@@jorisciz Yup, that's fair - Polar does do it. Though, I find it vastly underestimates the load in all of my attempts (including some 12-14hr days with the Grit X2 Pro recently).
I have exactly those heart rate zones. It is almost if it is just using the 220 - age to determine max heart rate and then just take percentages for the zones. It also says it updates monthly yet it has not changes for me since Jan 1st while I became way more active.
Interestingly enough, I actually got frustrated with the Garmin training load because it didn’t seem to be all that accurate with how I felt and there was zero explanation for whatever the number it gives means. I guess it’s neat that you can see a number trend up or down with the granularity of a whole number but an upward\downward moving line seemingly accomplishes the same goal to me.
Will it take my data from Zwift which is uploaded to Strava, or will I need to have my watching running at the same time (and thus doubling up my workouts)?
It's effectively a unit-volume (TRIMP) of the total load on the cardio vascular system. Virtually all endurance sports companies use a variant of it. Here's a bit more detail: www.garmin.com/en-US/blog/fitness/ask-expert-training-load/
11:34 This should be the standard view I think. Like combine your specifically recorded workouts with your other activities. Like when I was travelling in Italy, we were on our feet all day and walking a lot around the city usually between 15-26km (26 km was our biggest day) but I was not recording this walking as a workout so it would be good if they just added this info into your training load by default. It's nice that they have this "All Day" category but I think this should be the default.
Couple things: I don’t want the graph numbers personally, I find that overwhelming. If they could show them only when you tap and hold on the graph for a day that could work. Second, I really wish Apple would allow the Action Button to have two purposes: 1) a “default” that you choose, like we have now 2) the option to enable contextual functions which would depend on the app. pause workouts, start the stopwatch, whatever when you’re in each of those apps, but then turn on the flashlight when you’re on the watch face.
Will you review the Nothing CMF Watch Pro 2? It looks pretty good for the price. If the heartbeat and gps sensors are just somewhat accurate, it could be a very nice entry option
I haven't bonded with my AW. I have a Garmin Instinct 2. I don't run, but do work out, so some of this seems cool compared to Whoop or Athlytic. I am hoping a lot of Garmin will export to Health and I can use vitals, etc. whether or not I use a AW.
They’re training their neural network using this data from users right now, at realease it’ll probably be about as superior to accuracy as their hr-readings are. Nothing beats the scale of which apple can dial in features
I’ve been trying AW Ultra 2 as my 945 LTE battery is dying too quickly on long runs and I didn’t want to buy the Fenix 7 as the 8 is due very soon. Within 1 week I ordered the Epix Pro Gen 2 knowing it will be replace by the end of August. The AWU2 is no where near as complete as a high end Garmin!
Perceived intensity could also help with strength training load. Garmin repeatedly disappoints me there where it thinks I only need a few hours of recovery after very high weight training just because it doesn’t see continuous high heart rate.
Ugh if they could just get this effort score training load, HRV stuff right this could be the one watch to rule them all. Doesn’t seem there yet, but at least they are making progress.
I wish they incorporate recovery information like Whoop has. I guess you can get a rudimentary outline of your recovery with some of the new data points, but man is Apple lacking in the most important aspect of tracking fitness.
They should allow you as a user to pick beginner, intermediate, and advanced to determine what presentation and level of data and information to show you
Yeah but wouldn’t you had a higher bump on your Apple had you had left it on hard as it suggested? Garmin brought your bump up. Maybe Garmin also determined it was higher than you thought as well? Just curious.
Fun fact: I do. It's a notable quirk of the Netherlands. I live at -3.8m according to teh national scientific tool for seeing exactly what level you live at.
I'm assuming we will be able to assign training scores to activities imported from other devices for a wholistic picture? I normally don't use my Watch on the bike (Wahoo Bolt, with a PM and HR strap).
Will they ever add the ability for non Ultra watches to lock on to GPS before the run starts? I love my Apple Watch series 8 but not locking on to GPS pre run costs me at least a tenth of a mile for every 5 miles I run. Doesn't seem like much but it never happens with my Garmin
I was laughing when he complained about always being a 7 and then the one time he was a 9 he changed it to.....a 7. Apple algo probably saying "I knew I should have just stuck with a 7!"
I was laughing when he complained about always being a 7 and then the one time he was a 9 he changed it to.....a 7. Apple algo probably saying "I knew I should have just stuck with a 7!"
Good job Apple! A first step in becoming a… Garmin competitor 😂 Still need: 1) Better battery life: At least 3 days on the Ultra? I would switch from garmin if I could get that… 2) At least two buttons. I will NEVER run again where I have to struggle to swipe between data screens as the sweat makes it virtually impossible. I also don’t want to have to press the home or multitask button, swipe around to find Spotify… tap tap swipe swipe, while I’m running? No thanks, on garmin I simply: hold the music button, and can then easily navigate with buttons that I can activate from muscle memory without looking. 3)Heart-rate broadcasting: setting my mom up on a kickr core with Zwift was easy, until I had to go deep deep in Apple settings to the settings to allow workout device access. Then, we have to leave wife companion on iPhone open, zwift companion on the Apple Watch open and connect to zwift on Apple TV to get heart rate. Multiple times throughout the ride the heart rate stopped transmitting and the companion apps had to be force closed and re-opened on iPhone and Apple Watch.
Great vid. Mmmm it's just not a serious sports watch. The watch is literally a "Jack of all trades and master of none". I was really disappointed from my use of the Ultra. The battery life is crap, the health/sports page/reporting is such a klunky interaction and some of it just completely inaccurate. The use of apps was problematic common everyday use apps like Uber are missing and Strava is pretty much off and on. I had an expectation that by just wearing the Apple Watch I could leave my heavy Iphone at home - Nope couldn't do that. It's still got a lot going for it, but a serious sports watch it is not
Can Workout Zone/Effort be disabled? I ZERO interest or faith in any AI's (especially Apple's) eassassement of anything, but especially when it comes to my workouts. All I want is data (which every workout watch does only so so). And I definitely DO NOT want ANY recommendations from Apple on ANYTHING.
Meh, it’s not really that different anymore. There are a few data points that Apple can’t track, but they aren’t something the vast majority of runners actually need to track. I used garmin only for 7-8 years. I have started using an Apple Watch for the last couple years, and with third party apps, I have been happy with everything except one thing. The only significant difference is battery life. The ultra is perfectly fine for marathoners, and ultra distances that are less than 70 miles. That is 99% of runners. I hate apples obsession with the dang display and brightness, they are their own worst enemy in that regard.
Apple is definitely prioritising the sports side of their watches to try to keep up with the competition. I still do not see myself abandoning my Fenix 7 Pro any day soon though. I use my watch for sports and do not care about, or want, all the extras that might have some people prefer the Apple Watch. Also, I don't really like the Apple design/layout/icons that to me makes the entire platform look like something made for children age 4-8.
Basically Apple, you can’t be half pregnant. Go all-in with metrics or why bother. I’ve always disliked how they use stylized lines with thick rounded end caps for bar charts.
@06:16 no number is useless , lets say you got 1000 training load it represent nothing. but in a graph its easily understandable you traniding up or down. stop over complicating things for end user.
Honestly, I don't find Apple's approach very useful at all. Generalized graphs that don't show anything specific is no better than just being self aware, IMO.
