GPS-Sport ForenGPS-Sport GeneralRanking Top 100 activity levels
Bitte einloggen, um neue Kommentare zu erstellen Foren durchsuchen
Erste Seite<Seite1von1>Letzte Seite
LeMarquis 21.04.2011 07:07:23 UTC



Hi Starbase,

Thanks for your reply.
You're doing a great job, keep up the good work! :)
Please be aware of the fact that I do not want to blame anyone... this might just as well be a miscalculation (or have another cause)...

By the way: my site isn't open for others (because of privacy considerations) but I linked my weight to my Withings scale so I'm sure it's very accurate.

Kind regards!

LeMarquis
user_-897618145 21.04.2011 05:02:10 UTC



Hi,

my site is open for all, no concealment of data!!!

with friendly greet

starbase64
user_-897618145 21.04.2011 04:59:00 UTC



Hi,

at beginning of this year my weight is 95 kgs, but now i have 87 kgs.
I have permanently corrected the weight in Run.GPS.

with friendly greet

starbase64
ab006897 18.04.2011 12:01:10 UTC



I use a band for the heart; usually calculate caloric 1cal x 1kg x 1 hour... ... with the band for the heart is a different.
I weigh 70kg and run for 1 hour, the consumption is 700kcal but in this training have consumed 825kcal in 50 min (http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/running_544472)

If i make my weigh in 100kg the consumption is very hight, The problem is the same !!! ... the field calorie consumption isn't good for the 'Hall of fame'
If I run 10km at a rate of 4 min / km (totale 40 minutes), my performance is better if I run 10 km at a rate of 6 min / km (total 60 minutes), calorie consumption is the same, as why I used less time. The performances is the same but the same atlete?
In the endurance sport, the best atlete have high performance with low energy consumption...

I propose an algorithm that calculates the performance, weight, speed, number of training sessions, to create a month ranking.

Eros
LeMarquis 18.04.2011 00:19:48 UTC

Athletes of the Month

Just another thing which crossed my mind...

There's a diffence between the "Athletes of the Month" on the homepage and the top 3 ranked athletes in the hall of fame. It seems that calories consumed by walking are not taken into account on the homepage in contrast with the hall of fame. On the other hand the "questionmark-sports" (which could be anything) are taken into account on the homepage, but not in the rankings.

Is there a reason for this?
LeMarquis 18.04.2011 00:03:33 UTC

Possible cause?

Hi Eros,

Thanks for your reply!
I may have found a cause for the "problem" but I'm not sure... maybe the admin can help us out...
As far as I can see there are 2 possible causes for too high calorie consumption values.

1. As I stated before I think the calorie consumption is directly proportional to (only) a persons body weight. So if the body weight is set too high the calorie consumption will be too high as well.

2. I think I may have found another issue which could lead to incorrect values. It seems that if people wear a heart belt the calorie consumption is calculated in a different manner (maybe heart efficiency?). E.g: There's a certain person in the top rankings who consumes 48,8 kCal when wearing a heart belt and 27,0 kCal when not wearing the belt (same sport of course). Both measurements were made on the same day.

Under current circumstances there are people who consume more calories by cycling 50km than others by 100km racebiking, which seems quite odd...

Admin, could you please check this out?
Thanks in advance.
ab006897 14.04.2011 15:16:04 UTC

Likely solution

In this topic i have write the same problem
http://www.gps-sport.net/forums/thread/1907-0/Mounthly-Activity-Level

Maybe one day it will be resolved.
Thanks
LeMarquis 21.03.2011 01:05:29 UTC geändert am 21.03.2011 02:35:58 UTC

Ranking Top 100 activity levels
Erste Seite<Seite1von1>Letzte Seite
© 2026 | Impressum | Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen | Nutzungsbedigungen | Datenschutzerklärung | Widerruf und Rücksendung | Batterieentsorgung