Feedback on Run Tags and Moving Time/Pace Calculation

Strava,

What is the difference in tagging a Run Activity as one of these Run Types?

1) Run

2) Race

3) Long Run

4) Workout

5) Treadmill

The one difference I see is that by tagging a Run as a Race, Strava modifies the Pace to be the actual Pace instead of the Moving Pace. On all other tagged Run Types, the Moving Pace is used for mile splits (but labeled as Pace). Also, the Elapsed Time is shown at the top of the overview in large vs small font and presumably calculates the pace from the Elapsed Time.

 

1) I don't see any KB Articles on Run Types, so please elaborate on them

2) Strava should not be using Moving Pace on Run mile splits - its misleading and not accurate. If Strava wishes to display the Moving Pace vs the actual Pace, then Strava should label it as such.

3) I should not have to switch my run to a Race just to see the actual Pace mile splits.

4) IMO Strava should not even use Moving Pace, its not useful. But if they wish to use it, it should be labeled so people are not confused if it is a Moving Pace or the regular Pace. By tagging a run as Race vs Run we are somehow suppose to know that the Pace has been changed from Moving Pace to Pace? Just label the Pace always and show both. For mile splits, GAP and Moving Pace (labeled as just Pace, misleadingly) are of no interest and the true Pace is not shown (unless the run is tagged as a Race)!

 

Strava - please straighten out your usage of Moving Pace. We need to see our real pace for mile splits - not a massaged # that looks great even if we stopped at every drinking fountain.

Also, on the Run overview page, the Moving Time shown is not the actual Moving Time, its the Time. Garmin defines the following times; Time, Moving Time and Elapsed Time. Strava is overloading the usage of Time and Moving Time. The label on the web page is Moving Time, but the value is Time. Change the label to Time. And in the mile splits, you do the opposite, label the pace as Pace when its really the Moving Pace. Both of these are misleading, and in the case of mile splits do not even have the actual Pace per mile. iPhone App displays Pace as Moving Pace with no option to see the actual Pace and does not label the Pace as Moving Pace either. This needs to be fixed too.

Quite simply - label the correct values - and show the real mile split Paces. Label Moving Time as Moving Time. Label Moving Pace as Moving Pace. Label Time as Time. Label Pace as Pace. And show the actual mile split Paces (not moving pace) despite how the Run is tagged.

 

connect.garmin.com labels these values correctly and includes both regular and moving times/paces.

 

 

 

96

Kommentare

217 Kommentare
  • Hi Blaime:

    I send a request to Strava team and I literally copied what you wrote, because it is a bug and you said it perfectly. I guess more people will do that and more Strava team will listen... Thanks for that thread:

    • "This ticket is being opened to track Strava's response, fixing and resolving the bug of erroneously labeling moving pace as "Pace".
    • Both on the web and mobile versions of Strava:
    • 1) The overall data of a run shows a moving pace labeled as "Pace".
    • 2) The mile splits are labeled as "Pace" but have the values of moving pace.
    • 3) When a run is marked as a "Race", the labels of "Pace" stay the same and the values change from moving pace to pace. This is called overloading and it is erroneous to label 2 different sets of data as the same thing. Similar to creating a field called "Money" and alternating the value between 10.00 and 13.00 not knowing what currency it is and then swapping the values arbitrarily.
    • For these 3 reasons, the mislabeling of Pace in Strava is erroneous and a bug and needs to be fixed.
    • This ticket will be open until Strava fixes this on both the Web and Mobile apps and starts labeling moving pace as "Moving Pace" and the actual pace as "Pace" and not overloading the meaning of the label "Pace".
    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I don't know if anything has changed behind the scenes, but my latest runs have pretty much the exact same moving pace and actual pace.

    However, the idea of labeling two different sets of data with the same label is a big blunder from a UX perspective. As a web developer, this is quite frankly a very bad decision from the Strava team in my professional opinion. This whole issue would be a lot less annoying if they labeled the data correctly in their user interfaces. 

    It seems Garmin devices are most prone to a bid time difference between moving pace and actual pace though. Take a look at this run as an example: http://www.strava.com/activities/204915590

    Distance: 22km,

    Moving time 1.08.11

    Best estimated Half marathon effort: (21.1km): 1.11.25,

    Actual elapsed time: 1.15.09

    Moving time in this scenario is extremely misleading. 

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I wrote STRAVA that:

    • I cannot say it better than Blaine Browning, so I recopy the bug apparently already exposed to you:
    • "Both on the web and mobile versions of Strava:
    • 1) The overall data of a run shows a moving pace labeled as "Pace".
    • 2) The mile splits are labeled as "Pace" but have the values of moving pace.
    • 3) When a run is marked as a "Race", the labels of "Pace" stay the same and the values change from moving pace to pace. This is called overloading and it is erroneous to label 2 different sets of data as the same thing. Similar to creating a field called "Money" and alternating the value between 10.00 and 13.00 not knowing what currency it is and then swapping the values arbitrarily.
    • For these 3 reasons, the mislabeling of Pace in Strava is erroneous and a bug and needs to be fixed."

    And they answered that:

    Hi Christian, There are a few people who have brought this up, and I'm sure you've seen the discussion on the forums. At this time we have no plans to change the way we display pace. We feel that this the way the vast majority of our runners want pace to be displayed. This is supported by the fact that we have heard countless number of requests asking us to improve the way that we detect and remove resting time so that we can accurately display moving pace without any resting time. If your activities (or those of others on the forum you've mentioned) are inaccurately detecting resting time when there shouldn't be any, then this is a different issue and something that should be addressed on a one-off basis. Best, EJ,Strava Support Team"

    What I responded to that:

    "It is not a question of what people would like to see, but a question about the label of the data of what people want to see and the inconsistencies about those (tag a run as a "race" shouldn't change the value of the same variable "race" and even "moving pace" is not "pace"...??). If the "vast majority of [y]our runners" want to see moving pace, are you sure they also want it to be mislabeled as "pace" ?
    If the "vast majority of [y]our runners" want moving pace to be labled as pace... it is probabley becuase they don't know the difference between both... if you explain them, they would agree, I'm sure, about a correct labelin of their stats. You don't think? Thanks for the answer."
    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • @Vegard re: "a big blunder from a UX perspective"... I too am a Senior Software Engineer and also believe in my professional opinion it is a poor decision for Strava to be mislabeling data such as moving pace.

    @Christian  its clear EJ from Strava is not reading our concern's correctly. My ticket I sent yesterday and the one you copied and pasted and sent has absolutely nothing to do with the other issue of showing BOTH moving pace and pace. Re-read what we wrote to Strava in the ticket and then read what EJ wrote back. My ticket had nothing to do with detecting resting time and showing moving pace vs actual pace. It had to do with accurately labeling moving pace as "Moving Pace" which he did not address. Why would Strava insist on not accurately labeling moving pace as "Moving Pace"? Right next to it is a "Moving Time" field but they mislabel moving pace as "Pace" and as a result, people believe that is their actual pace which may at times be much faster than their actual pace.

     

    I also believe Strava should be showing both Moving Pace AND Pace, but my first and simplest request is to have Strava accurately LABEL moving pace as "Moving Pace".

     

     

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • @Blaine:

    If you want the rest of the discussion, I insisted on the first step that need to be done : Change the label of "paste" to "moving paste". Discussion is to be read from the bottom to the top (and sorry for my poor English!):

    EJ Noreika, Oct 10 11:52 AM:

    This is just the design team decision. With moving time right next to pace, I would assume that's how Strava is calculating pace.

    Best,
    EJ
    Strava Support Team


    Christian Mace, Oct 10 11:47 AM:

    Okay, even if it is not logical, I think, you helped me understand the logic underlying your decision... But I think you can have more confidence about your public (runners) and their capabilities for understanding the term "moving pace". It is easy to define it in a couple words as it is easy to define "pace" in a couple words. I also think you are the only one (from main running apps / web apps) who are confusing those two terms. According of what you said, runners are not able to understand the terms in all other apps.

    Regards,

    Christian

    Christian



    EJ Noreika, Oct 10 11:28 AM:

    Because there's so much going on with activity pages already and how most users are acquainted with the layout, it might confuse users much more to add additional terms. Redesigning the activity page is a serious endeavor for any site.

    Most users think of pace as judged against time when they're moving, and if they do stop for whatever reason, they're not thinking of that as part of their pace. At least when activities are listed as a race, only elapsed time is used, since you should be moving the entire time.

    Best,
    EJ
    Strava Support Team



    Christian Mace, Oct 10 11:21 AM:

    Thanks for the discussion around Strava. You seem to agree it is a bug... but your team doesn't, as I understand the situation. Thanks anyway... Just changing "pace" to "moving pace" and let it pas in the "race", would be a very nice thing to do and it would not be so complicate no??

    Christian



    EJ Noreika, Oct 10 10:42 AM:

    OK thanks for expressing your interest in this as well.

    I have discussed it around Strava for more opinion, but this will stay as-is.

    Best,
    EJ
    Strava Support Team



    Christian Mace, Oct 10 10:31 AM:

    Hello again,

    "I think that maybe Strava could offer the option to toggle between moving time and elapsed time for analyzing their activity.". Of course, that would be perfect and would also imply to label correctly. Labeling correctly is the first step and after the next perfect step would be to offer stats in actual/real average "pace" and in average "moving pace" like you propose. I'm not saying that moving pace is useless, I'M sayin that you could want the real pace.

    Thanks for answering and for looking to be in a listening mode... but I understand that there is no plan to change anything about this labeling issue (that is a BUG: two set of data for the same variable...)

    Christian



    EJ Noreika, Oct 10 10:15 AM:

    I think that maybe Strava could offer the option to toggle between moving time and elapsed time for analyzing their activity. At the same time, I'm living in an urban area and am a fan of the moving time calculations. I am frequently stuck at stop lights and busy intersections where my elapsed time-pace would suffer significantly.

    Blaine Browning that you referenced has already filed tickets regarding these distinctions as well, but there is still no plan to change the way this is displayed.

    Best,
    EJ
    Strava Support Team



    Christian Mace, Oct 10 09:55 AM:

    It is not a question of what people would like to see, but a question about the label of the data of what people want to see and the inconsistencies about those (tag a run as a "race" shouldn't change the value of the same variable "race" and even "moving pace" is not "pace"...??). If the "vast majority of [y]our runners" want to see moving pace, are you sure they also want it to be mislabeled as "pace" ?

    If the "vast majority of [y]our runners" want moving pace to be labled as pace... it is probabley becuase they don't know the difference between both... if you explain them, they would agree, I'm sure, about a correct labelin of their stats. You don't think?

    Thanks for the answer.

    Christian



    EJ Noreika, Oct 10 09:45 AM:

    Hi Christian,

    There are a few people who have brought this up, and I'm sure you've seen the discussion on the forums.

    At this time we have no plans to change the way we display pace. We feel that this the way the vast majority of our runners want pace to be displayed. This is supported by the fact that we have heard countless number of requests asking us to improve the way that we detect and remove resting time so that we can accurately display moving pace without any resting time.

    If your activities (or those of others on the forum you've mentioned) are inaccurately detecting resting time when there shouldn't be any, then this is a different issue and something that should be addressed on a one-off basis.

    Best,
    EJ
    Strava Support Team



    Christian Mace, Oct 09 12:38 PM:

    I cannot say it better than Blaine Browning, so I recopy the bug apparently already exposed to you:

    "Both on the web and mobile versions of Strava:

    1) The overall data of a run shows a moving pace labeled as "Pace".

    2) The mile splits are labeled as "Pace" but have the values of moving pace.

    3) When a run is marked as a "Race", the labels of "Pace" stay the same and the values change from moving pace to pace. This is called overloading and it is erroneous to label 2 different sets of data as the same thing. Similar to creating a field called "Money" and alternating the value between 10.00 and 13.00 not knowing what currency it is and then swapping the values arbitrarily.

    For these 3 reasons, the mislabeling of Pace in Strava is erroneous and a bug and needs to be fixed."

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • @Christian EJ still does not understand your request if you read through it - even discussing Moving Time and Elapsed Time, not Moving Pace and Pace and the associated labels. EJ says, "Redesigning the activity page is a serious endeavor for any site." We are talking about changing text from "Pace" to "Moving Pace" to accurately represent that piece of data. Its a simple bug fix - as a Software Engineer myself. And EJ says, "it might confuse users much more to add additional terms" - preposterous. To name something what it is is clarity, not confusion. If a pair of shoes are red, you label them as "red" not "blue" and that is not confusing. It is beside the point if EJ lives in an urban area and is a "fan of moving time calculations". What we are discussing here is labeling moving pace as "Moving Pace". Precisely prepending 7 characters to a label. Strava runners need to understand with this correct labeling that the pace showed to them is actually their Moving Pace. And it is not only runners that it confuses but whomever you share that running activity with. How would they know that they pace you shared with them on social media or via link etc that that data is not your true pace? Moving Pace needs to be labeled as "Moving Pace", period.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • The method mentioned in this thread of using a pause on the watch to trick Strava into correct pace calculation just plain doesn't work for Suunto devices.

    I used a pause several times on a recent slow run/walk with my daughter. Strava counted all segments that we walked with paused watch as if we moved through them very quickly with a pace like 1-2 min/mile. I ended up having quite a bit more mileage on Strava than on my watch (3 miles vs. 2.3) and a significantly faster average pace than the actual one. This was a fun run so I don't care too much about inaccurate result, but still it shows how wrong Strava interpretation of the data can be. 

    Here is the activity: http://www.strava.com/activities/206795451 

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I think you should not use it that way. You paused the watch and kept walking several times. You should not keep moving while paused because then you have big gaps in the GPS recording. You stop at a GPS point and then suddenly start at a new location so this throws the whole tracking off.

    The pause trick is only for a short time to make strava not use automatic pausing algorithm. If you walk / run then either set the watch for that (some devices have that walk/run setting) or keep the watch ON as you normally would while walking. The pause trick is only to be used once either at the start or end of the run, for example, and just for a few seconds. For best results stand still while pause for a few seconds. Hope that helps

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • @Blaine. I agree, it would just be adding 7 characters. I was suprise to hear the answer that this would be complicate, but I don't do web site so I don't know... And yes EJ is mixing arguments between multiple aspects... His point was that runners will not understand what is moving pace... I think it is a bit  condescending to say that. I think EJ was understanding the problem, but he was finding arguments to keep the problem as it is. I hope other people will open ticket on that subject for making Strava realize that they are doing the wrong thing.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I also would like this fixed. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out why my times were faster than my running partners and why the final times were different than what I was pacing during the run. Good to know to label it as a race, but that kind of makes me crazy, since I'd like to keep my actual races separate. 

    This original post was made in Aug 2013 and now it is October 2014 and people are still having issues. I think it's fair to say that the users want to know the accurate time of their runs.  To be honest, I'm considering shopping around for another more accurate app. 

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • HOORAY!!! STRAVA FIXED IT!!!

    Nah, only joking, they haven't. But they have added a little 'info' icon next to a lot of the fields on the Activity Page so that you can try to work out for yourself what data it's showing you. I guess that's probably as close as you're going to get to a resolution on this issue. 

    As others have said, it's not so much the woeful implementation of "Moving Pace" that is the issue, it's the fact that Strava is manipulating your data without making it clear that this is happening. This latest addition attempts to address that, if only in the most minimal fashion possible.

    The obtuseness of the Strava employees detailed here is quite astonishing really. If they want to keep using Moving Pace by default that's absolutely fine, but mislabelling those fields e.g. in the 'Splits' tables is misleading, take Amber's case below as a prime example why. It's not surprising to see that the related issue regarding "Weekly Time Totals" that I raised on July 29th 2014 has not been addressed either.

    I'm done with using Strava for anything to do with running. The moving pace calculations are garbage and I'm not tagging everything as a race.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • That is terrible to hear they don't consider this a bug.  I always run at a pace of between 4 and 5 minutes per km.  I never stop on my runs and they are mostly between 4 and 6 km.  But nearly always, Strava gives me up to around 2 minutes of resting time.  I repeat - I DO NOT stop on my runs.  This IS a bug.  This has happened ever since the 'new' run pages were introduced.  It didn't happen on the old pages (which were much better in all ways, for anyone who wasn't here back then).  I write to technical support after nearly every run, because they can click a button to reprocess the run without the false resting time.  Maybe we could have a "fix the bug" or "I didn't stop" button...?  So we don't have to contact technical support after most runs?  Like others here, I don't want to mark these runs as a race.  Technical support have told me they are working on this.  But it's much longer than a year and they are still telling me they are working hard on this.  Well over a year, to fix one bug... seriously...?  I am a programmer and it's obvious there's something wrong here.  Anyway, assuming they are telling the truth and are just total beginner programmers without the first clue, how about something simple - a new run type "non-stop run" or "continuous run" that is processed like a race (just ignore the falsely detected resting times) but doesn't appear as a race?  I am using a Forerunner 210.  I understand there are repeated data points.  You just have to filter them out.  I don't keep frequently stopping for 10 seconds then sprint down the road as fast as a greyhound.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Sorry, I use a Forerunner 110.  It shows up in Strava as a Forerunner 210 but is actually a 110.

    Dear Strava, please admit that false detection of resting time is a bug... and fix it.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I am also using a Forerunner 110 and get so frustrated with this issue!  Things have got a lot better recently as the 'Race' feature does bring through my correct splits on the full site, but it doesn't on the iPhone app.  The great thing about Strava is the community aspect and sharing runs with my friends.  I have improved massively, but they all think I'm much quicker than I am!! 

    Here is my example from yesterday at the Gosport Half Marathon (an excellent event I recommend):-

    Gun Time: 1:15:58

    Chip Time: 1:15:56

    Elapsed Time on Strava (and the time shown on Garmin Connect): 1:15:56 (so far so good) - pace 3.35km (exactly what I actually did!!!)

    Moving Time: 1:11:50 - pace 3.24km

     

    I just don't understand why any runner would possibly want 'Moving Time'; it is completely meaningless.  How can it think that I stopped moving for 4 minutes during a half marathon!? 

    I logged it as a race in Google Crome (which it continues to show the 'Elapsed Time' and the correct splits, but on iPhone it is showing that I ran certain KMs in less than 3 minutes!! 

     

    Please please sort this out Strava, I currently use the free version, but genuinely would pay the Premium (as I love the idea of the heat map to see how much of my home city I have covered), but there is no way I will until this issue is sorted.

     

    Thanks.

     

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Oooh nice running Elliot, cracking time over HM!

     

    While I’m bored of arguing that Strava should do away with this moving pace thing for running, I have come to the conclusion that they are not going to budge, and until I upgrade my Forerunner 110 to something more expensive that works with Strava better I am just stuck with it...

     

    But I just wanted to back you up on the app thing...

    If I mark a run as “race” it will show as:

    Elapsed time on the computer

    Elapsed time on an Android phone

    Moving time on an IPhone

    Moving time on an IPad

     

    Essentially meaning that whatever you tag the run as you still end up showing a time and pace on the Apple apps that show you better than you actually are... which unfortunately just makes using Strava considerably less enjoyable than it should be :-(

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Nice half, Elliot! Just to support your statement about not upgrading to the premium version, I'm in exactly the same boat. I was about to upgrade, and was evangelizing Strava in the local running community, but learning about Strava's attitude toward running time and pace just soured me on it for serious runners. It's a shame, since the impression Strava gives is that it's a service for competitive folks, but the data has to be reported accurately. Or, as I've suggested before, we should be able to edit the times and distances to be accurate without having to delete an event and enter it manually, which achieves the same thing with a lot more work.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Thanks guys!  I've since asked friends how they see my runs on Strava and the conclusion very much is (if I've set it as a race):

    -Web Browsers > Elapsed Time

    -Android Apps > Elapsed Time

    -Apple Apps > Moving Time

     

    Strava updating their Apple App to show the Elapsed Time when you've selected race would go a long way to helping the issues that a lot of us our facing.

    It still makes absolutely no sense at all to me to have Moving Time (and pace) for runners. 

     

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Beating a dead horse but here's an interesting one: Strava decided that Kilian Jornet was moving too slow on the Rut 50 and gave him a bonus 6 minutes where they considered he wasn't moving. http://www.strava.com/activities/194089678/overview

    I've yet to meet a runner that considers this calculated moving time desirable. 

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Giving this one another bump.  Went on a canal run in London today, and apparently averaged 5:09.....per mile...  1h03m elapsed time, which Strava generously corrected down to 42m courtesy of a lot of bridge along the route which cause short breaks in the GPS.  http://www.strava.com/activities/227080157/overview  Stupid, pointless feature to force on users without any ability to manually switch it on / off.  That'll be one more user here on the list of those who were considering premium but now WONT be courtesy of this, and will be advising others in my run and tri clubs to do likewise until fixed.  

    Endomondo is an excellent, accurate alternative for those looking.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Hi Elle,

    I've just spent a few hours importing my data from Nike+ and was extremely excited about using Strava, especially taking into the account the premium features which I intended on paying for. That was, until I discovered the issue of Moving Pace, which told me my fastest ever mile was 3:55. Boy, I wish it was. I've now read this forum post and realised that the the only 'workaround'  that can be suggested is to mark all runs as Races. Wow. That's terrible.

    Can you please let your developers know that I now WON'T be using Strava. You've lost a potential paying customer.

    I don't believe that Strava has have any evidence that 'this is what most of our customers want', but this is ACTUALLY what the developers want. The suggested workaround would mean I can no longer use one of the built-in features of Strava (distinguishing between run types), so this is quite insulting and actually devalues the website's feature set. I echo all of the sentiment on this forum. The default should ALWAYS be the actual pace and elapsed time. Moving pace should merely be an OPTION.

    The thing that confuses me the most though, is that you've built such a detailed, granular platform on which runners can analyse their progress, and then you ruin it by masking the raw data with a system that hides true performance. Can your developers REALLY not see why this makes no sense? Why do they refuse to look beyond their own, bias point-of-view?

    Why should a training run - i.e. which blatantly isn't a race - be any less important than an actual race, when I'm trying to analyse my splits? If I'm not fit enough to run 5 miles without taking a 2 minute break, then the stats NEED to show me this! Under what circumstance would ANYONE that takes their training seriously not want to see this by default?

    Your developers should realise that their stubbornness is now having an effect on Strava's revenues, since I have no intention of paying for a service that thinks it's right to distort my runs so drastically. The other users on this forum have all been polite and courteous, but your developers really are treating them with absolutely no respect in return. Have they personally read this thread and seen the volume of support this requested change has?

    It's such a shame that your impressive website and infrastructure has been completely ruined by something so critical - but that would have been so simple to solve.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Is the simple solution not to make the default activity type "Race" and maybe rename it "Training Run"  and have another tag as "Moving time" for any people that want to cheat themselves and just look at their moving time?  This can't be a hard request can it?

    Alternatively, have an options in our settings where we can select our default activity type.  Labelling interval training sessions as races is just daft! 

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I recently did a workout on the indoor track. I switched my Garmin to "Indoor Mode" and just used the stopwatch function for a 5 mile run which took me just under 28 minutes. Through Garmin Connect, Strava pulled this activity out and gave me a moving time of 22 minutes for a "treadmill" run. This was a continuous run workout with absolutely no stoppage time. Where did Strava decide that I just randomly wasn't running for 5 minutes of the workout?

    I've let my Premium membership lapse this year. As a customer with concerns that have not been properly addressed, I'm forced to talk with my wallet. I love Strava, but this one feature really makes NO sense. I've been a runner for 14 years, and at no point during my career would I want your calculation to address my performance and fitness.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Well since this thread is up and running again, it's probably worth mentioning that the Strava Engineering blog posted an interesting piece on Auto-Pause a couple of days ago. It primarily addresses the functionality of the Strava iPhone/Android apps, but there's some interesting points in there regarding this topic of Moving Pace vs Actual Pace.

    Firstly, they reaffirm their belief that people primarily want to see moving time/pace; fine, I don't agree with it but if it was implemented in a half-decent fashion I guess I could get along with it.

    Secondly, they essentially acknowledge that using GPS location data for auto-pause (and thus define moving time) is completely inadequate:

    "...we first tried building run auto-pause based on GPS location updates similar to the way we had built ride auto-pause. Unfortunately, it was not responsive enough — resuming was fairly quick and usually happened within a couple of seconds of the athlete starting to run, but pausing sometimes took 5 seconds or more of standing still. [...] We experimented with making it more sensitive to minor GPS movement, but that caused errors — it would sometime pause while running or resume while standing still.

    This is essentially the same issue that we are all experiencing here with post-hoc uploads to the site.

    I did have a quiet laugh at the final line though, I wonder if they've read this thread:

    "At the same time, it has given us a lot of ideas about other ways we can serve our athletes better in the future, particularly in the realm of data accuracy."

    http://engineering.strava.com/improved-auto-pause-for-everyone/

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Adam, one thing I have noticed is a comment on the Strava support website that states:

    If you choose to pause your run activity manually on your Garmin watch, we will honor that choice and represent your Moving Time according to the time and pace shown on your GPS device.

    I've understood this to mean that, if I turn off auto pause on my Garmin, then Strava will also honour this setting and I won't ever have to worry about seeing Moving Time again - Strava will essentially always show actual time instead. Can anyone confirm if this is right? I've only just bought a Garmin (collecting it from my local Amazon Locker later today) so I'm wondering if anyone has any experience of this already.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Hi Mike,

    I believe you would have to include a manual pause on the Garmin during the activity as well. To quote Elle's reply from below:

    "If you have a Garmin run device, turn off auto-pause, and use the manual "Stop/Resume" button at least once during your run, the Strava will NOT overwrite your time data with it's algorithm for detecting resting time. Instead, Strava will display the time data according to the "timer time" of using the Stop/Resume action. In theory, you could use this button for a brief instant at the beginning or end of your run and then you would see pace times that reflect your total time."

    I can't be bothered with that so I don't know if it works; I just use Garmin Connect for any analysis.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I've left a comment on the blog post about Auto Pause, encouraging the developers to read this thread because of the connection with data accuracy. Perhaps that will raise the profile of this issue as well as help other Strava users understand what's going algorithmically. Others might wish to post their concerns about data accuracy as well. http://engineering.strava.com/improved-auto-pause-for-everyone/

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I confirm that the "manual pause for a couple of seconds" workaround works with my Forerunner 110.  At some point during your run (maybe at a stile or a gate if you encounter any) just stop the timer then start again maybe 3 seconds later.  Usually I forget that, I'm too busy vaulting the stile or whatever, so then at the end, I restart the timer a couple of seconds after I've finished, then stop it again a couple of seconds later.  This is annoying but has a minimal effect on the run stats.  It's better than having to contact Strava support after every run because they usually credited me with around 90 seconds of resting time on every 20 minute run.

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • I wonder how many runners actually stop during a run? I know I don't. If a runner does need to stop for any reason they can always pause their device or the app manually.
    As long as the watch or app is tracking it should be assumed that the athlete is moving. This would eliminate any need to guess when the runner has stopped or is tying their shoelaces.

    If a dedicated gps device like a forerunner is being used for tracking, Strava should let the device deal with auto-pausing and not try and cut out seconds where it thinks they were not moving.
    If Strava wants to play around with how their own app handles moving thresholds and auto detecting pauses, thats ok with me  but as long as a dedicated gps device is being used then they should respect the data and not mess with the results. 

    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • Strava... Is there anybody there..? Why have you chosen to ignore your users/customers for so long? It blows my mind that you choose
    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink
  • ...to manipulate your data when clearly people just want it as it comes? And why oh why oh why do you just keep on ignoring your customers???
    0
    Aktionen für Kommentare Permalink

Bitte melden Sie sich an, um einen Kommentar zu hinterlassen.

Sie haben nicht gefunden, wonach Sie suchten?

Neuer Post