Will Ionic display run cadence?

[Boost01]

Great, all these fancy new features, but it still can't tell me my cadence while running.

Moderator edit: Clarified subject

[soccersnaps]

have a look at cadence coach in the fitbit app gallery

[BenDaShark]

From what I can tell, that's a stand alone app that won't run while the fitness tracker's running.  But please correct me if i'm wrong and the watch can do both at once!

I just don't see why fitbit doesn't add cadence as one of the display options in the fitness tracker.

[Calcobrena]

There's a lot of bad information going on here, so I'm going to help.

A running coach tried to ask about the obsession over cadence and was quickly dismissed.

Yes, Cadence is an important metric, but real-time cadence reports can be very wonky as it can rapidly drop if you hold your wrist up to look at it.  You can put a bluetooth cadence sensor on your ankle and use your phone, but I'd assume nobody wants to keep looking at their phone.

Fitbit does have cadence data, though, that is pretty accurate after you complete a run.  You just have to do a little bit of math.  And this will be way more accurate than lifting your wrist and messing with real-time cadence reports.  Strava Premium can be connected to Fitbit and give you some great, in-depth pace analysis with your Fitbit data.

It was my interpretation that wrist-based real-time cadence analysis just wasn't reliably accurate enough and would cause confusion with runners trying to use it as they watched their cadence drop when they held their wrist up to their face.

With the ability of these devices to pair with bluetooth headphones, I wouldn't be surprised to see Fitbit incorporate a bluetooth cadence sensor in the future that can pair with a future device.  There are others already doing this, but the real-time metric is only someone decent when looking for inconsistencies and that can be analyzed on a segment by segment basis with Fitbit data as well.

One way to use Fitbit for a real-time cadence analysis is by knowing your stride length to calculate your estimated pace at 180 steps per minute with that stride length.  Then, you can just use the real-time current pace report.  When you run a kilometer, it'll buzz your wrist, you look at it, and see you can tell right away if you were a little under or over that target.

Another way is to use a 180 bpm metronome or a song with a known 180bpm (plenty of websites that can help you with that).  Or whatever your target is.  180 is usually the target for the serious runners who are interested in this metric.

[Boost01]

As the OP for the topic, I feel obliged to answer some of the points.

1) the "running coach" wasn't quickly dismissed, a question was asked and was answered, with some reasoning provided for my answers.

2) real time Cadence wasn't actually requested, just that it should do it.

3) Fitbit doesn't have any Cadence information available after a run. The data is only there if

   a) you happen to know your stride length, or believe the auto-stride length provided by Fitbit (I found it was off by 20% for me)

   b) you want to figure out how many steps you take each minute (or each km) then do the calculation yourself

   c) you download the data from Fitbit, throw it isn't Excel and get that to do the calculations for you.

4) Since this data is also all pulled from your wrist, I can't see the calculations (once you finally figure it out yourself) will be any less accurate than if Fitbit provided it for you (in real time)

5) Even if I wanted to try to do all this in my head while on a run (and I don't as I run to relax and not try to do math) my Fitbit doesn't vibrate or alert me after each km run.

You know a really funny thing, my Garmin running watch, which I recently acquired, is able to give me real time cadence, and it doesn't even track steps. Amazing that it is an option for Garmin, but out of the realm of possibility for Fitbit.

It is just surprising to me that it isn't provided as extra stats, even after a run as it is so trivial a thing to do.

[WavyDavey]

---

@Calcobrena wrote:

With the ability of these devices to pair with bluetooth headphones, I wouldn't be surprised to see Fitbit incorporate a bluetooth cadence sensor in the future that can pair with a future device.  There are others already doing this, but the real-time metric is only someone decent when looking for inconsistencies and that can be analyzed on a segment by segment basis with Fitbit data as well.

---

Possible but highly unlikely. Fitbit hasn't expressed interest in even connecting to external heart rate monitors, so I wouldn't expect them to get to foot pods anytime in the future. Fitbit's don't typically pair with others' bluetooth devices (other than headsets), and Fitbit doesn't make external bluetooth devices. I just don't see them going this way, it's too far away from their core market IMO.

[BenDaShark]

Why would the watch need an additional Bluetooth cadence monitor?  The Garmins do just fine without one, and my fit bit gives me live step count all day long.  

And I get all the arguments questioning whether monitoring cadence during a run is helpful, but this thread isn't trying to take that on.   

[Calcobrena]

Getting your stride length isn't rocket science... Known distance divided
by known steps...

And yes, it is dependent on accurate stride length. But it would be
indirectly dependent on that regardless. Because accurate stride length
would require an accurate step count within a GPS measured distance.
Cadence is an accurate step count within a fixed time period. If your GPS
is working correctly and distance is correct, and if your steps are being
recorded accurately, Fitbit isn't that bad at estimating your average
stride over a decent amount of distance.

[Calcobrena]

Fitbit does the same thing the Garmin does. Real-time cadence monitoring
drops when you lift your wrist. But Garmin is simply giving you that
information based on the same data that Fitbit records. It's just better
analyzed after a run rather than during it when it comes to a wrist-based
device.

[BenDaShark]

I can see value to having it available after the run, but FitBit should give the user the option to see it during the run.  There's a reason Garmin does--lots of people find it helpful.  This thread and a few other similar threads highlight that folks want that feature.  I don't understand why FitBit doesn't add it.  It's either not listening to its users, secretly passing judgement on our request, or is somehow prohibited from activating what seems like such an easy feature.

[WavyDavey]

---

@BenDaShark wrote:

I can see value to having it available after the run, but FitBit should give the user the option to see it during the run.  There's a reason Garmin does--lots of people find it helpful.  This thread and a few other similar threads highlight that folks want that feature.  I don't understand why FitBit doesn't add it.  It's either not listening to its users, secretly passing judgement on our request, or is somehow prohibited from activating what seems like such an easy feature.

---

Or. Nobody has posted it as a feature request on the correct forum (hint: it's called Feature Suggestions). Or, someone suggested it but others haven't voted for it there, instead starting new threads elsewhere, giving Fitbit the impression it's not a popular request.

https://community.fitbit.com/t5/forums/searchpage/tab/message?advanced=false&allow_punctuation=false...

[BenDaShark]

Hah. That might be the case; i admit I'm new on this forum. But I thought
this thread begin with someone saying they posted a feature request and
others saying they voted for it. I suppose they may have done it wrong,
and other's didn't realize this forum isn't the place to convince FitBit to
add the feature.

[Calcobrena]

Because the wrist-based version on Garmin is trash and causes a lot of
confusion.

If you want it during a run, use a metronome or song with a bpm for your
target. You can also calculate an estimated real-time pace target using a
target cadence and known stride length.

Fitbit has been pretty picky about using features that have greater margins
of error. These include "lactose threshold estimates" and wrist-based "real-time
cadence."

[Boost01]

---

@Calcobrena wrote:
Getting your stride length isn't rocket science... Known distance divided
by known steps...

And yes, it is dependent on accurate stride length. But it would be
indirectly dependent on that regardless. Because accurate stride length
would require an accurate step count within a GPS measured distance.
Cadence is an accurate step count within a fixed time period. If your GPS
is working correctly and distance is correct, and if your steps are being
recorded accurately, Fitbit isn't that bad at estimating your average
stride over a decent amount of distance.

---

The problem with "known distance divided by known steps" is that it changes depending on terrain, up hill or down hill, or even how fast you are going.

Trying to calculate these yourself after the fact is very tricky, doing it on the fly in your head is almot impossible.

I don't want to get into a Garmin vs Fitbit argument, as my Garmin doesn't do things that my Fitbit does, and vice-versa. Both have their places and uses, but adding a few easy features would help bridge that gap for Fitbit.

[Boost01]

Someone from Fitbit replied to this thread (I think, I haven't gone back and read all the post) that they won't be adding Cadence into their device.

Maybe they don't think it is important enough, but given how easy it should be to implement, that seems short sighted.

[Calcobrena]

Yep, you're kinda dependent on the value of averages 🙂   If you run a route that returns you to your start position, things average out pretty well.  Using a metronome with your cadence target will be far more accurate and beneficial than attempting to utilize a wrist-based cadence estimate. 

[Boost01]

@Calcobrena and a Metronome may end up being the answer for many people.

As for me, I an checking out of this thread as I don't see Fitbit changing anything regardless of what peoples' opinions may be on the subject.

[Calcobrena]

Real-time wrist based cadence reports will be garbage on any device. And I would trust any device less that did it.  One way fitbit could display cadence that would be much more accurate is in the unit report that it does at the end of each kilometer or mile (depending on the units you have set up).   A calculation of steps per minute over a period of time every 4 to 10 minutes would be fairly accurate and reliable on a wrist-based sensor.

And for those who are concerned with the accuracy on a wrist-based device, it should be optional to display it in the report.

[Nathans9]

Has anyone from FitBit actually read any of this chain?

[soccersnaps]

the suggestions board has many good suggestions such as a heart rate warning buzzer/alarm. Many of these suggestions have thousands of votes and have been running in some cases for years. it would be nice to think fitbit read these great ideas and even consider implementing some of them, the evidence would suggest otherwise, which is a shame. 

[Calcobrena]

How would a heart rate warning buzzer even work? Like, what's it a warning
about? Too low? Too high? If you are concerned about your heart rate, you
are probably looking at your wrist every once in a while to maintain a
certain exertion level. A feature that ONE person might have found a use
for just isn't something that would be suited to any serious runner.
Serious runners aren't looking for gimmicky toys. And if there was big
enough demand for this, then there'd be a third party app. There's already
one for cadence. And it has the same issues that any wrist-based cadence
tracker would have.