The fitness benchmark has surprisingly unscientific origins – yet it does contain more than a kernel of truth
The idea that we need to walk 10,000 steps a day originated not in medical research but in a 1960s marketing campaign for a pedometer, says Jack McNamara, senior lecturer in clinical exercise physiology at the University of East London. The round number was easy to remember and the idea caught on, despite there being no scientific evidence for 10,000 steps as a specific threshold for health.
“When the research community looked into it, they found that there were health benefits, so it didn’t necessarily get thrown out as pseudoscience,” says McNamara.
Some yogis welcome the idea of competition – for others, it is anathema. Will those keen for yoga to become an Olympic sport win the argument?
Vaishnavi Saravanakumar describes herself on Instagram as “India’s rubber band girl”. In a typical video post, dressed in a rhinestone-studded crimson catsuit and accompanied by a Bollywood-rap anthem, she demonstrates an improbable feat. From standing, she snakes into a deep back bend, curls her head and shoulders up under her tiger-striped calves, and finishes beaming to camera with ankles crossed under her chin. This is yoga as we have seldom seen it before.
Earlier this year, the Indian government announced that it will push for yogasana’s inclusion in the Olympics, ahead of the country’s bid to host the 2036 Games. The news came the week before the inaugural World Yogasana Championship, held in Ahmedabad in June, at which Saravanakumar, a gold medallist, was one of 522 yogis competing.
From doing too much cardio to wasting time – PTs reveal the common fails stunting your progress, and how to avoid them
We’ve all done it. Launched ourselves head first into a new regime – perhaps as the result of a new year resolution, recent breakup or aggressively unflattering photo. “You go all in and train five days a week,” says Elizabeth Davies, personal trainer and author of Training for Your Old Lady Body. “Then life happens. You miss a few sessions, then stop completely. You feel deflated that you couldn’t stick to it. Then some time later, motivation strikes again and the cycle repeats itself.”
On Saturday Night Live last week, comedian Shane Gillis made a pathetic ‘joke’ about the clothes women wear to the gym. It was puerile – but also pernicious
I’ve spent the morning doing Shane Gillis’s work: checking out women in the gym. If you’ve avoided Gillis thus far, apologies for enlightening you – he’s a “comedian” who recently told a “joke” on Saturday Night Live that began: “I haven’t been to the gym in so long, I didn’t know women just dressed like whores now.”
Well, reporting for duty from the weight room, here’s the clothing tally: eight women in leggings and T-shirts; six in T-shirts and trackie bottoms; five in shorts and vest tops; one in a crop top and leggings. It’s not exactly the Folies Bergère – there’s not much, I would have thought, to cause Gillis to blush. But maybe I’m wrong – how undressed, exactly, constitutes whorish? Is a glimpse of a female forearm a distracting provocation? Should we pull up our socks to avoid inflaming male passions with our slutty ankles when we’re doing step-ups?
This week, Suunto launched its newest addition to its Race line of performance watches, the Race 3S. At $599, it’s lightweight with a premium feel, and to me, its most interesting upgrade is the new silicon-carbon battery, which Suunto says offers up to 38 hours of dual-band GPS, up to 45 hours in Endurance mode, 10 days of training use, and up to 12 days in daily mode. While I usually stick to my Garmin Forerunners, I’ve been personally testing the Suunto 3S and loving it on first impression.
Suunto may be one of the lesser-known fitness watch brands, but its offerings, aimed at hikers and outdoorsy people, have long been well regarded. The company sorts its sports watches into families: Run, Race, and Vertical. Three families of watches, all with several generations of models and a lot of overlapping specs, are enough to leave you staring at a product page, wracked with decision fatigue. This week’s launch of the Suunto Race 3S, the newest member of the Race family, is a good enough reason for me to help you sort it out.
The Suunto Run series: Lightweight and run-focused
Best for: Road runners, 5K-to-marathon trainers, and anyone who wants a watch they forget they're wearing, including overnight. It's also a good first step into Suunto's ecosystem.
In her review of the Suunto Run my colleague Beth Skwarecki calls this watch on of her favorite running watches, pointing to features that not only rival, but maybe even outshine Garmin and Coros watches at a similar price point. Both watches in the Run series, the Run and the Run 2, are known for being easy to wear and simple to use, but still with all the core features of a reliable running watch.
The Suunto Race series: Performance training and racing
Best for: Trail runners, triathletes, and runners who want serious training tools and navigation.
The Race S is the compact option, while the Race 2 has since replaced the original Race and has a bigger screen and larger case. It might best suit people with bigger wrists who want a big display and don't mind the weight.
As of today, the Race 3S is the lightweight premium pick. It combines the Race S's compact size with a titanium and sapphire build, a bigger battery, a brighter screen, and double the storage. Suunto says its battery capacity is 46 percent larger than the Race S's, and its display is 233 percent brighter.
When in doubt, the Race series is the middle of the lineup, and it's a natural sweet spot to land on. If you can't decide between the Run and Race options, Beth's got you covered with an in-depth comparison.
The Vertical series: Built for the backcountry
Best for: Ultrarunners, mountaineers, backpackers, and anyone doing multi-day trips where charging isn't an option. It's also a good fit if you want a watch that holds up to rough use.
The Vertical 2 is marketed as an expedition-grade watch. It weighs about 87 grams and measures 49 mm, and it's available in stainless steel or titanium. It's water-resistant to 100 meters. It has a built-in LED flashlight that the lighter Race and Run watches lack, a redesigned heart rate sensor, and more storage and processing power than the original. Its main selling point is battery life—allegedly up to 65 hours of GPS in Performance mode and up to 250 hours in Tour mode.
The original Vertical is the older model, with a solar-assisted MIP display. It's still sold and often discounted, but the Vertical 2's AMOLED screen is a major step up in clarity.
The bottom line
The Suunto Run series is for runners who want a light, simple watch. The Race series is for performance athletes who want a premium build and strong all-around training and navigation tools. The Vertical series is for people who go far from civilization and want the longest battery life and the toughest build.
The Suunto lineup also includes Core outdoor watches and dive computers like the Ocean, but those are a different conversation. For runners and trail athletes, the choice comes down to Run, Race, or Vertical, and which of them fits how far, how long, and how rough you like to get:
If you mostly run on roads and want a lightweight entry-point watch, look at the Run.
If you race, train across several sports, or run trails and want a premium build, look at the Race 3S, or the Race if you're sticking to a smaller budget. Or you can choose the Race 2 if you prefer a bigger case and screen.
If your adventures last days rather than hours, choose the Vertical 2.
The market for smart bands is getting pretty crowded. It’s hard to beat the Fitbit Air on value or the Whoop on performance analytics, and anything in between struggles to make itself stand out. But the Speediance strap caught my eye for an unusual feature it includes: a sensor that claims to measure your core body temperature during workouts.
Does the Speediance Strap really measure core temperature?
The only other device I’ve seen make a similar claim is the Core 2 thermal sensor, which I wore for a summer’s heat training and found it valuable and useful (though not without a few caveats). A Speediance rep told me their device works the same way as the Core 2: It has a sensor for skin temperature, and another for heat flux, which can estimate how much you’re warming up over the course of a workout.
Core 2 requires that you pair its device to a chest strap heart rate monitor because its algorithm can only relate data from the sensors to your core temperature if it knows how your heart rate is responding. It also asks you to wear the sensor on the chest strap, so that it’s as close as possible to your actual core temperature. Speediance doesn’t have those requirements; you can get temperature estimates while wearing the device on your wrist and without any extra equipment.
To test Speediance’s claims, I wore both devices together for several workouts and compared the heat strain each device says I was under. While the Core 2 device is geared toward heat adaptation, Speediance uses heat data mostly to tell you when you’re done warming up and when your performance may be suffering due to heat.
How I tested the core temperature features of the Speediance band
Credit: Beth Skwarecki
The Speediance app shows your “heat load” during workouts, right on the same screen that shows your heart rate, time, and running mileage. At the beginning of a workout, you’ll see a label that says you’re insufficiently warmed up. Once your body temperature rises by about 0.5 to 1 degree Celsius (about 1 to 2 degrees Fahrenheit), you’re deemed to be in the “optimal performance” zone. A numerical strain index increases as you get warmer; above 5.0, you’re told you’re in “performance decline,” and above 7.0, you’re in “heat overload.”
For comparison, the Core 2 sensor uses a slightly different scale, or at least has different cutoffs: Between 1.0 and 2.9, you’re increasing your heat training load, and from 3.0 to 6.9 you’re more effectively increasing that load. Above 7, you’re not recommended to train because risks of overheating are too high.
It’s fall as I was testing the Speediance strap, and the weather was beautiful, so I wasn’t able to test this feature in any extreme temperatures. I did notice that, in a strength workout in my garage, my warmup was supposedly over before I had barely done any work. And I hit the “performance decline” level of heat load toward the end of several relatively cool runs.
To get a better sense of how the Speediance band does at measuring temperatures, I took it out alongside the Core 2 for an hour-long trail run on an unseasonably warm day (it was in the high 70s), and compared the heat load readings at various points during the run.
Credit: Beth Skwarecki
The numbers didn’t match up directly; the Speediance band always read several points higher than the Core 2 sensor, and seemed to show more ups and downs. But both climbed more or less together. I don’t think I’d say the Speediance band is as accurate—and in any sense, I don’t have a gold standard to compare to—but it seems like it could certainly be useful in monitoring how your performance varies with temperature in hot weather.
How the Speediance band performs for activity and sleep
Credit: Beth Skwarecki
If you’re going to get a Speediance band for its temperature features, you’re probably also going to use it for general activity and sleep tracking. On that front, I have plenty of good news. It’s comfortable to wear, with a soft band that feels a bit nicer than Whoop’s. I often completely forgot I was wearing it.
The app has a lot of nice little features. You get a circular visual of your day, showing when you slept versus when you exercised. My only complaint here is that the background is a generic visual that suggests you’re looking at a graph of daytime and nighttime, but it’s not lined up with the actual times of sunrise and sunset. Aligning those times with the visual would do a much better job of showing how your habits are (or aren’t) matching up with your circadian rhythms.
The band and app measure all the usual things, and display the data well: My HRV, skin temperature, and resting heart rate are all reported as vital signs, and I can easily see how they’ve changed over the past week, month, and year. A “TRIMP” number shows up among my daily metrics, which I know refers to the same thing that other apps call cardio load. A little obscure in the naming, but a good metric to track. The app suggests a bedtime, and its sleep tracking seems relatively accurate (not counting the time it read a dentist appointment as a nap—although, to be fair, I was lying still for half an hour).
But I’m disappointed by a few things. One annoyance is that, since Speediance is primarily a home gym company, you can’t log a strength workout without creating an exercise routine. (I ended up logging my strength sessions as “mixed cardio” instead.) If you want to share your exercise data on a graphic, you get stock images of Speediance equipment for backgrounds.
And I was never able to properly sync my workouts to Strava. I got a message in Chinese after attempting the connection, which a translation app told me means “the binding is successfull!” and the settings in my app told me in English that Strava was connected. Still, nothing ever showed up on my Strava page. That’s a bummer, both for everyday use if you use Strava, and for me personally since I could have used Strava to download more specific data from my workouts than I can get from just viewing workouts in the Speediance app.
Is the Speediance strap worth the money?
At $159, I’m on the fence. The temperature features of the Speediance strap could be useful for anyone who wants to keep track of how heat affects their workouts, especially in the summer. It doesn’t track heat adaptation, so it can’t replace the Core 2 sensor, but I do appreciate that Speediance is offering something more than just another heart rate measurement.
But the glitches (especially the lack of Strava connection) are a dealbreaker for now, and I wasn’t able to get as much information as I’d like about how well it measures heart rate. If I could overlook those, I don’t think this band is particularly worse than the Polar Loop or the Garmin Cirqa, which both cost a bit more. But I certainly can’t say it’s better than the Fitbit Air or the Whoop. Perhaps with time, this will be a better device, but at this point, I’m more inclined to watch for improvements than to recommend it as is.
From an infinity pool with sauna in Scotland to a restored Victorian gem in Bristol, here are 10 great spots where you can swim in comfort year-round
Portavadie, on the banks of Loch Fyne on the west coast of Scotland, was originally earmarked as an oil rig, but plans fell through. Today it is a marina with holiday homes, a restaurant and bar, a gift shop, and a leisure centre with what is believed to be the biggest heated outdoor infinity pool in Scotland. There are also outdoor spa pools and a sauna, an indoor pool and a gym; treatments such as massages and facials are available. The facilities are powered by a woodchip biomass generator, and have views across the loch and over to the Isle of Arran.
£14 for a 90-minute swim, sauna and hot tub
The Fitbit brand has long been defined by fitness trackers with tiny screens, yet it's been three years since it released a new one. Now that the Fitbit Edge has been announced (and pre-orders have opened), longtime Fitbit users are probably wondering how it compares to the last Fitbit release with a screen, the Charge 6.
The design is the first clear difference: The Edge fits in perfectly between the screenless Fitbit Air and the smooth, curved screen of the Pixel Watch. It runs on the same operating system as the Fitbit Air, which is slightly different from the OS that runs on Pixel watches. Like other Fitbits, the Edge pairs with both iPhones and Android devices. Now, let's look at what Google has added since the Charge 6—and what it took away.
I just unboxed the Fitbit Edge that Google sent me to review, and can confirm: There is a physical button on the right side of the casing. It makes an audible click when you press it in, even when the device is turned off. The Charge 6 has a "button" that is just a haptic nub—squeeze it, and if you're lucky it might recognize your touch and buzz in response. (Sadly, I found it often didn't work.)
The Fitbit Edge has an altimeter and an allegedly better GPS chipset
The altimeter is a brand-new bit of hardware in the Fitbit Edge. You have to go back to the Charge 4 to find a Fitbit tracker with an altimeter. This is the sensor that tells you your altitude and enables a measurement of how many "floors" you have climbed throughout the day. It also allows for more accurate tracking of hills on your hikes and hilly runs.
The Charge 6 and the Edge both have GPS capabilities, allowing the device to know where you are in the world, even if you left your phone at home. (The Fitbit Air, by contrast. does not have its own GPS and has to pester your phone to find out where you are and how fast you're running.) The Charge 6's GPS has some serious flaws, the main one being that tightening the wristband too much could strain the GPS antenna, leading to comically distorted maps, as you can see from my testing. Google says the Fitbit Edge has better GPS hardware. I believe them, but mainly because it would be hard for it to be worse.
The Fitbit Edge does not have Google Pay or NFC capabilities
This is the biggest downgrade: With the Charge 6, you could set up Google Wallet and be able to tap your Fitbit to pay for things at stores. That's a convenient feature if you like to run or walk without your phone and still be able to buy a drink at a convenience store. But the Fitbit Edge dropped this capability, probably to make room for other internal components. If you loved Google Pay on your older Fitbit, you'll miss it if you upgrade to the Edge.
The Fitbit Edge will be able to play music from any app, not just Youtube Music
The Charge 6's music player is one of the most frustrating things about it. The music controls only work for Youtube Music. That's a premium service, meaning you need to pay a monthly subscription fee just to be able to control music playing on your phone, and it has to be a subscription to Youtube Music—Spotify or Apple Music users are out of luck.
Fortunately, that's been fixed in the Fitbit Edge. Google says it will be able to control whatever is playing on your phone (like pretty much every other watch in existence) rather than relying on a specific app.
Google Maps directions are unsupported on the Edge—but "coming soon"
At launch, the Fitbit Edge doesn't support Google Maps directions—but Google's spec sheets say it's "coming soon." To be fair, Google Maps directions were never particularly useful. They lived in their own little app, and only gave you turn-by-turn directions, not a map view showing where you are. In the long run, this isn't likely a difference that matters, since Google plans to bring this feature to the Edge. But if you enjoy it on your Charge 6, you should know it's not going to be available right away on the Fitbit Edge.
Google announced the Fitbit Edge earlier this week, making it the company's first Fitbit with a screen since the Charge 6 was released in 2023. Pre-orders are open now, and the devices are expected to start shipping on Oct. 27.
The Fitbit Edge ($179.99) has features and a price that are right in between the Fitbit Air, which has no screen and retails for $99.99, and the Pixel Watch 5, a full-featured smartwatch that starts at $399.99.
You can pre-order the Fitbit Edge here. It comes in black with a black band, silver with a "fog" (gray) band, "champagne gold" with a salmon-pink band, and a metallic color they're calling "satin pyrite" with an olive green band. There's also a Steph Curry edition for $219.99 in gray and orange. The standard packages come with two bands, a small/medium that fits wrists 130 to 170 millimeters around, and a medium/large for wrists 170 to 210 millimeters. There are a few other bands available for an extra fee: an "active sport" band with larger holes for ventilation ($39.99), a magnetic band ($49.99), and a band with metal links ($149.99).
What's new in the Fitbit Edge
Unlike the screenless Fitbit Air, the Fitbit Edge adds its own GPS chipset, so you can track distance without bringing your phone, and an altimeter to detect elevation changes like hills. The latter also enables a "floors climbed" metric each day. The Fitbit Edge also has an ECG app, a morning report, and can control music playing on your phone no matter what app is playing it.
If you're upgrading from a Fitbit Charge 6, the Edge adds an altimeter and a morning report, and you'll be glad to see the music controls work for any music app, not just Youtube Music. The Edge is missing some features, though: With no NFC, it can't do tap-to-pay with Google Wallet. The Edge also does not have Google Maps directions at launch, although Google says these are coming soon. The EDA scan and stress tracking are also gone. (Personally, I'm glad about that. Stress tracking isn't accurate enough to be useful.)
Yesterday the MARQ Gen 3 turned up on Garmin's support pages, and today, the company has made it official. Garmin launched its third-generation luxury smartwatch collection, a lineup of six models priced from $2,500 to $3,100. That sure is a lot of money for a watch. Let's take a look at what exactly you get with the new Garmin MARQ Gen 3.
The new collection consists of the MARQ Athlete, Adventurer, Aviator, Commander, Golfer and Diver. Across all six, Garmin has moved to larger AMOLED displays, added LTE and satellite connectivity, expanded its mapping, and brought in its latest health and fitness features that I detail in my review of Garmin's other recent release, the Fenix 9 Pro.
The hardware follows the luxury formula the MARQ line is known for. Each watch has a 47 mm Grade 5 titanium case, a sapphire crystal lens, and a ceramic bezel inlay. Each is 15 mm thick and carries a 1.4-inch AMOLED display, up from 1.2 inches on the previous generation.
At the bottom of the range, the MARQ Athlete is the entry point at $2,500. It comes on a silicone strap with VO2 max markings on the bezel, and includes Garmin's full collection of running and training features. The MARQ Adventurer costs $2,700 and pairs an Italian leather strap with a compass bezel. This one is aimed at hiking, navigation and climbing, and includes preloaded ClimbPro information.
And so on: The remaining four models are each built around a specific pursuit, as MARQ variants have been since the line debuted. The MARQ Aviator is the flight-focused model, the MARQ Commander is the tactical one, the MARQ Golfer is built for the course, and the MARQ Diver is the one for the water. Garmin's pricing and strap details for these four sit between the Athlete's $2,500 and the $3,100 top of the range.
What else is new about the Garmin MARQ Gen 3?
In terms of software updates, the biggest addition is embedded inReach connectivity. All six watches support LTE calling, messaging and location sharing without a phone nearby, along with satellite messaging and emergency SOS through Garmin Response. Note: These services require a separate inReach subscription.
Garmin has also added a speaker, a microphone, and an LED flashlight. Other upgrades include the ECG app in supported regions, newer health and recovery metrics, and worldwide TopoActive maps with address search. Storage has jumped from 32GB to 128GB, and battery life reaches up to 18 days in smartwatch mode, or seven days with the always-on display enabled.
How the MARQ compares to non-luxury Garmins
What's most exciting is how these changes bring the MARQ much closer to Garmin's latest high-end sports watches, as opposed to being more of an aesthetic purchase. Previously, MARQ buyers were paying a considerable premium for hardware that lacked some features already available elsewhere in the range. Honestly, the earlier MARQ was, in effect, a fancy-materials version of a watch you could get for less, with fewer capabilities.
Now, the MARQ Gen 3 is finally a watch that tops the Garmin lineup with all the features of a Fenix. And for the first time, the MARQ has pluses the Fenix doesn't, like increased storage and on-device mapping features. The question of whether such premium price Garmin has set is worth it? That's still up for debate.
You just finished running a race, but your watch disagrees with the official distance and timing. Which should you trust? While race organizers can screw up their distance or timing, they usually don't. Let's look at how races are measured and why they may disagree with your watch—which happens more often than you might realize.
How races measure your time
Before we compare a watch time to an official race time, we need to know what kind of official race time we're looking at. There are two different numbers you might see from a race: gun time and chip time. They may differ from each other and from your watch. Here's where each comes from:
Chip time
Chip time, also sometimes called net time, is the time from when you personally cross the start line until you personally cross the finish line. This is the time that matters for most of us.
Chips measure your personal start and finish because big races often have a crowd at the start line. If you’re running a big-city marathon, it could be 10 minutes or more of waiting and then slowly moseying forward with the crowd before you are able to cross the start line. In that case, your marathon could have a 4:40:00 gun time and a 4:30:00 chip time.
The “chip” in the name refers to a computer chip that is usually embedded in your racing bib (the numbers you pin to your shirt). The timing system registers a data point whenever you cross a timing mat on the ground. There is a timing mat at the start and another at the end of the race. (Longer races like marathons and half-marathons may also have timing mats at a few checkpoints along the way, such as the halfway point.)
Gun time
Gun time is the time from when the race starts (often signaled by a starting pistol, hence “gun”) until you cross the finish line. This is also sometimes called clock time.
If you are trying to actually win the race, you may need to care about gun time. Sometimes the rules specify that the person who wins the race is the person who crosses the finish line first, regardless of when they crossed the start line. If you are an elite athlete who is in the running to win a big race, you’ll generally work out arrangements with the race organizer to be at the actual start line when the race starts, so that the gun time accurately reflects how long it took you to run the race.
But for the rest of us, gun time doesn’t matter at all. The exception is if you are in a very small local race that doesn’t use chip timing, or that only has one mat at the finish line (no mat at the start). In that case, only a gun time will be reported, and no chip time.
Watch time
Watch time is the name I’m using here for the time you see on your wristwatch, or in your running app after the fact. If you start and end the timer exactly when you cross the start and finish lines, and never pause it in between, in theory, it should be the same as the chip time. All the major brands of running watches and smartwatches do an accurate-enough job in most situations. But you shouldn't trust it too much—let me explain why.
As I mentioned above, gun time only matters if there is no chip time, if you’re trying to win an award in a race that uses gun times for awards, or if you’re trying to qualify for the Olympics.
Use the chip time anytime you’re telling someone what you ran, or when you’re keeping track of your personal bests (PBs). (Only use a watch time if you ran a race with no chip time, and even then make sure to use your actual total time between the start and finish lines, no pausing. In that case, you're not trusting the watch over the chip time; you're just using it to estimate a missing chip time.)
Watch time should be the same as chip time if you started and stopped your watch at the start and finish lines. But it’s often not. Some of the reasons your watch time might be wrong:
Your watch auto-pauses. This is a convenient setting on training runs, if you often stop for a water break or to wait to cross a street. Your watch will pause your run when you stop, and resume recording when you move again. But during a race, stops aren’t free! If you stop to spend two minutes in a porta-potty, that’s still part of your race time.
Your app (such as Strava) might report a “moving” time. Same idea as above, but it happens even if your watch recorded the whole thing. For example, on one longish run I did, I remember stopping to tie my shoe. Strava shows this run as taking 1:17:02. But if I scroll down through the numbers it gives, I can also see an elapsed time of 1:17:28. I guess it took me 26 seconds to tie my shoe.
On Strava, you can make your elapsed time show up first by selecting Edit Activity and then changing Type of Run to Race. If I do that on my shoe-tying run, the elapsed time with the extra 26 seconds shows up on that Strava activity.
There is one other reason why your official race result might not make sense, even if it’s a chip time and it’s showing the same as your watch’s elapsed time: Every now and then, a race organizer fucks up.
One time, I was running a 2K race (1.2 miles) and was expecting a finish time somewhere between nine and 10 minutes. My watch registered a number in that range, but I knew it was probably off by a few seconds. When I checked the official results shortly after crossing the finish line, I had a time of 12:29, about three minutes longer than I was expecting! And in this case, I had started near the start line (it was a small, local race), so I couldn’t blame a gun/chip time difference. Turns out the timing service had accidentally added three minutes to everyone’s times. They noticed the error pretty quickly, though, and my official time was soon updated to 9:29. (I got an age group medal that day, and wrote my time on the back, which is why I remember it all these years later.)
So if your official race result is way off, consider speaking to the race organizer. There may have been an error that affects everybody, or they may only have a gun time and not a chip time.
How races measure distance
There’s one other consideration here: not just the time on your watch, but the distance. You may find that your watch’s time was within a few seconds of your chip time, but the distance seems wrong—usually too long. Or if you upload your run to Strava, you may find that the notorious "Strava tax" has been applied, appearing to shave off a bit of distance. (My best 5K in the last few years was recorded on Strava as 4.99 kilometers and thus didn't update my 5K PR. Am I mad? OK, yes.)
The first thing to check is whether the race course was certified. (Most are.) The process of certifying a race course ensures that the course has been measured to be the correct distance. And that distance is nearly guaranteed to be shorter than most runners actually run. So, yes, you will probably run a smidge longer than 3.1 miles in a 5K (3.1 mile) race!
You can read the USATF course certification guidelines here. Of particular interest is this part: "A race course is defined by the shortest possible route that a runner could take and not be disqualified. A given runner might not follow the shortest possible route…[t]he actual path of any given runner is irrelevant. The shortest possible route is a reasonably well-defined and unambiguous route that ensures all runners will run at least the stated race distance." (Emphasis theirs.)
How does one find the shortest possible route? "You might envision the shortest possible route as a string, stretched tightly along the course so that it comes within 30 cm (one foot) of all corners, straight through S-turns, and diagonally between corners when crossing a street. You should measure the course following the same route as that hypothetical string." In addition, there is a 0.1% correction factor added to the measured distance, to ensure “that your course will not be short, even if you make small errors in following the shortest possible route.”
The only time your smartwatch’s distance should make you doubt the course measurement is if your watch thinks you covered a significantly shorter distance than the advertised length of the race. In that case, check your map to see if the GPS route looks like the route you actually ran. If you had poor GPS accuracy, your watch (or phone) might draw a line that cuts a corner that you did not actually cut.
If your map looks correct, but your distance is still short, it’s worth checking with other runners to see if they had a short distance as well. Mistakes in course measurement or signage are rare, but they happen! The San Francisco Marathon accidentally shaved half a mile off its half-marathon course once. If you think your race course was short, contact the race organizer.
What counts as my PB?
Your PB, or personal best, can be whatever you want it to be in your heart. But if you want to brag about your times or compare them with other runners, you'll want to talk about chip time.
This is where the distance issue comes up. Maybe you finished your first 5K in 30:03 chip time, but your watch congratulated you on a 5K PR of 28:59. What gives? Check the distance, and you might see that your total race distance was 3.22 miles, with 28:59 being the time it took you to hit 3.1 (at which point the finish line was in sight, but you weren't actually done with the race). Sorry, but you didn't officially run a sub-30 5K.
This is why we distinguish race PBs from training PBs. The race course's timing is more accurate, and its certified distance is more accurate than your GPS even though the actual route that you personally run may be a bit longer than the certified distance. People tend to hit PBs at races because that's when you're the best prepared for a big effort and you have a crowd cheering you on. But the distance being potentially longer than advertised means that it is more of an accomplishment to run a "5K" race in a certain time than to run exactly five kilometers in that time.
So when another runner asks for your 5K time, they mean a race. You can proudly and accurately cite your chip time—in our example, 30:03. But you could also add: "My best training PB for that distance is 28:59, so I know I'm going to break 30 minutes officially soon." You will. I believe in you.
Is the treadmill harder or easier than running outdoors? Survey runners, and you’ll get plenty of different opinions on which feels harder or easier, but the basic physics of running are the same on both. (I promise.) So why do people who are used to treadmills find that they’re suddenly slower when they run outdoors? I’m going to run through the factors that are at play here, and talk about how to adapt if you want to be able to enjoy both.
Why treadmills sometimes feel harder than running outside
If you find treadmill running harder, you probably already know the reason: It’s boring. You have nothing to distract you from your own effort and the glowing numbers telling you how little progress you’ve made. This is a problem that we can train our brains to solve for us over time, whether with distractions, mindfulness, or simply being grateful that we’re not outdoors in the bad weather.
The treadmill does not move your feet
Physics-wise, running on a treadmill is pretty much identical to running outdoors in identical conditions. It is not true that the treadmill "moves your feet," as I have seen runners claim. Running is the action of pushing off the ground to move yourself forward relative to the ground. If the “treadmill moves your feet” theory were correct, would we not have to consider the rotating Earth its own sort of treadmill? And thus it would be 2,000 times harder to run west than to run east?
In reality, you have to spend just as much effort to stay in place on a treadmill going 6.5 miles per hour, as you do to move forward at 6.5 miles per hour on flat, steady ground. In other words: in both scenarios, you are asking your muscles to push off with a force that will keep you moving 6.5 mph faster than the ground. Physics is not the reason why the treadmill feels different.
You only need to add a 1% incline if you are running very fast
Then there’s the issue of wind resistance. Some runners will say you need to set the treadmill’s incline to 0.5% or 1% to mimic outdoor air resistance. Even on a calm day, your body has to push into the air to keep moving. Adding a small incline to the treadmill is supposed to mimic that extra effort.
But that is only true if you run at a pace of 7:30 per mile (8.0 mph) or faster. Below that, “the difference is so small as to be meaningless,” a scientist who studied the question told Runner’s World. So if you’re jogging at 6 mph, you don’t have to worry about accounting for wind resistance. Now that we understand the physics, let’s talk about why treadmill runs often feel easier than outdoor runs.
The treadmill may feel easier because it handles the pacing
Pacing is probably the biggest factor (aside from weather) in why outdoor running feels harder for a person who is used to treadmill running. On the treadmill, you decide on a pace, punch it in to the treadmill, and then you'll keep going at that pace whether you're thinking about it or not.
But outdoors, you don't know when you start what pace you're running. Even if you're relying on a watch to tell you your current pace, it can take a moment to catch up and give you the correct numbers. It's easy to take off a little too fast, especially if you have a good song playing or you're excited to get the workout going (or over with).
So you, the treadmill runner, head off on an outdoor run without a good sense of how fast you’re going, and maybe you find yourself tired out a few minutes in. Meanwhile, outdoor runners learn to develop a sense of pace out of necessity. They know you have to listen to your body, not just look at a number, to know whether you're running at a pace you can sustain for the whole workout. Fortunately, you can learn this skill! Just run outdoors at least some of the time, and pay attention to your breathing and effort level.
The treadmill has no weather
If all your treadmill runs are inside of a 68-degree gym, they’ll all feel pretty similar. But the great outdoors is fond of blessing us with heat, wind, humidity, rain, snow, ice, and similar complications.
Heat slows us down a lot, especially if we aren’t used to it. (You do build up some heat adaptation throughout the summer.) Humidity, in combination with heat, makes this even worse. Your body can’t cool itself as well through sweating, so you get hot and stay hot. It’s normal for your pace on a hot day to be anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes slower each mile.
Heavy winds can also slow you down (when you’re running into the wind) or speed you up (when you’re running with the wind at your back). Ice can make you slow down to watch your footing. Snow can make you work harder as your feet sink into the ground and you have to fight to pull them back up again.
On the other hand, a cool, dry day is better for your performance than the conditions inside a sweaty gym. Perfect running weather is (in my opinion) around 50 degrees, calm, and overcast. Most people will run a lot faster and feel better in those conditions than on a treadmill at room temperature.
The treadmill has no unexpected hills
If you live in a pancake-flat part of the country, you can skip this section. But many of us live where there are hills. Big ones, little ones, maybe some mountains. On the treadmill, you get to choose what incline to run with. Outdoors, your choices may be limited.
I live in a hilly place, so even my “flat” outdoor routes aren’t entirely flat. A regulation running track is my only truly flat option. Even gently rolling hills can add up over the course of a long run, making you work harder on the uphills without ever fully giving you that speed back on the downhills.
The treadmill has a more predictable surface
A treadmill only has one surface. Every step meets flat ground. Every step is the same softness or hardness. Outdoors, there’s so much more variation.
Even on a simple city run, you’ll find yourself traversing curbs, slightly tilted sidewalk slabs, cambered edges of roads, pebbles, stray garbage, and occasional patches of grass or dirt. Take your run to the trails and you’ll also hit packed dirt, mud, soft grass, leaf litter, rocks, sticks, logs, little streams you have to hop over, ruts carved by mountain bike wheels—you get the idea. Your feet have to land and push off just a little differently for each of these.
The variety in outdoor running is good for your feet, but it can be fatiguing on the small muscles of your feet and lower legs if you’re not used to it.
How to train for an outdoor race if you prefer to run on the treadmill
It’s OK to do plenty of your training on a treadmill, even if you're training for an outdoor race, and in some situations it may be necessary. The treadmill can let you get your training in when the weather is bad, when you can’t line up child care at your running times, or any number of other reasons.
The important thing is to still run outdoors at least sometimes. If you’re training for a marathon, try to do your long runs outdoors, even if some of your shorter runs and speedwork have to be on the treadmill. Get outside when you can. That way, you’re adapting to the weather, training your feet on different surfaces, and building the muscles and mindset necessary to tackle hills.
On most runs, I prefer to pay attention to pace and heart rate data from my Garmin, and ignore the rest (even though I love playing with the data later on). But I also believe in trying a fun experiment now and then. So, for my most recent training block, I’ve retooled my watch's data screens around several of the more nitty-gritty metrics available to me— cadence, stride length, vertical oscillation, ground contact time, and more—to see what useful insights I could gain.
First, a quick definition, because "running economy" gets thrown around a lot: Running economy is the energy (oxygen) cost of running at a given speed. Two runners can hold the same 8:00 pace, but the one who uses less oxygen to do so is more “economical.” That runner can run the same pace at a lower heart rate, hold it longer, or go faster for the same effort. It's one of the big levers for performance, alongside VO2 max and lactate threshold, and it's one you can improve with training, strength work, and technique.
Technically, your watch can't measure running economy directly and give you one neat number. What it can do is show you how you're producing your speed, so you can spot inefficiencies and then test whether fixing them lowers your heart rate at the same pace. That's the experiment I’m running (pun intended). After my next marathon, I'll break down how my running economy actually improved, and in what ways.
All the running dynamics on Garmin watches
Garmin groups these metrics under "running dynamics." Depending on your watch and accessories, they include cadence, stride length, ground contact time, ground contact time balance, vertical oscillation, vertical ratio, running power, and step speed loss. In all the examples below, I'm using a Garmin Forerunner 970; note that not every Garmin can show all of these data fields.
Cadence works on nearly every Garmin running watch.
Stride length is available on many mid-range and higher watches, sometimes from the wrist and sometimes only with an accessory.
Ground contact time, ground contact balance, vertical oscillation, and vertical ratio have historically required a compatible chest strap, but many newer watches now measure these from the wrist.
Step speed loss and step speed loss percentage require an HRM 600 chest strap paired to a compatible watch. They aren't measured when you're moving at a walking pace during a run.
Check your watch's owner's manual (the "Running Dynamics" page) to see what metrics are available for you to rebuild your own data screens.
How I use Garmin data screens to chart my running economy
Keep in mind that while these metrics are useful, there is no universally "correct" cadence or vertical oscillation number. Chasing the oh-so-coveted 180 steps per minute can do more harm than good if you end up overstriding at a fast turnover or running stiff and choppy. Think of everything below as a diagnostic, not a target. Some more tips to make the most of your Garmin data screens, without succumbing to information overload:
Change one variable at a time. I spent a few weeks laser-focused on cadence before getting stressed over anything else.
Use the new data screens on easy runs. Hard workouts are for hard efforts; easy runs are where you can afford to observe more.
Review after the run, not during. Staring at vertical oscillation mid-stride is a great way to trip and fall. Feel free to glance, but don't let the numbers take over your run.
Watch the trends, not single numbers. Again, focus on personal patterns, not any specific number targets.
Keep screens sparse. Three or four fields per screen is plenty. Anything denser is hard to read mid-stride.
Consider keeping your base screen first in the rotation and add the experimental screens after it, so you can flip over on easy runs without losing your usual setup.
Screen 1: Cadence + Stride Length + Lap Pace
Credit: Meredith Dietz
"Run at 180 steps per minute" is one of the most repeated pieces of running advice, and one of the most misunderstood. Cadence naturally varies with pace, so chasing one magic number regardless of how fast you're going can actually hold you back. Pace is the product of cadence and stride length. Seeing those two variables together can help show you how you're getting faster paces (or not).
What I noticed immediately: on easy runs, I naturally fall into a longer stride and lower cadence. It felt relaxed, but it also meant a lot of braking on each landing. Over the past several weeks, I've been nudging my cadence up by about 3 to 5 steps per minute, which shortens my stride slightly at the same pace, and my heart rate at that pace has come down a bit (although cooler weather certainly helps there, too).
The goal is to find your own cadence range and shift it slightly higher, not to force a fixed number. When in doubt, aim for a cadence at each pace that keeps your foot landing close to your body rather than reaching out ahead of it.
Screen 2: Ground Contact Time + GCT Balance + Step Speed Loss
Credit: Meredith Dietz
This screen needs compatible hardware, and if you do have it, it's my favorite for spotting fatigue.
Ground contact time (GCT) is how long your foot stays on the ground each step. Generally, shorter is associated with a springier, more efficient stride, and it tends to shrink as you get faster. GCT balance shows the left/right split.
Step speed loss is the newest of these metrics, and the one most directly tied to economy. Every time your foot lands, it acts a bit like a brake, and your forward speed dips before you push off again. Step speed loss measures how much speed you give up during each footstrike, and the percentage version expresses that loss relative to your running speed. Lower numbers mean less braking and more of your energy going into moving forward instead of fighting yourself.
It's useful for a few reasons:
It captures overstriding. Reaching your foot out ahead of your body increases braking, and this metric shows you the cost. That makes it a great companion to the cadence screen: if raising cadence brings your landing closer to your body, you may see step speed loss drop.
It's a cleaner efficiency signal than bounce. Vertical oscillation tells you how much you move up and down. Step speed loss tells you how much you're slowing down horizontally, which is closer to what actually costs you energy.
It shows fatigue. Like GCT, it can creep up late in long runs as form degrades.
Two other uses I found valuable on this screen:
Fatigue tracking. In long runs, my GCT always creeps up in the final third, well before my pace or heart rate tell me I'm utterly cooked.
Asymmetry flags. A consistent tilt away from 50/50 isn't automatically a problem, since a small imbalance is common. But if yours shifts noticeably on days something feels off, it's worth listening to.
Again, don't stress about small imbalances. Look for changes from your normal.
Screen 3: Vertical Oscillation + Vertical Ratio
Credit: Meredith Dietz
Vertical oscillation is how much you bounce with each step. Vertical ratio is that bounce relative to your stride length, which makes it easier to compare across paces and across runners. Lower generally means less energy spent going up rather than forward.
Personally, this was the most misleading screen in the beginning. I saw my number, decided it was too high, and tried to "run flatter." That just made my stride feel forced and awkward. What worked better was treating it as a trend. The plan is that when I improve cadence and let my stride shorten a touch, vertical oscillation naturally drops on its own. Strength work and a slightly higher cadence should do more for me than any overly contrived form cue about "floating."
Screen 4: Running Power (if you have it)
Credit: Meredith Dietz
The economy framing here is simple: compare power to heart rate over time. In fact, I'm planning to go in and put heart rate on my screen alongside power. Because power responds instantly to changes in effort and terrain, it's a better gauge of your economy compared to pace on hills or extra windy days.
If you can hold the same wattage at a lower heart rate than you could two months ago, that's a real improvement in fitness and efficiency, regardless of what pace says. Just be aware that different power systems calculate the number differently, so stick with one source and don't compare across devices.
Screen 5: Base screen
Credit: Meredith Dietz
Finally, the screen I never removed: pace, heart rate, and lap or average pace (plus a timer and time of day, since this is still my watch, after all). For the sake of these runs, I could judge my form changes by whether my heart rate at a given pace went up or down. At the end of the day, this is how you find out whether any of the tweaks above are making a difference.
How to add or edit data screens on your Garmin watch
You can customize your screens on the watch itself or in the Garmin Connect app. The app is easier if you're editing several screens at once, since the fields are larger and easier to read. Menu names vary by model, so treat these as the general path.
On your watch
Open the activity settings. From the watch face, press Start and select Run. Then hold the Up/Menu button (or tap the screen on touchscreen models) and choose Run Settings.
Choose Data Screens. This lists every screen you cycle through during a run.
Pick a screen to edit, or choose Add New to create one.
Set the layout. Choose how many data fields appear, from one large field to several smaller ones.
Choose your data fields. Select each field slot, browse the categories (Cadence, Running Dynamics, Power, Heart Rate), and pick the metric you want.
Reorder or remove screens back in the Data Screens menu.
In the Garmin Connect app
Open Garmin Connect and tap your watch (usually under More or the device icon).
Go to Activities & Apps, then select Run.
Tap Data Screens and pick the screen you want to edit.
Change the layout and fields, then sync your watch so the changes carry over.
The bottom line
If you have the hardware and a little curiosity, spending a few weeks with running dynamics on your wrist can help you nerd out like you're a true running machine. Look, learn, adjust one thing, and let your heart rate tell you whether it worked. For more, check out these ten hacks every Garmin user should know.
The rumors are true: Google has announced a new device, the Fitbit Edge. It’s a band with a narrow screen, much like the old Charge 6, but updated to match the look and some of the functionality of the Fitbit Air.
Before the Fitbit Air, which came out earlier this year, Google hadn’t come out with any new Fitbits since the Charge 6 in 2023. In the meantime, the Pixel Watch has gotten up to its fifth generation, and the Fitbit app became the Google Health app. I was worried the idea of a small-screen fitness tracker might have been lost for good. Fortunately, I was wrong.
What’s new in the Fitbit Edge
Google says that the new Fitbit has:
A physical button on the side, unlike the Charge 6’s haptic nub
Its own GPS chipset, instead of relying on your phone.
An altimeter, which the Fitbit Charge 6 did not have (but many fitness watches do)
A seven-day battery life, or about two days if you enable the always-on display
The same charger as the Fitbit Air
A replaceable battery
Music controls that work with anything your phone is playing
Pre-orders open today, and the Fitbit Edge is expected to start shipping on Oct. 27. The retail price is $179.99, making it $20 more than the Charge 6’s regular price. For comparison, the Fitbit Air is $99.99, and the Pixel Watch 5 starts at $349.99. The Fitbit Edge’s price, size, and functionality put it right in between those two devices, and honestly it’s a well-rounded lineup.
Google representatives said in a briefing that it will be possible to connect both a Fitbit Air and Fitbit Edge to your phone, so that you can switch between them at will. (Previously, you could pair a Fitbit and a Pixel Watch, but not two Fitbits.)
Compared to the Charge 6, the Fitbit Edge gains an altimeter and more useful music controls; the Charge 6 could only control music playing on Youtube Music, which required a subscription. However, the Fitbit Edge will not have a tap-to-pay option like the Charge 6 did; it does not have NFC capabilities. Google says GPS tracking is more accurate on the Edge than the Charge 6, which isn’t surprising since that was a major weak point of the Charge 6. I’m looking forward to testing out the Fitbit Edge and reporting back on how well it performs in real-life use.
If you take a break from the gym you may lose muscle and gain fat, but it isn’t as simple as one turning into the other
‘This is not true,” says Prof Leigh Breen, a specialist in muscle physiology at the University of Leicester. But it’s a statement he hears a lot, particularly from people who have taken a long break from exercise. “They’ll often refer to the notion that their muscles have ‘softened’ or don’t feel as toned.”
The reality is that there’s no biochemistry linking the two types of tissue. Muscle and fat are distinct. “There’s no known process in the human body that would support muscle turning into fat, or vice versa,” says Breen.
Running is one of the easiest exercises to take up, but it can be easy to lose your mojo and get injured. Coaches give their advice on how to hit your stride
Whether you have never been for a run or are building up to a marathon, sometimes the biggest challenge is just getting out the door. Here, running coaches share their tips on everything from mindset to avoiding injuries – but mainly how to find joy in running.
Ever since the Fitbit app became the Google Health app, the app’s AI features became impossible to avoid for Premium users—or at least it may seem that way. There are two ways to avoid the long-winded, sometimes judgy insights that pop up on your screen multiple times a day. I'll show you both: a way to turn off the AI entirely, and a way to get those insights to go away without turning off all the AI-enabled features.
Why you may want to turn off the Google Health Coach
The AI-based Health Coach is the centerpiece of the Google Health app, at least if you have a premium subscription. You may have accepted a three-month free trial of Google Health Premium when you connected a new device, or you may pay for Google AI Pro or Ultra, which includes the Health Coach.
When the Coach is enabled, it updates the main screen of the app with a few paragraphs of text several times a day. (You’ll also get a notification with each of these updates). The Coach will tell you how well you slept, congratulate you on a hard workout, or suggest workouts for the day given how recovered you seem to be.
But, as I wrote in my Fitbit Air review, the Coach hallucinates pretty often, misreporting your workout data or misunderstanding what you’ve told it are your goals. One user, returning to their normal routine after surgery, posted to Reddit that the Coach keeps trying to talk them out of doing workouts. They called it a “Demotivation Coach.” Others have pointed out that the Coach doesn’t seem to be reading its own data correctly. On a more personal note, the Coach uses a tone that I find insufferable: arrogant and excessively positive, except when it’s being unnecessarily negative. I’d prefer neutral, factual feedback or none at all.
To be fair to Google, the team has been hard at work on the Coach, and I've noticed its insights become a little more readable and a little less random since the feature first launched. But I'm still not always in the mood to see the Coach's chipper little pep talks.
How to turn off the Coach "insights" without losing other AI features
Left: the Today screen with no insights. Right: asking the Coach for an insight on-demand still works.Credit: Beth Skwarecki
Those unprompted pep talks are what the Google Health app calls "insights." Google quietly added a setting to turn them off in the August 2026 feature update. Tap on your profile picture, then Google Health Settings, then Coaching, and select No Coach Insights.
Once I turned off the feature, the insights stopped, as promised. But if I miss them, I can still tap Ask Coach in the bottom right corner of the screen, and ask the Coach how my day is going. All other features still work, including the AI-powered ones, like logging nutrition and workouts from the chat interface.
How to turn off the Google Health Coach entirely
Credit: Beth Skwarecki
If you're sick of the entire Google Health Coach, you can disable it: The same August update that gave us the "no insights" switch also made the Health Coach easier to turn off. To reach it, tap on your profile picture, then Google Health Settings, then Coaching. Then you can tap Turn off Google Health Coach. As the next screen explains, "your app will stop providing tailored guidance like fitness plans, recommendations, and proactive summaries of your sleep, fitness, and health trends. You also won't be able to ask questions or log your progress by chatting with the coach. You can turn this back on anytime."
Confirm your decision, and the AI will be gone. When you return to the Google Health app, you’ll still see the paragraphs of text that the Health Coach previously wrote, but you won’t get any new ones. There will be a card inviting you to re-enable the Health Coach, but you can tap “not now.” You can re-enable the Coach at any time by hitting the “Ask Coach” button in the corner (it does not go away) and following the prompts to turn it back on.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Garmin watches are my favorite training partner. The brand has long been one of the biggest names in the world of rugged sports watches and fitness trackers, and the Forerunner line especially is a go-to pick for accurate and reliable GPS tracking for runners.
So, looking at the date on my Garmin Forerunner 970, I can see that Amazon's October Prime Day sale is officially over. But if you missed your chance to upgrade your running watch, you're in luck: Two of the most popular Garmin Forerunners are still on sale, even after Prime Day has technically ended.
These Garmin Forerunners are still a great deal right now
The Garmin Forerunner 55 is $161.99, down from $199.99. This is the most basic Garmin running watch you can buy new. Don't be deterred by the word "basic." As my colleague Beth Skwarecki reports, it was good enough for Sabastian Sawe to wear to break the sub-2-hour marathon barrier earlier this year.
The Garmin Forerunner 165 is $199.99, down from $249.99. This is my favorite entry-level running watch. The music version is also on sale; as always, it runs $50 more than the standard.
While it's not a dramatic, the Garmin Forerunner 265 is 5% off, bringing the original price of $449.99 down to $429. Although it isn't the latest and greatest anymore, this is still a fan favorite among Garmin users. It's a step above entry-level options, with dual-band GPS, power meter compatibility, and advanced analytics (like training status).
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
The heart rate sensors on smartwatches are usually good enough for casual training (and some of them are really good), but to get the best possible accuracy, you want a separate heart rate monitor—ideally a chest strap. Fortunately, these wearables are still on sale even after the end of October Prime Day. Heart rate monitors from Polar, Coospo, and more were available at discounts, and two of my favorite models are still discounted.
The Polar H10 chest strap is $20 off
All electrical chest straps are good, but the consensus in the fitness world is that if you want the best, you get the Polar H10. It’s the chest strap that Apple used in its own heart-rate accuracy testing; it’s also the one I recall being put on me when I did a VO2max test in a lab. It retails for $104.95 but goes on sale from time to time, and now is one of those times: You can pick up a Polar H10 for $84.74.
I love when a budget option works as well as the top-of-the-line model, and that’s why I swear by my Coospo heart rate monitor. Full disclosure, the H6 model I used for over four years finally gave up its ghost, so I’ve moved on to a newer model, the H808S. Both are on sale: the H6 for $23.99, down from $29.99, and the H808S is $26.26, down from $36.99.
Heart rate monitors connect to your watch or to gym equipment wirelessly, usually with Bluetooth and sometimes with an older protocol called ANT+. (Many heart rate monitors can do both.)
You’ll need to set up the heart rate monitor to either broadcast your heart rate or to pair to another device. (Usually you broadcast to gym equipment, but pair to a watch or phone.) The specifics vary by brand, but it’s usually pretty straightforward. If you have a fitness watch like a Garmin, an Apple Watch, or a Samsung Galaxy Watch, pairing a chest strap is a simple job. Pixel Watches, unfortunately, can’t pair a heart rate sensor.
But even without a watch, you can use a sensor with your phone. I like the Polar Beat app as a simple heart rate tracker, but there are plenty of other options. The Apple Fitness app can use third-party heart rate sensors, and so can Strava.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Amazon's October Prime Day sale ends tonight, which means you have a few more hours to snag some great deals on my favorite brand of workout headphones: Shokz. If you're unfamiliar with Shokz (and the world of bone conduction headphones in general), I could talk your ear off about the big selling points: better situational awareness, all-day comfort, and ears that stay free and open. If you want to join the club, or need an upgrade, these are the best Shokz deals from this year's October Prime Day sale.
For runners, the OpenRun Pro 2 are down to $109.95 in Rose Gold (originally $199.95). In other colors, they're discounted down to $119.95 (originally $179.95). This beloved bone-conduction model combines Shokz’s signature open-ear design with a bassy sound and long battery life (up to 12 hours), making it one of the most popular choices for outdoor workouts.
The regular OpenRun headphones are also discounted, dropping down to $89.95 (originally $129.95). They offer many of the same benefits of the Pro line at a lower price point, including a lightweight frame and open-ear design geared toward runners and all kinds of outdoor athletes.
For anyone with a smaller head size, the OpenRun Mini have 0.83-inch (21mm) shorter band than the standard size, and they're seeing the same discount—currently available for $89.95 (originally $129.95).
The trendy OpenDots ONE are $60 off
If you've been following the trendiness of clip-on-style earbuds, the OpenDots ONE are 30% off, dropping down to $139.95 (originally $199.95). One of Shokz’s newer designs, the OpenDots ONE sit outside the ear canal, offering a lightweight alternative to traditional earbuds while still maintaining that signature situational awareness. Plus, they're a strong alternative to the pricier Bose Ultra open earbuds.
These swimming headphones are $50 off
Swimmers can save 22% on the OpenSwim Pro, now $179.95 (originally $229.95). Unlike most workout headphones, this bone conduction model has an IP68 rating and is built for use in the water. They support onboard MP3 storage, allowing you to listen to music even when Bluetooth connectivity isn’t available.
October Prime Day FAQs
When is Prime Day in October?
October Prime Day is a two-day event that starts Oct. 6 and ends on Oct. 7.
Is Shokz a reliable brand?
Yes, Shokz is one of the best brands when it comes to bone conduction and sports headphones. The OpenRun Pro 2 model especially is a go-to pick for battery life, comfort, and situational awareness.
Do Shokz Prime Day discounts apply to all their product lines, or just select items?
Unfortunately, not all Garmin products are on sale. However, there are many Shokz products on sale, and you can find them all on the Amazon landing page.
What else goes on sale on Prime Day?
Since Prime Big Deal Days happens in the fall, you're likely to see more deals on gaming and indoor gym equipment. Amazon has already announced some of the 35 categories that will be on sale, including beauty, tech, kitchen, fashion, and home. Some brands Amazon has already mentioned are: Shark, Princess Polly, Soundcore by Anker, UGG, Nest New York, Sony, Tarte, Adidas, and Barefoot Dreams.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Earlier this year, I explained how a Christmas gift I'd bought my then-15-year-old son—a set of adjustable dumbbells ($255) and an adjustable weight bench ($59.49)—had actually gotten me to stick to a steady lifting routine for the first time in years. And now, for October Prime Day, both are on sale, and the dumbbells are even cheaper than what I spent during last year's Black Friday sale.
I've had 9+ months of regular use with both (plus intermittent use by my now-16-year-old, 6-foot son), and both still look and feel brand new. The dumbbells can be adjusted in five-pound increments from 10 pounds all the way up to 55; the bench can lie flat or be adjusted at eight different angles, including a decline position. (Plus, they match, if that sort of thing is important to you.)
I was admittedly skeptical about how the padding on the seat of the bench would hold up over months and years of use; I've pre-emptively addressed that by adding a blanket to the seat when I use it, but it's likely not necessary. I've also caught my son as recently as two days ago dropping the weights to the ground as though he was standing on a padded gym floor, rather than a 100-year-old cement basement floor with unforgiving carpet, and they survived the abuse.
If you live in a small home but want to create a little weight-lifting space for yourself, I highly recommend both of these products—especially while they're on sale for October Prime Day.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
The October Prime Day sale is proving to be a good time to pick up fitness equipment at a discount—for proof, look no further than this list of the best fitness equipment deals. But if you're looking specifically for Peloton equipment, there's more good news: one model of the Peloton Tread is on sale for $1,000 off, and several Bike models are deeply discounted as well.
Peloton's Cross-Training Tread (that's a treadmill, obviously) is $2,295, down from the regular price of $3,295. This is Peloton's standard treadmill, currently in its second generation. It has a swiveling screen and upgraded hardware compared to the original Tread. Peloton offers running classes you can do on the Tread, and as with all its equipment, you'll need a $49.99/month subscription to use it and get all the streaming content.
The Cross-Training Bike and Bike+ are both deeply discounted
If you're looking for one of Peloton's signature Bikes, they're on sale today as well. The Cross-Training Bike is $1,295, down from a regular price of $1,695 (that's $400 off). And the Cross-Training Bike+, which applies resistance automatically as you follow a class, is $1,795, down from a regular price of $2,695.
For a budget option, there is also an original Bike, available refurbished for just $995. This Bike is still a solid pick (I have one myself!) and gets the same content as the more expensive bikes. It normally goes for $1,395 as a refurbished model, and was $1,695 when it was new.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Amazon's October Prime Day sale is here, and I've been tracking the best fitness deals—and deals on adjustable dumbbells in particular. I love recommending adjustable dumbbells as a way to save time, money, and precious floorspace when you're trying to strength train at home.
Where buying individual pairs of dumbbells in five-pound increments up to 80 pounds would cost well over $1,500 (and take up your entire home gym), adjustable dumbbells deliver the same versatility for a fraction of that price. Right now, my favorite set, the PowerBlock Elite EXP Adjustable Dumbbells, is $339.99, down from its usual $399.99 price tag. That's a solid $60 savings.
You'd be hard-pressed to find a "best home dumbbells" list without these PowerBlocks near the top. The futuristic cubic look is stylish, but more importantly, it's a seriously economical, space-saving design—which is the whole point of going adjustable over a traditional rack of individual weights. The weights have flat edges so you can hold them on end on your lap, and unlike a lot of adjustable models, they're compact enough that they won’t bump into each other on shoulder or chest presses. The only real drawback is the frame design: You have to place your hand inside the dumbbell's structure to grip it, which can be awkward, especially if you’re wearing a large watch.
These dumbbells also come in 70-pound and 90-pound versions. If you go with one of the smaller sets, you can also buy expansion sets later to upgrade to the larger versions. The full 90-pound set is also on sale right now, down to $738.65 from an original $869. And if you're not yet sold on adjustable dumbbells as a concept, this 150-pound set of traditional dumbbells is also discounted—down to $149.99 from $189.99.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
As a marathon runner, I take my recovery seriously. After trying out dozens of different products over the years, I've found what actually matters when shopping for massage guns and recovery tools. It's not hyperbole to say that massage guns have changed my life as an athlete—and TheraBody is a brand name I swear by.
TheraBody's signature triangular grip design is a fan favorite for good reason, as it allows for comfortable handling during long massage sessions. As far as Theragun options go, this is the pick for anyone looking for power and durability. Plus, its quiet operation makes it suitable for use in shared spaces without disturbing others. The battery life extends up to 120 minutes on a single charge, ensuring you won't be interrupted mid-session, right when you need it most.
If you're looking for other options, there are more Theragun deals in Amazon's Prime Big Deal Days sale:
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Amazon's October Prime Day is officially over, but I haven't stopped keeping my eye on all the best deals on home gym equipment that are still active right now. When it comes to building out a home gym, your best strategy for home gym shopping when you don't have a ton of room to work with is to focus on versatility and efficient use of space. That's why I'm keeping a close eye on adjustable dumbbells in particular.
Adjustable dumbbells are a favorite category of mine because they let you go from five-pound to 50-pound weights (or more!) without needing multiple shelves of equipment. Where individual pairs of dumbbells from five to 80 pounds in five-pound increments would cost well over $1,500 (and take up your entire home gym), adjustable dumbbells condense an entire weight rack into a compact, versatile system. Here are the best deals on adjustable dumbbells that you can still snag, at least for the next few hours.
My favorite deal right now is this set of Bowflex Results Series 552 dumbbells, $328.98 for a pair, normally $399.99. If you couldn’t guess from the name, they can adjust from five to 52 pounds. The curved design is stylish, but more importantly, it's a seriously space-saving—which is the whole point of going adjustable over a traditional rack of individual weights.
Here are some more adjustable dumbbells that are still active, even after Amazon's October Prime Day sale has officially ended:
Feierdun Adjustable Dumbbells are $169.99 for the 90-pound set, down from $219.99. I'm especially drawn to how this system can configure the weights as fixed barbells, kettlebells, traditional dumbbells, or individual weight plates. Incorporating kettlebell swings and goblet squats without purchasing separate equipment? That's a steal.
These UNNMIIY adjustable dumbbells are also $169.99 for the 90-pound set, normally $259.99. These can adjust from two to 45 pounds per dumbbell, and they have a five-in-one design so you can use them as dumbbells, barbells, kettlebells, and even push-up stands.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
October Prime Day has officially ended, but some of the deals are still going. Most of the deals I covered yesterday are still live, including on one of the cheapest good smart rings you're likely to find, as well as several on Garmins, and even a Fitbit or two.
The RingConn Gen 2 Air smart ring is $159.20
RingConn makes some of the better subscription-free smart rings out there. I tested the Gen 2 and Gen 3 rings and found them to be decently good at sleep and lifestyle tracking, although not always great at workout tracking. (Add my standard disclaimer that rings are never good workout trackers.) In any case, the Gen 2 Air is on sale right now. This is a pared-down version of the Gen 2 ring, but honestly, you don't lose much—just sleep apnea monitoring and a few days of battery life. That still leaves the Air with a 10-day battery life, so it's a tradeoff that's well worth it if you want an affordable smart ring.
If you mainly want a general fitness tracker during the day, but would appreciate a precise and full-featured watch for workouts, something on the lower end of the Forerunner line can do both at a good price. Right now, the Forerunner 165 is $199.99, down from $249.99. This is an entry-level Forerunner from the previous generation (they're up to the 170 now), but I wouldn't call it out of date. Garmins age well, and the 165 is a solid pick that will give you many years of use.
Polar makes a screen-free smart band called the Loop that normally retails for $199.99, but right now it's on sale for $169.99 (and some colors are $161.99). The Polar Loop looks like a slightly more stylish Whoop. In my testing, I enjoyed the physical design, but was underwhelmed by the app (it's pretty barebones). Still, it has no subscription, and may be just the minimalist tracker you're looking for.
Fitbit's Charge 6 normally retails for $159.99, but right now it's on sale for $133.49. Or somewhere around there—I've been seeing the price jump up and down a few dollars throughout the day. You can read my review of the Charge 6 here. I found it a solid tracker if you just want the basics, but didn't love that it limits music playback to YouTube Music and requires your phone to be on hand for payments and maps. Still, it's one of the best options out there for a band that has a screen but isn't shaped like a watch. And if you don't ned GPS, you can save a few bucks and go for the Inspire 3, which is on sale for $74 to $88 depending on color.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Amazon's October Prime Day sale has come and gone, but there are still some solid Garmin deals—for now, at least. Garmin is the biggest name in the sports watch world for good reason: They deliver advanced metrics and reliable GPS tracking, usually with a multi-week battery life. There was a time when I ran full marathons totally watch-free, but now I keep my Garmin Forerunner 970 on my wrist at all times. If you want to join the club, or need an upgrade, these are the best Garmin deals from this year's October Prime Day sale that are still live.
These Garmin Forerunners are a great deal right now
The Garmin Forerunner 55 is $158, down from $199.99. This is the most basic Garmin running watch you can buy new. Don't be deterred by the word "basic." As my colleague Beth Skwarecki reports, it was good enough for Sabastian Sawe to wear to break the sub-2-hour marathon barrier earlier this year.
The Garmin Vivoactive 5 is $100 off its original price
Garmin's Vivoactive line is probably its most underrated, according to my colleague Beth Skwarecki: "It's solidly good at running and fitness tracking, and convenient for everyday use with a touchscreen for most functions (but still uses physical buttons to start, stop, and lap workouts)." The Vivoactive 5 was originally $299.99 and dropped to $229.99 back when the Vivoactive 6 came out. Right now, it's just $198.
This Garmin Instinct Solar 2X is $180 off
The Garmin Instinct 2X Solar Tactical Watch is one of the brand’s best solar-charged options, and right now it's available for $319.99, down from $499.99. Compared to its predecessor, the Garmin Instinct Solar 2X produces up to 50% more energy from the sun thanks to the Power Glass lens, which is particularly helpful in GPS mode, which can drain the battery quickly. It’s also 0.8 mm thinner and has a built-in LED flashlight, a compass, and an altimeter.
If you're looking for an even more premium tactical watch, a renewed Garmin Tactix 8 is on sale for $919.99, down from $1,030.25. This model is full of dedicated tactical features, like a jumpmaster activity, landmark projection, dual-position GPS format, stealth mode, kill switch, night vision goggle compatibility, rucking activity, and a preloaded applied ballistics solver.
The second-generation Garmin Epix Pro is nearly half off
The Garmin Epix Pro (Gen 2) Sapphire Edition is marked down 47%, bringing its usual $999.99 price down to $529.99. The reason for such a major discount is that Garmin has since merged the Epix and Fenix product lines, and this model was replaced with the Fenix 8 series, which has since been replaced with the Fenix 9 series. Still, the Epix Pro holds up. It's got you covered for tracking your sleep and blood oxygen levels, measuring your VO2 Max, tracking 30 activities, offering a multi-sport mode, plus extras that most running-specific watches don't have, like golfing features, tides, and fish forecasts.
October Prime Day FAQs
When is Prime Day in October?
October Prime Day is a two-day event that starts Oct. 6 and ends on Oct. 7.
Is Garmin a reliable brand?
Yes, Garmin is one of the best brands when it comes to rugged sports watches and fitness trackers. The Forerunner line especially is a go-to pick for accurate and reliable GPS tracking for runners.
Do Garmin's Prime Day discounts apply to all their product lines, or just select items?
Unfortunately, not all Garmin products are on sale. However, there are many Garmin products on sale, and you can find them all on the Amazon landing page.
What else goes on sale on Prime Day?
Since Prime Big Deal Days happens in the fall, you're likely to see more deals on gaming and indoor gym equipment. Amazon has already announced some of the 35 categories that will be on sale, including beauty, tech, kitchen, fashion, and home. Some brands Amazon has already mentioned are: Shark, Princess Polly, Soundcore by Anker, UGG, Nest New York, Sony, Tarte, Adidas, and Barefoot Dreams.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Amazon's October Prime Day, known as Prime Big Deal Days, is a two-day sale that starts Oct. 6 and ends on Oct. 7. Already I've been tracking the best deals on home gym equipment, always keeping an eye on compact cardio solutions. Foldable treadmills are all the rage, and with today's deals, you can save even more on existing budget options. Right now, one of the most trusted name in treadmills, the NordicTrack T Series 5, is on sale for $449. That's a 25% markdown from its typical price of $599.
If you are looking for something more high-tech, the T Series 16 is on sale for $1,299, down from its typical price of $1,499. The main draw of this model has got to be its 16-inch touchscreen with a pivot display. Otherwise, the T Series 5 is the perfect starter treadmill for anyone who needs a minimalist option to get your run in, rain or shine.
The NordicTrack ecosystem gives you access to over 10,000 workouts when you sign up for an iFIT membership. For $39/month (or $396/year), you can follow expert trainers through global runs, hikes, strength training, yoga sessions, and more. When you choose a desired workout, your NordicTrack hardware automatically adjusts the speed and incline to match the workout. And for those of us who like to track our progress across multiple platforms, iFIT syncs with your Strava, Garmin, and Apple Health.
Amazon October Prime Day FAQ
When is Prime Day in October?
October Prime Day is a two-day event that starts Oct. 6 and ends on Oct. 7.
What goes on sale on Prime Day?
Since Prime Big Deal Days happens in the fall, you're likely to see more deals on gaming and indoor gym equipment. Amazon has already announced some of the 35 categories that will be on sale, including beauty, tech, kitchen, fashion, and home. Some brands Amazon has already mentioned are: Shark, Princess Polly, Soundcore by Anker, UGG, Nest New York, Sony, Tarte, Adidas, and Barefoot Dreams.
Is Prime Day once a year?
Prime Day happens every summer. Prime Big Deal Days (or October Prime Day) happens every October. Big Spring Sale happens every spring.
This year was an interesting one for smart rings and smart bands, and we ended up with a few new devices that mark serious improvements on what was available before. With these new developments in mind, here are my picks for the best fitness trackers to consider giving (or asking for) as gifts this year.
The Fitbit Air is the best fitness tracker for most people
I’ll have recommendations below for athletes, runners, and people with higher budgets, but before we get into those, let me present the best fitness tracker for most people: the Fitbit Air.
Google now owns the Fitbit brand, and it spent the past few years making questionable choices about its software and mostly neglecting the brand’s iconic hardware. Then, in a stunning turnaround, Google launched the smallest, lightest, and most comfortable fitness tracker I’ve ever used (not counting rings, but we’ll get to those).
The Fitbit Air tracks your steps, sleep, and workouts without needing much attention from you. Its battery lasts a week, its app reports all the standard information without a subscription, and the price is sensible for such minimalist hardware: $99.99. The only real downside is the overly chatty AI built into the app, which you can disable if it annoys you as much as it did me.
The Oura Ring 5 is the best fitness tracker to splurge on
If you have $499 to spare (or $399 for some colors), the tracker to get is the Oura Ring 5. Smart rings have always been pretty clunky, but for the fifth generation, Oura managed to get its ring to a size that blends in with jewelry rings. I’ve been wearing Oura rings since the gen 2, and this is the first one that really feels like you can forget you’re wearing a device.
You pay for the privilege, of course: The purchase price, plus a $5.99/month subscription fee. But Oura’s app is one of the nicest and easiest to use of any smart ring I’ve tried. Besides just giving you daily sleep scores, it breaks down your data to show things like how well you’re recovering despite stress, and how regular your bedtimes are.
Smart rings aren’t great for detailed workout tracking (or for strength training), but they’re excellent for casually monitoring how much exercise you end up getting throughout your day. For somebody who either doesn’t need workout tracking, or tracks their workouts with another device, an Oura is great for the rest of their day.
The Whoop band is the best fitness tracker for athletes
Some people may want more information than what the Fitbit Air or Oura Ring can give. If they still want to avoid having a screen on their wrist all day, the perfect pick for this person is a Whoop 5.0, specifically with the Peak (middle tier) subscription.
To explain the pricing: You’ll pay $239 for a Whoop band bundled with your first year’s subscription. After that expires, if you want to keep using it, you need to pay another $239 (or $199, if you want to downgrade your subscription and lose some of the features). That makes it more expensive than my top pick, the Fitbit Air.
But for an athlete who wants data to pore over, the Whoop seriously delivers. During workouts, you can see your heart rate zones on your phone’s screen, which the Fitbit doesn’t offer. The app can also guide you through weekly plans that are specific to your goals—say, totaling a certain number of minutes of zone 4 and 5 training, while also keeping a consistent bedtime and avoiding screens at night. The app is great at analyzing how the habits you log affect your sleep and recovery, and it’s easy to customize toward the goals you actually care about. I find it easy to balance perfectly so you don’t get information overload.
The only real downside is that many athletes may want something that gives them pace or heart rate data on their wrist. If your recipient already has a fitness watch, they can use it for workouts while using the Whoop for the rest of the day, and Whoop will seamlessly pull in workout data from the other device. That said, read on if you’re looking for an actual fitness watch with a display.
The Coros Pace 4 is the best basic fitness watch for runners
You probably thought I was going to recommend a Garmin—and I will, below—but first let me tell you why the Coros Pace 4 is a hidden gem, my personal favorite, and my best overall pick for most runners.
First, the price. It’s $249, which is cheap in the running-watch world. But it punches way above its weight, with dual-band GPS for accurate pace and distance tracking, a heart rate sensor that performed well in my extensive testing, and a fun and useful extra in its voice training logs. As of a 2026 update, it can now display maps, which is incredible for a watch in this price range.
You’d have to pay more than twice as much for a Garmin with all of those features—specifically, the Forerunner 970, which I say more about below. Buying a nice Coros (or a Suunto, for that matter) feels like you’re getting away with something.
The Garmin Forerunner 970 is the best top-of-the-line fitness tracker for a runner
If there’s a runner in your life you love very much (and want your budget to reflect that), you can’t beat the Forerunner 970. Our resident marathoner Meredith Dietz has an in-depth review here that you might like to check out, but as a spoiler: She loved it.
The Forerunner 970 packs in all the features a running watch could possibly have. It’s got all the core features of more basic watches like the Coros I mentioned above, plus more storage and better performance of onboard maps, so you can see where you are in the world by glancing at your wrist.
The 970 also has a ton of performance metrics and tools to plan your training, plus a feature everyone loves: an LED flashlight that can shine on what’s in front of you without interfering with your view of the watch. If you’re looking for the best fitness watch out there, I can’t think of one that’s better than the 970.
A new Google wearable may be on the way, and leaked pictures suggest it may be a fitness band with a screen, a successor to the Fitbit Charge 6. Android Headlines reports that the new device will be called the Fitbit Edge.
Earlier this year, Google ran ads on Reddit that seemed to show a new fitness band alongside Pixel watches and phones. In a post titled “Um so what the hell is that??,” redditors debated whether the unfamiliar wearable was an accidental leak of a yet-unreleased device, or just an AI hallucination. After all, if you asked an AI to create a hybrid of a Fitbit and a Pixel Watch, it would look more or less like what was in the picture.
What rumors say about the new "Fitbit Edge"
The leaked photos appearing at Android Headlines look like the device from the ad. It has an oval screen, only about as wide as the wristband and taller than it is wide. The rounded edges and the style of watch band match aesthetically with Pixel Watches, while the overall form factor—a tall screen set into a thin wristband—fits the design of the old Fitbit Charge 6.
According to spec sheets that were reportedly also included in the leak, the device will have GPS, an altimeter, and a seven-day battery life. That's the same battery life as the Charge 6, which had GPS but no altimeter. The new device is said to work with both iOS and Android, as the Fitbit Air does, rather than being Android-only like the Pixel Watch. The rumors do not include a price, a release date, or a full list of features.
What this means, if true
If it weren’t for the earlier ad—the one that many thought was a hallucination—I probably wouldn’t have expected Google to release a device like this at all. Its last fitness tracker with a screen was the Fitbit Charge 6 in 2023. The Fitbit Air makes sense since smart bands are having a moment, and the Fitbit Air is a really well-executed one. But I wasn’t sure if Google was interested in continuing the Fitbit line beyond that one device.
It’s a good idea, I think. Small trackers are easy to wear (and forget you’re wearing), but sometimes you just want to be able to see the time on your wrist. If Google is smart, they’ll allow you to swap seamlessly between the new device and the screenless Fitbit Air. (Currently, you can pair one Pixel Watch and one Fitbit to your phone, but you can’t pair two different models of Fitbit.)
I’m excited to see what Google has in mind for the new device, assuming the rumors are true about its size, shape, and capabilities. I was disappointed by all the things the Charge 6 couldn’t do, and I hope the new Fitbit doesn’t repeat those mistakes. For example, the Charge 6 can control the music that’s playing on your phone, but only if you pay for a YouTube Music subscription. Most fitness watches—including Garmin, Coros, and Suunto watches I’ve tried—will simply give you controls for whatever is playing on your phone, no matter what app it comes from.
If it’s true that the new device also has its own GPS and altimeter, that’s also exciting—but I’m skeptical that Google will be able to stuff in high-quality versions of those components in the space available. The Charge 6, I found, had trouble getting a good GPS reading and a good heart rate reading at the same time. But the Fitbit Air is surprisingly small and capable for its size, so I’m looking forward to seeing what the new device might be able to do.
Formerly a favourite of the A-list, the chain has abruptly ceased trading, leaving teachers and customers blindsided
Kate Comer is a single mother with two children, so she is used to living on a financial knife-edge. But when the yoga studio at which she taught closed without warning in September, leaving her with two months’ worth of unpaid wages, it sent her anxiety skyrocketing.
“I’m just reeling right now,” she said, estimating her loss at about £1,500. “I’m very concerned about the future.”
Outdoors, smartwatches do a great job of telling you how far you ran or walked. Indoors, they often disagree with the readout on the gym’s treadmill. Which leaves a lot of us wondering—should we trust the treadmill, or the watch?
I won't make you wait: The answer to this question is the treadmill. While a watch guesses at your speed based on wrist movements, the treadmill will always have a better idea than the watch of what your feet are doing. But I don’t blame you for doubting everything you see on a gym machine’s readout. After all, their calorie counts are notoriously inaccurate.
How treadmills determine distance
Whenever we’re evaluating accuracy, it’s important to know whether a device is measuring something directly, or interpreting data to make a guess. In this case, the treadmill is measuring distance, while the watch is guessing at it. (Calories are always interpreted, which is why they are never truly reliable.)
Distance is pretty simple: It’s the number of miles (or meters) of treadmill belt that passes under your feet while you run. The treadmill knows how long its belt is, and how fast the motor is running, so it’s pretty directly measuring how much belt it’s sending under your feet. (Sticklers will note that technically there is still some interpretation going on here, since the relationship between the motor's performance and how much belt it moves can change over time, which is why gyms should recalibrate their treadmills from time to time. But the treadmill's number is likely to be close to accurate even if it's not perfect, and is still your best bet for the purposes we discuss here.)
How watches determine distance
Your watch, by contrast, is on your wrist. There’s no way it can know what your feet are doing. It can make some guesses based on how much your wrist is swinging back and forth, and thus pick up a cadence (each arm swing corresponds to one footstep). You’ll swing your arms a bit harder and higher when you’re running faster, so it can use the oomph in your arm swing to make a guess at the speed you’re running. From speed and time, it calculates distance.
Some devices use outdoor, GPS-tracked activities to estimate the length of your average stride. That number then goes into the distance calculation, which helps to improve accuracy. But your stride length isn't the same for every speed you might run or walk, or for every type of terrain. The calculation is pretty limited in its usefulness.
How to get the most accurate numbers on a treadmill
Neither is guaranteed to be perfect, but the treadmill is a lot more likely to get the right idea. A treadmill can be slightly miscalibrated, and give you a distance that’s a smidge off from what you actually ran. But a watch is just riding on your wrist, guessing. I’ve noticed that my arms don’t swing all that differently when I’m running at a fast versus a slow pace.
In fact, while following an interval workout on the treadmill on a Garmin, I’ve found that the watch thinks I’m going slower than I am during the fast parts. If I'm following a Garmin workout that asks me to run specific paces, it often buzzes to chide me (“Pace low”) even if I'm going at the right speed. I can often convince it I’m in range by pumping my arms a little harder. This isn’t really a solution, though.
Instead of trying to get more accurate numbers from my watch during the run, I approach my treadmill workouts with the assumptions that the following things are accurate:
The treadmill speed during the workout
The treadmill distance at the end of the workout
The heart rate from my watch (especially if I’m using a chest strap)
The time from either or both devices (which should be the same if I started them at the same time)
I then follow my workouts appropriately. If it’s a heart-rate-based workout, I let my watch handle everything. (Garmin might tell me to do 32 minutes at 139 to 167 beats per minute. Perfect. All you, Garmin.)
But if I want to do a speed- or distance-based workout, I manage that manually, with my human brain. A quarter mile at 7.5 miles per hour, repeated eight times? I boop the buttons on the treadmill accordingly. At the end of the workout, I’ll either “calibrate” (from the watch) or edit the distance on my app to make sure it recorded the correct total distance.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Amazon's October Prime Day event may officially be over, but I'm still keeping an eye on all the best discounts for major brands like Peloton, PowerBlocks, Therabody, and more. Below are my favorite fitness deals that are still active even after Amazon's Prime Big Deal Days sale has ended.
The best October Prime Day deals on cardio equipment
The NordicTrack T Series is a foldable treadmill, normally $799, currently on sale for $616. For cardio, your options get trickier in an apartment setting or a home without a ton of extra space, but foldable equipment like this is a nice solution.
This Sunny Health treadmill is $699.99, normally $899.99. This treadmill comes fully assembled, goes up to 10 mph and a 15% incline, and folds up for storage.
This YOSUDA PRO magnetic exercise bike is $289.99, normally $329.99. With magnetic resistance, you can count on the bike to be quiet enough for a home gym setup.
This Chaoke walking pad is on sale for $149.99, down from $229.99. Designed to fit under your desk and be easy to store, this walking pad still gets up to a decent 9% incline at speeds up to 6.2 miles per hour.
These UNNMIIY adjustable dumbbells are $169.99 for the 90-pound set, normally $259.99. These can adjust from 2 to 45 pounds per dumbbell, and they have a 5-in-1 design so you can use them as dumbbells, barbells, kettlebells, and even push-up stands.
These FEIERDUN adjustable dumbbells are $269.99 for the 110-pound set, normally $349.99. These have my favorite type of adjustment mechanism: a one-hand rotating dial.
This cast-iron adjustable kettlebell is $47.99, normally $59.99. This kettlebell starts with a 15-pound weighted handle with four non-weighted removable spacer disks, a five-pound bottom plate, and a center pin to support additional weight plates up to 50 pounds.
The best October Prime Day deals on home gym staples and accessories
These resistance bands are $37.97, normally $49.95. A solid pair of resistance bands like these is the perfect addition to home gyms, travel workouts, or hotel rooms.
This 3-in-1 Plyo Jumping Exercise Box is $59.97, normally $69.99. Two sizes are available: 24 x 16 x 20 inches and 30 x 20 x 24 inches.
The Therabody Prime 6th Gen Deep Tissue Massage Gun is $199.99, normally $329.99. As a marathon runner, it's no hyperbole to say that massage guns utterly transformed my post-workout routine, and TheraBody is a brand name I swear by.
Amazon Prime Day is an annual event held in June or July. Amazon's October Prime Day event, known as Prime Big Deal Days, is a two-day sale that starts Oct. 6 and ends on Oct. 7.
What goes on sale during October Prime Day?
Since Prime Big Deal Days happens in the fall, you're likely to see more deals on gaming and indoor gym equipment. Amazon has already announced some of the 35 categories that will be on sale, including beauty, tech, kitchen, fashion, and home. Some brands Amazon has already mentioned are: Shark, Princess Polly, Soundcore by Anker, UGG, Nest New York, Sony, Tarte, Adidas, and Barefoot Dreams.
Is Prime Day once a year?
Prime Day happens every summer. Prime Big Deal Days (or October Prime Day) happens every October. Amazon's Big Spring Sale happens every spring.
Google’s “Health Guardian” feature set has rolled out to Pixel Watches 3, 4, and 5 this week and will be coming to Fitbit Air users “later this year.” Google says the new features include reports on your blood pressure trends and on insulin resistance, which is a big claim for a wearable. Here’s what we know about Health Guardian, including how to set it up and what to expect.
Can you really measure insulin resistance with a wearable?
Credit: Beth Skwarecki
Insulin resistance is associated with type 2 diabetes, and can be an early sign that you are heading toward pre-diabetes or diabetes. When your body’s insulin receptors stop responding as strongly to insulin, you’re more likely to have higher blood glucose.
Insulin resistance is normally measured with bloodwork. For example, your fasting glucose levels and fasting insulin are combined into a score called HOMA-IR. If you’re concerned about insulin resistance or pre-diabetes, it’s best to talk to an actual healthcare professional to find out what tests they recommend, and what to do with the results.
The insulin resistance feature coming to Google Health is, Google notes, “not intended for medical purposes” and “not a pre-screener for diabetes.”
Google published a paper describing some of the testing that went into developing its insulin resistance algorithm. In the study, the researchers had people use their own Fitbits or Pixel Watches to record a variety of metrics, including heart rate, HRV, and activity. It’s not clear from this paper exactly how the algorithm works or whether it’s likely to be useful in a general population, but apparently Google is betting on it being an interesting factor to track in your Google Health app.
Can you really measure blood pressure with a wearable?
Credit: Beth Skwarecki
Google also published a paper on a blood pressure algorithm, although it is not peer-reviewed. Instead of explaining how the algorithm works, it describes how the researchers tried to figure out what their AI-based model might be looking at. According to this paper, Google's model works about as well as clinical blood pressure measurements, but it's not clear how useful it would be in the real world. For example, the study excluded people with heart disease, but I'd imagine plenty of people with heart disease would be interested in their blood pressure scores.
Is Health Guardian free?
Google said in a press release that Health Guardian, which includes insulin resistance and blood pressure trends, is available for free for people who use a Pixel Watch 3, 4, or 5. Fitbit Air users will get blood pressure and insulin resistance trends “with a Google Health Premium subscription later this year.” So it’s free if you have a Pixel Watch, but not if you only have the Fitbit Air. Google Health Premium is $9.99/month.
It’s unclear what happens if you own both devices; presumably, having a Pixel Watch will get you free access. In any case, other devices, including older Fitbits, do not seem to be included. For the moment, I'll note that a mix of Pixel Watch and Fitbit Air data wasn't enough to get my insulin resistance report; Google Health seems to require data from the Pixel Watch specifically.
How to get Health Guardian’s blood pressure trends and insulin resistance estimates
The new features are built into the 5.09 release of the Google Health app for Android, which is rolling out this week. (It seems iOS will be getting the features later. This makes sense, since iOS users wouldn’t have a Pixel Watch paired, anyway.)
You can set up your blood pressure and insulin resistance tracking as soon as you get the new version of the Google Health app. I was able to set up insulin tracking by going to the health tab and then tapping Metabolic, and I set up blood pressure under Heart. If you go to Respiratory, you can also set up sleep-breathing quality. (Some European users will get a feature that can call for help in a "breathing emergency," but that is not available in the U.S.)
Google said that the insulin and blood pressure features will give you a monthly report on the first of each month, with the first report coming Oct. 1, if you have given the watch enough data in the previous month. Here is what the app requires:
For blood pressure reports: You need to wear the watch for five consecutive days in the previous month. You don't have to wear the watch at night.
For insulin resistance: You need to wear the watch for seven days and nights in the previous month, but they don't need to be consecutive.
How well does Health Guardian work? We don't know.
I set up both features as soon as I got the update last week, but that timeline didn't give me a full seven days and nights. That means I don't have an insulin resistance result. I do have my blood pressure trend result: "Not High." As a reminder, a watch cannot know your actual blood pressure, so the watch is making estimates based on data that may not correspond with your actual blood pressure. That said, my blood pressure tends to read in the normal range at doctors' visits, so at least this wasn't surprising.
What's more confusing is what you're actually supposed to do about the results. If your watch says your blood pressure or insulin are fine, would you delay seeking care or abandon a treatment or lifestyle change that was supposed to help you? If your watch says something is wrong, would you believe that and maybe spend unnecessary time and money getting checked out? Pixel Watch users are discussing their results online, with a variety of reactions. One redditor says: "I awoke to find out that my blood pressure is too high and apparently the insulin in my body does nothing. This despite that my most recent doctor's visit and blood work were all perfectly normal." Another said: "I got this high insulin result this morning. I have really changed my diet the last 4 months and I have been going to the gym regularly. I have lost about 40 pounds this year. It's a bummer to see this. I just wonder if it's accurate." I wonder that, too.
Meet Sonita Mulah. She is the queen of powerlifting. At 2023 Classic Powerlifting Championships, she broke three open world records; squatting 285.5 kilograms, deadlifting 260.5 kilograms and totaling 688.5 kilograms. She was attempting a record 334.5 kilogram squat when a racist spotter intentionally sabotaged her lift. Mulah speaks out again in the NYT. This powerlifter talks more about racism in powerlifting.
Garmin's Fenix line has long been the watch to beat in the outdoor GPS category, and the new Fenix 9 Pro checks all the right boxes. You still get excellent mapping, a durable and premium build, and strong battery life, plus a handful of quality-of-life updates that make daily use even better. Here are the five features on Garmin's latest flagship that I suddenlly find I can't live without.
Garmin Epic training summaries (aka multi-day activity grouping)
Not to be confused with the older Epix product line, Garmin Epic is a new way to tell the story of a trip rather than just log it. Instead of scrolling through a pile of disconnected activities after a multi-day hike or a training block, Epic groups related sessions into a combined, shareable summary in Garmin Connect—plotting everything on a color-coded map by activity type, with a rundown of health and performance stats underneath.
Credit: Meredith Dietz
While Epic is marketed as the place to relive your adventures, I'd argue the more useful trick is using it to zoom out and look for patterns in your training. And while the launch of Garmin Epic has been wrapped up in the debut of the Fenix 9, you don't need this particular smartwatch to use Epics in the Connect app—but for now, however, the Fenix 9 is the only Garmin model that lets you start an Epic straight from the watch.
Stamina curve and stamina zones to chart your endurance
The Stamina Curve estimates how long you can sustain a given effort level—pace for runners, power for cyclists—based on your accumulated training history, and it updates continuously as your fitness shifts. Stamina Zones then turns that curve into personalized effort ranges you can pace against in real time.
The mechanics are intuitive once you're observing them in action: easy efforts drain the curve slowly, near-maximal efforts burn through it fast. Tracking how that curve shifts across a training block gives you a pretty useful read on whether your endurance is trending up or down. It's less about a single number on a screen and more about considering your own fatigue trends, which is exactly the kind of feature that rewards long-term users.
Tilted perspective map view and smoother zooming/panning to plan your runs
Garmin has rebuilt how maps render and move on the Fenix 9 Pro. The new tilted, perspective-style map view gives you a more three-dimensional sense of terrain—useful for reading elevation changes or picking a line through complex trail networks—while zooming and panning are meant to be smoother compared to previous generations. For anyone whose main use case is route-finding in unfamiliar terrain, this is arguably a bigger day-to-day upgrade than any single new sensor or metric.
A green LED flashlight mode that won't blind you during dark runs
It's a small addition, but a fun one. The Fenix 9 Pro's built-in flashlight—a fixture of the best adventure watches these days—adds a green light mode alongside the existing white and red options, specifically to help preserve night vision on pre-dawn starts or overnight camp routines. The flashlight also has adjustable brightness, strobe patterns, and even a distress-flash mode that displays your emergency contact information on screen.
Faster mapping and course calculation for more efficient route planning
Under the hood, the Fenix 9 Pro's mapping engine has gotten a serious performance boost: Garmin claims maps now paint roughly 30% faster, and round-trip course calculation is about 40% quicker. Combined with the doubled storage capacity, this is the feature that makes the flashier navigation updates (like the tilted map view) actually feel good to use rather than just look good in a press release.
The upgrades here are real, but I understand they probably don't justify the price jump for most people already carrying a Fenix 8. Where the Fenix 9 Pro makes the most sense is for anyone whose Fenix 7 or older watch is on its last legs. For that person (especially one who spends serious time navigating unfamiliar trails and can justify the spend), the Fenix 9 Pro is an excellent watch, and this generation's improvements to mapping, stamina tracking, and everyday usability make it even easier to recommend.
Apple caught my attention with their claim that the Apple Watch Series 12 and Ultra 4 have the “most accurate heart rate in a wearable.” It’s hard to make a really accurate heart rate sensor, and in my experience, Apple hasn’t had a great track record in that area. So I tested the Series 12 pretty intensively over the past week or so, and now I have results.
I’m picky about accuracy; longtime readers have seen me test watch after watch against my trusty chest strap to find out how good each one really is. That sometimes brings surprises: The Powerbeats Pro 2 are surprisingly bad at heart rate tracking if you have small ears, for example. I also discovered that the Garmin Forerunner 570 is shockingly good at heart rate accuracy, far better than any other device I had tested up to that point. (Garmin’s Forerunner 970 and the newest Fenix and Venu watches have the same sensor.)
What Apple says about their heart rate sensor, and why I doubted it
Is the new Apple Watch really good enough to beat Garmin’s best sensor? Apple believes it is, but I doubted that claim, for a few reasons. The first is simply Apple’s track record. Early models of the Apple watch had better sensors than most wearables at the time, so Apple developed a reputation for good accuracy. For example, back in 2019 or so, the Series 4 watch performed far better for me than the Whoop 3.0. But time marches on, and devices have gotten better. Garmin has an excellent sensor, as I already explained; the Pixel watch is also impressively good. But Apple just didn’t keep up.
You can see it in my comparisons over the years: here’s the Series 11 glitching where a Garmin did just fine, and here’s the Series 10 struggling alongside a Fitbit Charge 6. If I were to rank all the heart rate sensors I’ve tested for their accuracy, the Garmin 570 would be A-tier, the Pixel Watch and most good sports watches would get a B, and the Apple Watch (Series 10 and 11) would be a C. (S-tier would be reserved for chest straps.) Not long ago, I got downvoted to negative infinity for commenting on Reddit that Apple’s heart rate accuracy (up to the Series 11) is “mid at best.” Sorry, but it’s true.
But, OK, perhaps it’s a new era. Apple redesigned its optical heart rate sensor to include larger LEDs and arrange them more closely in a circle. To support its claim that the new sensor is the most accurate on the market, it published a study that was extensive in its breadth (seven recent, competing devices were tested in a variety of activities) but limited in usefulness. Each pairing of a device and workout type was given, essentially, one number. We don’t get to see how each device behaves in use. The data feels cherry-picked, and in any case, it doesn’t give us enough information to say whether one sensor is truly better than another, or specifically what it does better. So I’m going to add my own data points.
How I tested the Apple Watch’s heart rate sensor’s accuracy
I am just one person, so my experiments amount to a very small, informal study. That’s the case for any tech reviewer, no matter their qualifications—so feel free to compare my data to what others have found, but keep these limitations in mind for each of us.
I took the Apple Watch Series 12 and the Garmin Forerunner 570 out for several tests during workouts. (I did not have a feasible way of testing background measurements outside of workouts.) I wore one device on each wrist, positioned according to manufacturer recommendations, and, at the same time, used an electrical chest strap to provide the reference values.
I have relatively light skin, which may improve accuracy, and no wrist tattoos, so both sensors should get a clear signal on either wrist. I have six-inch wrists, on the small side of average, so I wore the 42-millimeter size of each watch (both are available in larger sizes for those who prefer it). A good fit is critical to getting good accuracy, and I feel I achieved that for both devices. I did my best to have both devices equally snug (but not uncomfortably tight) against my wrist.
I tested both devices, together, on treadmill runs, outdoor trail runs, a rowing session, and a few strength sessions. Some of these workouts involved quick changes in intensity, leading to peaks and troughs in the graph. Others were more steady. Gripping objects such as dumbbells or rower handles can interfere with accuracy for some devices, which is why I included those workouts. Ambient light and temperature can affect accuracy as well, so I tested in a variety of weather conditions.
The results
In my first set of tests, which I also shared here, the Apple Watch and the Garmin both performed well, but each had their flaws. The Garmin sometimes lagged a bit at the start of the interval, but quickly caught up. The Apple Watch didn’t have that problem, but sometimes missed the highest values on small spikes in heart rate. I’d call this one a tie.
Apple Watch in red, Garmin in purplish, chest strap for reference in gray. Credit: Beth Skwarecki
In my other trail runs and treadmill runs, I saw a similar pattern: Both watches would be on track most of the time, but each had their quirks. Garmin was more likely to miss out on the beginning of spikes, but the Apple Watch was more likely to drop data points entirely, especially toward the beginning of a workout.
One day, I did three mini workouts at the gym: a treadmill run, a rowing session, and a strength session. The strength work included a few sets each of overhead barbell press, front squats (with my arms in a clean grip), and dumbbell curls. Here are those graphs, again with the Apple Watch in red, the chest strap in gray, and the Garmin this time in purple:
Apple Watch in red, Garmin in purplish, chest strap for reference in gray. Credit: Beth Skwarecki
Both devices performed equally on the treadmill run, with their own minor glitches but both getting the job done pretty well. On the rower, the Garmin struggled more, missing almost half of the second interval. The Apple Watch wasn’t perfect, though, overestimating in a few places and not always picking up the lowest value between intervals.
The strength workout was a mess for both devices. The Garmin often read low, but the Apple Watch sometimes read high and reported fewer values in total. This view shows it a bit better (each data point is a dot):
Apple Watch in red, Garmin in purplish, chest strap for reference in gray. Credit: Beth Skwarecki
So, is Apple’s sensor really the most accurate in a wearable?
Looking at my data, I think the biggest news is that Apple is no longer lagging when it comes to heart rate accuracy. The Series 12 is a lot more accurate in my tests than the Series 10 or 11 ever were. Apple has built a very good heart rate sensor, and they deserve huge credit for that. I will no longer have to tell people Apple's sensor is mid.
But does it have the best heart rate sensor? I’m not so sure I’m convinced. It is holding its own against Garmin’s best sensor, for sure, and that’s impressive. In the rare cases the Garmin struggles, the Apple is usually there with a more-or-less correct value. But I have seen near-perfect graphs from the Garmin on its best days (admittedly, outside of this testing week); I've never seen one quite like that from Apple. The Apple Watch's sensor sometimes has trouble ramping up to correct values at the beginning of a workout; it overestimates on occasion; it doesn’t get all the way down to low values when intervals change quickly; and I’m concerned about the sparseness of the data points. It almost seems like the Apple Watch won’t report a value it’s not sure of, which is arguably better than recording a data point that could be wrong, but leaves odd gaps in some of the charts.
This leads me to over-analyze the claim of “most accurate in a wearable.” If Apple’s sensor fails to report a data point where another device reports an incorrect one, does that make Apple “more accurate” because more of its data points were on the right line? That’s probably a fair claim, but it still doesn’t feel great to award that device the “best” title. And if we truly want to compare the Apple Watch to all wearables, shouldn’t we consider chest straps, which are also worn, and which are objectively more accurate than any optical sensor in a watch?
After all this analysis, I have a hard time awarding the Apple Watch a definitive title of being the “best” at wrist heart rate accuracy. But it’s damn good, and I have to put it up in the A tier with the Garmin. Congratulations, Apple. You managed to tie the best watch sensor out there, and I can’t claim there’s another one that’s better.
Garmin's new logging feature, Garmin Epic, is getting buried in the launch of the latest Fenix 9 watch, but it deserves a headline of its own. It's a shareable digital travel journal for your big trip, being pitched by Garmin as the kind of thing you post after a major hike or race. Personally, I think that framing undersells it. Epic is also a great training-analysis hack, and that's how I plan on using it for my upcoming marathon this fall.
First things first: Garmin Epics are not to be confused with Garmin's older watch line, epix, with an "x". This feature is Epic, with a "c". The names are close enough that searching for one turns up the other, so double-check the spelling.
A Garmin Epic is a digital travel journal that combines your activities, maps, photos, and key health and performance metrics into a single interactive timeline you can revisit and share. With the Fenix 9 smartwatch, you can create and start an Epic directly from your watch. For older watches, you can still create Epics in the Garmin Connect app.
Once you create an Epic, you can see all activities on one map, photos, an activity feed, daily notes, and selected performance and health reports across the whole span. It's a free Garmin Connect feature, and Garmin's launch demo showed a Reports tab with sleep score, resting heart rate, and HRV status for the same dates.
Credit: Meredith Dietz
How to use Garmin Epic as a training tool
Again, although the launch of Garmin Epic is wrapped up in the launch of the Fenix 9, you don't need that smartwatch to use Epics in the Connect app: You can find it under the Activities menu. You can also group past activities into an Epic after the fact, and that ability is what makes the training-hack angle work.
An Epic can run up to 92 days and keeps cumulative distance and calories along with sleep, recovery, and HRV status. That's about 13 weeks, which conveniently covers a typical training block for a half-marathon-level event. Here are some ways to use it:
Wrap a whole training block. Make one Epic per build, such as "Fall Marathon Build" or "Base Phase." You get total volume and the recovery trend in a single view, and you can compare it against your next block.
Review a training camp or big week. Garmin lists training camps as a use case: Group the days, see total volume, and check how fitness and recovery responded over time.
Look back at a build after the race. Backdate an Epic across the last 10 weeks and see whether your HRV status and sleep held up. Then you can decide what to repeat for next time.
Track a return from injury or a taper. Sometimes these are periods where the trend matters more than any single run.
Use daily notes as a subjective log. "Legs heavy," "slept badly," "felt great." The metrics show what your body did, but your notes show how it felt, which is usually what explains a strange week.
Plan ahead. You can schedule up to five future Epics, up to 366 days in advance. Set up your next block before it starts.
Garmin Epic wasn't designed to be a comprehensive training-analysis feature, so it's not a flawless system. Still, while Epic is marketed as the place to relive your adventures, I'd argue the more useful trick is using it to zoom out and look for patterns in your training for next time.
When I test smartwatches and fitness trackers, I place a particular emphasis on accuracy. Is my running pace correct? Does the device capture the ups and downs of my heart rate? I even got a VO2max lab test to check a bunch of watches' fitness scores. But one thing I never test for accuracy is calorie burn. None of my devices come close to agreeing on the number of calories they think I'm burning, and I don't expect them to. Even scientists who study the accuracy of wearables can't answer the question in a way that's useful when you're shopping for this year's devices—but we'll get into why that is below.
There was a time, before Fitbits, when nobody knew quite how many calories they were burning on a daily basis. Sure, you could calculate a rough estimate based on your body size, sex, and age. You could choose whether or not to believe the calorie readout on the cardio machines at the gym. (You shouldn't.) But the idea that a gadget on your wrist could tell you how many calories you personally burned during one particular day was revolutionary. It was also wrong.
How fitness trackers calculate calorie burn
Before I discuss how accurate fitness trackers are, let’s look at where they get their numbers. For calorie calculations, the main sources are motion and heart rate data. For motion, trackers use accelerometers to figure out when your body is moving, and by how much. If you have a watch on your wrist, and the watch swings back and forth rhythmically while sort of bouncing up and down, your gadget guesses that you must be walking. If there is quicker bouncing and your wrist makes a smaller movement, you’re probably running.
This is the basic idea behind how trackers detect how many steps you’re taking. If you’ve paid attention to your step count, you already know some of the ways this can be inaccurate. If you’re shopping, for example, keeping your hand on the shopping cart handle may result in you not getting credit for the steps you’re taking, though this depends on the device. (For a perfect illustration of this issue, see these tests I did comparing a Garmin to an Apple Watch on a treadmill. When I rested my hands on the treadmill handle, the Apple Watch recorded 318 steps while the Garmin recorded none.)
Then there’s the heart rate sensor: Since your hands don’t always move predictably during exercise, it can be easier to just tell your watch that you’ll be cycling or doing yoga or whatever. The gadget then uses your heart rate to make an educated guess about how much work your body is doing.
Whatever the source of the data—heart rate, movements, or a combination—the gadget processes it through a formula to calculate how many calories it thinks you’re burning. Your age, weight, and sex may figure into this equation. Importantly, though, the fitness tracker doesn’t actually know how many calories you’re burning; instead, it’s calculating a probable number based on incomplete information.
Why there's no simple test for calorie burn accuracy
If humans were robots, all built the same, all moving in predictable patterns, this formulaic approach might work. But humans are complicated, and technology often gets confused. For example, you may get different step counts if you put a device on your right versus left wrist. And the optical heart rate sensors that a lot of trackers use may be less accurate on dark skin compared to lighter skin. These problems relate to the data that the trackers gather, but calorie burn isn't a direct measurement. It's an estimate derived from doing math with the data the watch measures, and different algorithms can come up with different calorie burn numbers depending on how the algorithm is designed.
The companies that make fitness trackers aren’t required to publish their algorithms or verify that their calorie counts are accurate. They can just put a device on the market, and there you are, comparing wearables on shopping sites without any information about how accurate they are, outside of the companies’ claims.
Researchers are interested in fitness trackers’ accuracy, which would seem like a good thing. They want to be able to use wearables in research or recommend them for individuals and healthcare providers, and so they'll run studies comparing consumer devices to lab equipment. This sounds like a great way to answer our questions! But there’s a huge delay in actually getting that information, and it’s often published too late to be useful. By the time a researcher buys a batch of the latest model, runs a study, writes it up, submits it to a journal, and finally gets it published, several years may have gone by, and the company has moved on to the next model.
That delay is why I (usually) can't use scientific studies to weigh in on the devices I write about. Here's a great example of how frustrating it can be: This review was published in 2025, and found the Series 1 was the Apple Watch that turned up the most often in the studies the authors were able to gather. The Series 9 and 10 watches were completely missing from the available data—and as a reminder, we're now up to the Series 12. With that caveat about delays, I still think it’s useful to look at the research on fitness trackers to see what themes emerge. Are any of them good at estimating your calorie burn?
What studies say about fitness trackers’ accuracy
Time for the bad news. A study from 2020 that looked at a variety of gadgets from Apple, Garmin, Polar, and Fitbit found that all the devices are inaccurate more often than they are accurate. The authors considered a device to be accurate if its reading was plus or minus 3% when compared to a more reliable measure of energy expenditure (that is, calorie burn) in a lab setting. Here’s how some of the top brands fared:
Garmin devices underestimated calorie burn 69% of the time.
Apple watches overestimated calorie burn 58% of the time.
Polar devices overestimated calorie burn 69% of the time.
Fitbits underestimated calorie burn 48% of the time and overestimated 39% of the time.
The fact that Fitbits were roughly correct on average doesn’t mean they were useful. If sometimes your device overestimates and sometimes it underestimates, it’s not very helpful unless you know which is which.
A 2018 review specifically of Fitbits found that accuracy varied greatly depending on factors like where they were worn (torso was more accurate than wrist), whether you were walking uphill, and whether you walked at a constant speed or stopped and started. The accuracy also varied by device, with the Fitbit Classic underestimating calorie burn and the Fitbit Charge usually overestimating. The devices just aren’t accurate enough to know how many calories you’re really burning
A 2022 study compared the Apple Watch 6, the Fitbit Sense, and the Polar Vantage V. The researchers had volunteers wear all three gadgets while sitting quietly, walking, running, cycling, and strength training. Every gadget, for every activity, was awarded a judgment of “poor accuracy,” with coefficients of variation ranging from 15% to 30%.
This 2025 review of Apple Watch studies—the same one I mention above—found that calorie burn was, on average, off by about 18%. The authors mention a proposed standard from the International Electrotechnical Commission that recommends fitness trackers not be off by more than 10%. That's clearly not being met, although the researchers noted that newer models may be more accurate than earlier ones.
And this 2026 study looked specifically at how accuracy relates to skin tone and to the amount of fat a person has. To the devices' credit, skin tone didn't seem to affect calorie counts very much, but adiposity (fat content) did. The higher a volunteer's body fat percentage was, the more inaccurate their calorie burn result. The Garmin Forerunner 955 and Samsung Galaxy Watch 5 seriously overestimated calories; the Apple Watch Series 8 also overestimated but not as much; and the Fitbit Sense 2 underestimated when it wasn't producing wild outliers. The authors concluded that all devices "substantially misestimate" calorie burn during exercise.
To get a sense of these percentages, let's say your true calorie burn is 2,000 calories per day. A device that's off by 15%—on the low end of what these studies found—might report that you burned 1,700 calories, or that you burned 2,300. If you're using your device to figure out how much to eat, you could be way off in meeting your calorie goals.
If these devices are all inaccurate, how can you know how many calories you're burning?
It’s probably most useful if you think of your calorie burn as a number you cannot measure directly. Treat it as a black box: I burn some unknowable number of calories; now what?
The only common reason you would need an accurate estimate of calorie burn is if you are trying to figure out how much food you need to eat. If you want to lose weight, you want to eat less than you burn; if you want to gain weight, you want the reverse; and if you’re trying to maintain your weight, you want to eat roughly the same as what you burn. But think about it this way: you don't actually need to know your calorie burn if you have the other two terms in the equation—your calorie intake and your weight.
It's considered more accurate to adjust how much to eat based directly on your weight, rather than using calorie burn estimates as a middleman. Let’s say you’re training for a marathon and you want to make sure you fuel yourself appropriately. Well, if you’re under-eating, you’ll start to lose weight. When you start to see the scale trending downward, that’s your signal to add a few hundred calories to your diet. If, after that adjustment, your weight stays steady, then you know you’re eating the right amount. As you increase your training (or if you take time off to rest a sprained ankle), you can make more adjustments as you go.
I have a post here detailing how to make these adjustments with the help of either a paid app, a group of free apps, or a DIY spreadsheet. If you’ve been using a fitness tracker instead, and it’s working for you, feel free to keep using it. But if the tracker ever stops giving you the results you want, you can safely leave it out of the equation.
The beauty of a smart band is that it isn’t a watch and doesn’t need to act like one. That includes where you wear it: Whoop has the right idea with their bicep band and “any-wear” clothing. Since Google hasn’t released a bicep band for the Fitbit Air, some users are taking matters into their own hands—with rolls of tape.
I’ve watched this trend unfold on the Fitbit Air subreddit, as one person after another realizes they can just tape the device to their arm, or anywhere they want. I’ve actually done something like this before—years ago, I found myself trying to fit the Whoop onto my ankle, and then thought, wait a sec, can’t I just tape it to the side of my leg? (I did, and it worked)—so I decided to give it a go again with a Fitbit Air. Here's how that went.
Why are people taping Fitbits to their arms (and what kind of tape works best)?
Taping your Fitbit Air to your arm (without the strap, of course) gets it off your wrist. It means the device is no longer in the way of wrist wraps or kettlebells, and you can wear any kind of sleeves or accessories you like without the Fitbit getting in the way or cramping your style. These are minor problems, to be sure. But sometimes, it’s nice to just forget you’re wearing something.
People are experimenting with different types of adhesives. One of the more popular is KT tape, the stuff that athletes often use to stabilize a body part that’s giving them some minor trouble. You can also use athletic or medical tape. But I don’t really trust any of those. I find that KT tape can start peeling off in just a day if you do a really sweaty workout and then take a shower. Maybe it’s not supposed to, but it can. Longer strips of tape have plenty of adhesive to keep them on, but a small piece—the size you’d need for a Fitbit—is going to have a harder time doing its job.
The best adhesive for the job is probably a CGM overpatch. CGMs, or continuous glucose monitors, are small plastic devices that are typically stuck on the back of the upper arm. A filament pierces the skin to take readings, but to keep it safely in place, the device itself has an adhesive. You can add some security by applying a large sticker called an overpatch.
These overpatches are perfect for securing a Fitbit to your arm for long-term use. A typical CGM lasts about two weeks, and the Fitbit Air’s battery lasts about a week. If you want the device to stay on through workouts and showers, an overpatch is more than qualified to do the job.
Does taping a Fitbit to your arm actually work?
While I’ve taped devices to my body before, I decided to do a proper experiment with the Fitbit Air. I applied it to the back of my arm with an overpatch (similar to this one) and went out for a run. It stuck well (despite the sweat), and captured heart rate data that matched well with other devices I used for comparison. Here's a video I made showing the process, and the results:
One risk of taping a Fitbit to your body is that not all areas of the body can capture heart rate equally well. The upper arm may not have great access to blood vessels on everyone’s body (we’re all different), but on the bright side, sticking it under a patch will keep it snug against your skin and block out ambient light, and those factors tend to improve accuracy.
Activity detection may suffer, though: The Fitbit is judging your movement based on what it expects to see your wrist doing in a workout. Your upper arm won’t show the same movements as your wrist, so auto-detection might not work properly. When I took the taped Fitbit out on the road, it didn’t auto-detect my jog. On a second run, I started the workout manually, and things went better from there.
How my week of Fitbit taping went
To start, if you think having a device taped to your arm sounds annoying, well, I often literally forgot I was wearing it. Several times during the week, I got a notification on my phone from the Google Health app congratulating me on a workout or critiquing how I slept. Every time, I thought: "Oh, right, I'm still wearing the Fitbit!" I have to admit this beats even the Oura ring as a set-it-and-forget-it tracker. Workout detection was admittedly not great, but it usually tracked something when I did a workout, even if it didn't get the correct start and end times. And I could certainly have manually stopped and started my workouts if I had wanted that level of accuracy.
Not everything about it was so convenient. There was one thing I was dreading, and that’s what would happen when I had to take it off. An overpatch often has adhesive so strong it’s hard to remove at the end of the two-week life of a CGM, and a Fitbit Air only lasts about a week before it needs to be charged. Normally, I'll just pop the Fitbit on a charger when I get a low battery notification, but I wasn't about to peel off the patch on a whim, so I waited through a day's worth of pestering from the app until it was shower time. By this point, the patch was peeling a little bit around the edges. If I'd needed to keep it on another week—like with an actual CGM—I'd just trim the edges and keep going. But my Fitbit was now nearly dead, so I had to take it off entirely.
A warm shower is the best place to remove something with strong adhesive. I got the patch off just fine, although I then faced the unexpected problem of what to do with the Fitbit. When you peel off a band-aid or a CGM, you just throw it in the trash; I had the Fitbit in the shower with me and had to find a place to carefully set it outside the shower without losing it.
Aside from that minor awkwardness, I was pretty happy with the whole experience. The Fitbit stayed out of my way, tracked my sleep and workouts at a basic level, and let me know 24 hours before it died so I could peel off the patch during my next shower. The biggest downside, besides dealing with the adhesive removal (from both my skin and the device), is the costs involed in applying patches every week, but perhaps that’s worth it if you really don’t like wearing a wristband.
Login
