12

Differences between RunKeeper and RunningAhead (Read 3053 times)

    I've read through the manuals for GPS running units and none of them claim accuracy down to inches....how does the RA method correct for this?

     

    I don't know why you take issue with my statement.  I'll assume you didn't read the rest of the paragraph, which continued on to say:

    The actual distance for manually created maps is accurate to probably a couple of hundred feet because each pixel on your monitor represents tens of feet on the map, depending on your zoom level.

     

    As Mikey pointed out, there is no GPS involved in the calculation.  Most, if not all other mapping sites's distance calculation formula assumes a spherical earth, which is good enough for most mapping purposes.  As you know, the earth is ellipsoidal, and RA's calculations take this into account.  As you know, the accuracy of the calculated distance depends on the accuracy of the data.  With precise data, the formula produces a value that's accurate to inches.  GPS readings aren't that precise yet, thus it's theoretical.

     

    mj.moto.johnson: should you switch?  That's up to you, but how many sites do you know where you can interact directly with the developers?

    mj.moto.johnson


      All I can say is WOW and thank you.  I am switching back (actually I never really left) to RA.  I have no doubt that the GPS in my cell phone might be dropping data points considering we were back up against the Santa Cruz mountains.

       

      I will also pass on this thread to my running buddies who have wondered why the results were different.

       

      Thanks again,

       

      -mj


      Imminent Catastrophe

        And another thing...

        From your log it looks like you run trails a lot. On trails with lots of sharp switchbacks the sampling rate becomes more important, since it will cut the corners with a longer sampling interval. On a straight course, less so.

        "Able to function despite imminent catastrophe"

         "To obtain the air that angels breathe you must come to Tahoe"--Mark Twain

        "The most common question from potential entrants is 'I do not know if I can do this' to which I usually answer, 'that's the whole point'.--Paul Charteris, Tarawera Ultramarathon RD.

         

        √ Tahoe Rim Trail 100M 20/21 July 2013

        Boston Marathon 21 April 2014

        Tahoe Rim Trail 100M 19/20 July 2014


        Feeling the growl again

           

          I don't know why you take issue with my statement.  I'll assume you didn't read the rest of the paragraph, which continued on to say:

           

          As Mikey pointed out, there is no GPS involved in the calculation.  Most, if not all other mapping sites's distance calculation formula assumes a spherical earth, which is good enough for most mapping purposes.  As you know, the earth is ellipsoidal, and RA's calculations take this into account.  As you know, the accuracy of the calculated distance depends on the accuracy of the data.  With precise data, the formula produces a value that's accurate to inches.  GPS readings aren't that precise yet, thus it's theoretical.

           

          mj.moto.johnson: should you switch?  That's up to you, but how many sites do you know where you can interact directly with the developers?

           

          "Take issue" is a bit strong, I expressed curiousity at how such a claim to accuracy could be made.  Not having used Handy Runner I am not intimately familiar with the workings, hence the curiousity.  The discussion was so intermixed with GPS discussions that I did not separate the two, hence the confusion.

          "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

           

          twrex7


            And another thing...

            From your log it looks like you run trails a lot. On trails with lots of sharp switchbacks the sampling rate becomes more important, since it will cut the corners with a longer sampling interval. On a straight course, less so.

             

            I agree.  Also trails tend to have bigger / steeper hills which WILL mess with distance.  In the spring a 12 mile trail race I "ran" in Mass. read a tad over 10 miles due to its 3600FT + and - of elevation change throughout. 

             

            If you uncheck and recheck the elevation button on a mapped run imported from GPX, Running AHEAD will use elevation data from the google map as opposed to the GPX data.  This changes the distance of the run... Probably a bit more accurate.

            RunFree7


            Run like a kid again!

              Hmmm  I wonder what geographic coordinate system these different systems are using?  I hear NAD 1983 is nice Smile

                2011 Goals:
                Sub 19 5K (19:24 5K July 14th 2010)
                Marathon under 3:05:59 BQ (3:11:10 Indy 2010)

                I couldn't resist jumping in here with my 2c.  RunKeeper is a joke compared to Running Ahead.  It is cartoonish in appearance, the analysis is poor compared to RA, and they want to upsell you all the time to their "Elite".  I guess for some entry level runners it may be ok, but I find it completely unsuitable.  We should all be immensely grateful that Eric does what he does for all our benefit.

                - Joe

                all running goals are under review by the executive committee.

                  I couldn't resist jumping in here with my 2c.  RunKeeper is a joke compared to Running Ahead.  It is cartoonish in appearance, the analysis is poor compared to RA, and they want to upsell you all the time to their "Elite".  I guess for some entry level runners it may be ok, but I find it completely unsuitable.  We should all be immensely grateful that Eric does what he does for all our benefit.

                   

                  +1

                   

                  I came over to this site from RunKeeper which I was using for over a year and I even upgraded to "Elite". 

                   

                  This site is superior in the ability to fine tune exactly how you want to track your workouts, an endless variety of graphs which I love (as evidenced by my summary page), an incredibly responsive developer and of course the community.

                  2014 Goal: Run faster than 3:37:07 in the NYC Marathon


                  Zeus

                    I couldn't resist jumping in here with my 2c.  RunKeeper is a joke compared to Running Ahead.  It is cartoonish in appearance, the analysis is poor compared to RA, and they want to upsell you all the time to their "Elite".  I guess for some entry level runners it may be ok, but I find it completely unsuitable.  We should all be immensely grateful that Eric does what he does for all our benefit.

                     

                     

                    +1 again.   I urge you to try and find a better site than RA.  Level of detail, expansive tweaks, reporting are all superior to any other site. 

                     

                    Plus Eric is continually upgrading the product for adding advanced features for those who want them but also keeping it simple to use for all users.  Quite a feat. 

                    2011 goals [take 1]: 18:36 5k; 39:59 10k; 1:29:00 1/2 marathon; 3:10:00 BQ marathon (2013 standards)
                    2011 goals [take 2]: 18:00 5k; 38:30 10k; 1:28:26 1/2 mar; 3:03:00
                    2nd life PR's: 19:24 5k / 39:52 10k / 1:27:36 1/2 mar / 3:08:03 marathon

                      Kudos to both Eric and Derek. I love both RA and Handy Runner. I am thankful to both of you for the great work you do.

                      See how they run...

                      saxen49


                        I love HandyRunner too, but have noticed big inaccuracies, always overestimates of distance. For a 5km run, the GPS track measure 0.2-0.3km too long; when I run 8.2km (like this morning), the app tells me 9.2km (1km over). My long runs at the moment (80 mins) are overmeasuring by 1.5-2.0 km - a huge discrepancy. I'm blaming the GPS receiver in my phone rather than the app (I use a Samsung Galaxy 551), and I have to manually correct all my distances, which kinda defeats the purpose of having the app. It doesn't seem to matter where the run is - I get the same problem in the CBD where I'm sometimes running under bridges etc as I get in the open. Interesting.

                          Now I'll admit none of this technical talk makes any sense to me, but out of curiosity I did a mini experiment.  I know that the blocks where I camp consist of 1.25mi long roads.  According to RA, it is 1.26mi.  That's pretty good accuracy if you ask me!!  

                          'No matter how slow you go, you're still lapping everyone on the couch'

                           

                          "Running is a big question mark that's there each and every day. It asks you, 'Are you going to be a wimp or are you going to be strong today?'"  - Peter Maher

                           

                          "Running long and hard is an ideal antidepressant, since it's hard to run and feel sorry for yourself at the same time. Also, there are those hours of clearheadedness that follow a long run."  -Monte Davis

                            I haven't used RunningAhead as an app on my phone yet, but I have been importing GPX tracks from Runkeeper into the Training Log and they seem to match up to me.

                             

                            I've used the map a run on Runkeeper and used the ruler on Google Earth to check mileage as well and Runkeeper seems pretty darn close to me.  I run a lot of county roads that are in 1 mile sections and it matches up really well.

                             

                            I did end up replacing my iPhone last week and my route is much more jagged now and I've noticed that if I put it in my holder upside down it is even worse.  When I zoom in and look at the satelitte view I can see that it misses some turns and shorts me on some distance especially on out and backs, but when it is all said and done it seems to even out somehow to be very close to the number based on the mapped routes.

                             

                            I think Runkeeper's algorythm probably smooths out the jigs and jags the GPS on the smartphones provides and ends up with a more accurate number when it is all said and done.

                             

                            Sounds like RunningAhead would do a lot better with more accurate GPS information.

                            Age: 46 Weight: 208 Height: 6'2" (Goal weight 195)

                            Current PR's:  Mara 3:48:09; HM 1:43:26; 10K 44:51; 5K 21:27


                            day after day sameness

                              For clarity...there is no RunningAhead mobile app.  HandyRunner seems to be what people in this thread mean when they are typing "Runningahead on my smart phone".  HandyRunner is a third-party app and not RunningAhead.

                              Choosing my words carefully has never been my strength I've been known to be vague and often pointless

                                This thread continues to confuse because it compares GPS and websites and third party apps.  Three different things.

                                Well at least someone here is making relevance to the subject.

                                12