To me, the holy grail of sports training is to have simple but powerful enough models to estimate power data from dozens of movements, and fit various power curves that match real-world training.

So much promise there.

---

As for Stryd: That's so interesting. I'd imagine a lot of the same parallels to cycling to apply? Once you have your running CP/FTP, I'd imagine you could follow the same cycling training plans (relative to your FTP) for the same intended stimulus.

I'm curious though, can you see the Watts/zone/W'bal/etc. values on a watch or something when you're running?

I'm approaching it as a workout, where you're doing dozens of hit. Good idea to have an individual strike joule view to the display though! "carnival mode"

There are various methods to measure that strain, e.g. Strava, intervals.icu, TrainerPeak all have their slightly tweaked implementations.

I'm curious though, wouldn't a Concept2 ski-erg be the best machine for that job?

>track your one rep max force [...] especially for sprinters

Yeaaah that's the ticket =) One level of abstraction higher: you can think of that 1RM as the leftmost point on the max power curve, i.e. max force you've historically generated, from 5secs all the way to e.g. 60 mins [1].

(1) https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/4-key-uses-for-the-power-...

As a workout, "bike 30 km" is vague and meaningless. "bike 30km in 1h" is better, but not specific to the athlete: some have better cardio than others. Most serious cardio workouts are given in zones: "bike 1h at 60-65% of your functional threshold power" [1] – this particular workout would also be known as "zone 2 training session".

(1) https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/what-ftp-really-means-to-cy...

Please pardon the AI-generated placeholder images and some of the text at https://intensity.systems, I'm still very actively working on that.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46173345

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

- uv add

- uv sync

- uv run

Feels very ergonomic, I don't need to think much, and it's so much faster.

Not cheap either!

Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this

You're kidding, right?

> there are some underlying factors skewing these results, such as: > * grammar schools are more likely to be single-sex > * co-educational schools have a higher proportion of poorer pupils > * girls are more likely to get good results

>The report, commissioned by the Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia, was conducted by Macquarie Marketing Group using OECD data

reads more to me like "we found that all-girl private schools are better than the average of public and private schools", and the obvious reason why is probably *because they're private schools*, and not because they're all-girl.

The draft spec[1] – soon to be published AFAICT – flips this on its head and says "no, the MCP server is an OAuth2 protected resource, just go and talk to this authorization server and I'll accept its tokens". The MCP server doesn't need to handle anything related to auth. That's much saner, and would recommend people build towards _that_ particular future in mind.

But also broadly speaking: I strongly believe the mental model needs to move to MCP servers are URLs. It should just be extra endpoints and controllers on top of your app. I don't want to `npm install mcp-your-app` or go through someone else's implementation, I want to hit `https://your.app.com/mcp` directly.

I guess it's fine having the separate infra for an MCP server used to connect to 3p services... but fingers crossed, your 3p services starts exposing MCP endpoints directly.

edit: Add URL, fix words

1. https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/draft/basic/au...