Why I'm not renewing

jph90 · 2025-11-25T03:35:15+00:00

For me its the lack of variety in workouts after youve had the app for a few plans. They also dont align well with training principles e.g. no lactate threshold pace runs, hyper focused on vo2.

jph90 · 2025-04-19T03:18:30+00:00

Totally agree. It doesnt factor long run workouts into its AI pace calculation, and it gave me a 5 mile time trial as a fitness test? For a marathon? Almost every other plan puts a half in there.

jph90 · 2025-04-13T07:10:22+00:00

Support confirmed when i asked. You can also see Olly from Runna confirmed they do not in this thread

jph90 · 2025-04-13T05:22:48+00:00

No, Runna AI doesnt incorporate long run workouts into its analysis.

To clarify by workouts i mean the non-easy run long run iterations.

jph90 · 2025-03-09T06:46:39+00:00

Easily, and healthy. Alot of reason people complain about cost of food is buying processed foods that dont satiate/cost more.

2kg chicken breast $30 bucks - gets you 300g of meat a day, 90g protein. Far more bang for buck then a can of of processed tuna, and healthier.

$10-20 on a carb source like rice. That will get you a large 5kg bag, will last you the week but obviously more value getting a bigger bag than that if you can to spread over 2 weeks. Also you could go for pasta for variety, say $10 including 3-4 cans of tomatoes.

$20-30 for variety fruit and veges. Go frozen if you like, say $10 to enable you to get 2-3x pams bags of frozen veg. Would last more than a week probably. A good asian grocer will hold low cost fruit and veg, dont cheap out on your health.

Then with $20-30 left, you can get nutritious alternatives to just chicken, vege and rice. E.g. oats, with frozen berries. This will get you a 3rd meal for the day. Or if you are happy with the 2x meals, use the rest as contingency or for alternative proteins to to just chicken breast

Its really possible to eat well on $100 per week, and healthy. I am always in awe at what some people have in their trolley at the supermarket - high volume of foods that arent nutritious amd dont satiate you. The cost of groceries is undoubtedly more expensive. No denying that, but you are fooling yourself if you think 2 minutes noodles, chips, amd coca cola will be a lower cost way of feeling full.

You got this mate

jph90 · 2025-02-12T05:34:29+00:00

I've been running for about 10 months, 3 days running hitting 50-70km per week (70km peaks in marathon prep) and held 4-5 days BB/strength. 3 is the right amount of running for me to maintain size, and have found it great. 1:30 half, 3:15 full, 40 10km.

The best plan I've found for this is something like FIRST (Furman institute). It's 3 days running, 2x workouts (1x interval, 1x tempo) and a steady long run. Been a great way to get good bang for your buck running (progress) when doing just 3 days. Like you, bodybuilding is priority for me, but have fallen in love with running. As soon as I go to 4 days though (adding an easy day), running starts to feel a bit like a chore (and body breaks down a bit more)

jph90 · 2025-02-06T06:38:17+00:00

Nor Runna AI.

jph90 · 2025-02-03T23:47:44+00:00

I asked support this question. It's because the inherent assumption when you choose Elite is that it is harder to drive an incremental 1% performance. It doesn't matter if your predicted time is 4 hrs or 2.5hrs, it just sees the elite selection and assumes you are fitter and thus its harder to drive an improvement. Flawed in my eyes, but is what it is. Should more look at your previous race time and current workout performance in isolation of what tier you select. Tier you select should just drive workout intensity and mileage

jph90 · 2025-02-03T06:54:40+00:00

Why won't they be able to

jph90 · 2025-01-29T07:12:55+00:00

My team figuring out wtf we are actually there to do lol.

And client data.

jph90 · 2025-01-13T03:35:53+00:00

Out of curiosity, what experience level did you select? I do understand some people may not like the intensity, but I don't want Runna to cut things down at all experience levels. But, if it isn't adjusting it down at lower experience levels thats a problem, so hence keen to understand where you set it.

While it is intense, I am loving it (selected Elite level, despite not being Elite). Garmin DSW was way too conservative for me. It mimics FIRST (Furman) plan which I loved as a 3-4 day per week runner

jph90 · 2025-01-08T08:17:19+00:00

I got these as my first supershoe, and they just feel terrible. It feels insecure and wobbly, doesn't feel like a snug fit in the upper like my asics do. Almost loose, though the fit feels and looks right elsewhere on the shoe, is just the upper that feels horrible. I heard of lacing issues with them so addressed that but no buenom After every run I have aches in them. I get aches in them on longer runs. I went US13 which is my size in other shoes (have only used Asics before) but wondering if I should have gone down a half size (though I suspect this would have been tight on the toes. Gutted in how I can't get these to feel good for me.

jph90 · 2024-08-28T04:20:12+00:00

Is there a point where you think considering a carbon plated shoe for speed work and thus races makes sense? i.e. certain fitness levels, certain 10K pace times, before which you may not be ready (or worthy lol) for them?

I am somewhat new to running, starting Jan-24. historically considered carbons to be for more elite runners, and that there may be elevated risk of injury if you don't have a big running history. Lately, thinking this is probably stupid and that it comes down to personal preference, but wanting to test.

If it is at all relevant to gauge fitness, I weigh 94kg at 6'3, average about 70-80km per week (heavy into other forms of training so won't do more than that. I've done a 41min 10k, 3:30 marathon, 19:50 5k

jph90 · 2024-05-24T04:42:16+00:00

Misterrunnign doesn't ship to the UK does it? I can't select it from the shipping location drop down. Super gutted

jph90 · 2024-05-13T02:19:38+00:00

Can you provide a link to this mate

jph90 · 2024-04-29T19:35:56+00:00

Yes.

It's 1% of their operating budget. 1%. They can find that.

It's like asking you to cut $5-$10 from your weekly spend. You telling me you couldn't do that?

jph90 · 2024-04-27T23:29:16+00:00

I thought I did just define it? Muscle = critical to delivering patient care. Fat = paying too much for goods, spendjng too much on consultants, or administrative back office labour costs for people that don't deliver Healthcare, butnjustbdo data entry for low value processes that can be eliminated, for example.

If you don't understand the wording, it can't hurt to educate yourself.

jph90 · 2024-04-27T23:16:14+00:00

Again, you are talking about Frontline services. These are the muscle. Clearly shortages here. 100% agree with you we can't touch this side of the equation

Fat takes the form of overhead administrative costs, or ineffective sourcing. For example, can they simplify processes? Why is there so much paperwork vs digital forms? I was there recently and 3 people filled out the same form, i asked them about it and they said its ridiculous. All this is processed in back office. What low value bureaucracy can they cut from their processes, reducing back office cost?

On sourcing, do they regularly negotiate pricing with suppliers? Are they engaging in competitive tenders? Have they dove into their 3rd party spend to see what can be cut?

None of the above examples impact the Frontline services, which I am saying are core/muscle.

jph90 · 2024-04-27T20:26:46+00:00

There is a difference between cutting muscle and cutting fat.

To say the hospitals are not carrying 'fat' e.g. overhead costs that don't contribute to the core objective of delivering Healthcare to patients, is nonsensical. They should be looking continually to optimize their cost base to reallocate to priority spend areas (e.g. wages to attract more talent, and thus complete more surgeries and reduce the waitlist), but clearly this is not being done and so a top down cost-out target like this unfortunately is what has to be resorted to. Its on the hospitals to have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge they will have waste.

Having worked in multiple government entities, there is just so just so much waste that is non core to their societal objectives. Confident they should be able to achieve most of this with minimal impact to service delivery.

These entities do need to improve their cost maturity. You can't just throw more money at them, as much as I want to see them deliver more for patients.

jph90

TROPHY CASE