Benchmarks

2FNs suggested levels for activity:

Baseline Activity : 100 AFP to 150 AFP

Baseline activity represents the minimum points I would like to see each and every one of us earn each week. I’ve come to this number looking at past trends, and also looking at the literature and recent scientific evidence behind daily exercise. To arrive at the 100 AFP minimum, this value equates to a half-an-hour of walking, five days a week. By all accounts this is a baseline for good health. The formula is:

(7 METS (walking at a 4mph pace) * 30 minutes ) / 10 (to scale the number down) * 5 days a week = 105 AFP

Regular Activity : 150 AFP to 250 AFP

This Regular Activity category should be the vast majority of us here at 2FNs. We are trying to get into normal workout routines, either three or four days of decent cardio workouts. On a regular routine, this benchmark is not easy, but attainable. This is the category that people will really see the benefits of working out consistently each week, be it cardiovascular fitness and general overall health.

High Activity: 250 to ???

This is for our already established participants, those who are actively training for long distance running or who take part in cardio gym classes or other structured events. This is a pretty high mark to hit, and I don’t expect people to perform at this level unless they are really training hard.

 

How the Scoring Works

I think it is easiest to explain via an example. Say you have two people, Ellie and Jon. Jon decides to go for a run in the pouring rain, while Ellie decides to use the expensive gym membership they pay for each month instead. Ellie spends 60 minutes on the elliptical, while Jon runs in the rain for 30 minutes. Ellie covers 4 miles, while Jon covers 3.5 miles. An average pace for each exercise is computed, and the MET table is called up to find the appropriate MET value.

  • Ellie: Elliptical, 60 minutes, 4 miles : 4 mph : 8.3 METS
  • Jon: Running, 30 minutes, 3.5 miles : 7 mph : 11.5 METS

To calculate the score, we then take: [MET SCORE] * DURATION / 100 = AFP, resulting in:

  • Ellie: 4.98 AFP
  • Jon: 3.45 AFP

To graph various commonly submitted activities to demonstrate a time versus activity score:

Caveat

So, with any system, there are always little details that I wanted to talk about. First, not all workouts are pace dependent, as in there isn’t a distance metric to be kept. In this case, it is tough to gauge appropriate METS, so my plan is to allow the user to input their perceived effort level. You will be able to decide if it was an Easy, Average, or Intense workout, and from that I will attempt to determine a proper MET value.

Another caveat that is simply unavoidable is the fact that MET values are computed from an average across a population, meaning no two people are exactly alike. My true MET level for running a ten-minute mile compared to Ellie’s true MET level are undoubtably slightly different, however that is beyond the scope of my abilities, thus I ask for a little bit of slack. If some workouts are clearly weighted poorly, I’ll be doing some adjustments!