Calorie count too low these days

MoodyM

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 14, 2008
776
24
Not sure if this is since 2.0 or 2.0.1 update (or neither) but recently my workout aren't counting nearly enough calories - for example 45 mins on exercise bike yesterday only counted 200, yet usually that workout for me is around 350-400.

1 hour of indoor soccer tonight gave me 350 - usually that's about 600+

My weight/sex/age are set right, and the heart rate is reading an average in the Workout of what I'd expect.

Any ideas?
 

Mlrollin91

macrumors G5
Nov 20, 2008
13,477
8,687
Ventura County
Watch OS 2.0+ updates the way the watch counts calories. It's suppose to be "more accurate" now. I've seen a decrease in about 20-25% daily since updating to 2.0 then 2.0.1 in comparison to 1.0.1. I've had to reduce my goal by 100 calories since updating. It wasn't possible to reach my goal without overdoing it.
 

MoodyM

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 14, 2008
776
24
I wonder what's changed to make it "more accurate"?

Based on all research I've done around my sports, etc, my old calorie counts seems nearer the "recommended" values
 

Mlrollin91

macrumors G5
Nov 20, 2008
13,477
8,687
Ventura County
On 1.0.1, 30 minutes of full out indoor cycling netted me around 350 calories. Now it's more like 200-225. It's hard to imagine that I was burning more than 10 calories a minute just cycling. Even the the counter on the bike was about 260. So my watch was saying I was almost 30% more. Now my watch is less than the bike, but seems far more accurate. The watch takes into account your heart rate for determining how many calories are burnt.
 

MoodyM

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 14, 2008
776
24
On 1.0.1, 30 minutes of full out indoor cycling netted me around 350 calories. Now it's more like 200-225. It's hard to imagine that I was burning more than 10 calories a minute just cycling. Even the the counter on the bike was about 260. So my watch was saying I was almost 30% more. Now my watch is less than the bike, but seems far more accurate. The watch takes into account your heart rate for determining how many calories are burnt.
I must have a really low heart rate then, cos I'd struggle to find a source, other than Apple Watch running 2.0, that reckons someone of my stats would only burn 300ish playing non stop indoor soccer for over an hour
 

gsmornot

macrumors 68040
Sep 29, 2014
3,069
2,469
I must have a really low heart rate then, cos I'd struggle to find a source, other than Apple Watch running 2.0, that reckons someone of my stats would only burn 300ish playing non stop indoor soccer for over an hour
It sounds a little low if you're playing competitive but the number you're seeing is active calories. Depending on heart rate your total calories may be closer to the number your expecting. You have two numbers to look at after an activity and with the stop and go of soccer it might have placed more in the other category. Also, why do you have a watch on for soccer. Ha. (no jewelry)
 

e2783

macrumors newbie
Nov 2, 2015
1
0
I see the same problem. I make my training every day before Version 2 I made around 1300-1400 a day. (In training maybe 750-850). Since the new Version it's about 500 calories for a 1h Crosstrainer Training with with Avg BPM 145. Since version 2 had to reduce my daily target to 1000 calories, because i was not able to get my rings closed. I tried everything, calibration with Outdoor Run, Walk, Indoor run and walk, nothing changed. It's frustrating that there ist no transparency if it's a software problem (New Algo Code) or not. If Apple would give some informations to the situation or some details what's the correct calories use vor activity (Chart: BPM, Weight, Size, etc) it's would give a clue, was the calculation wrong in the past or is it now. Very frustrating.
 
Last edited:

tekchic

macrumors 65816
Apr 19, 2010
1,458
545
Phoenix, AZ
I'm also seeing the same. Getting harder to reach my move goal on rest days -- I've given up on trying to do perfect weeks/months now. If it's not a run day these days, I'm not hitting move goal, even if I do yoga, pilates, kettlebell, etc.

Exercise minutes got too easy and move calories got harder, haha.
 

MoodyM

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 14, 2008
776
24
Yeah what they're basically saying is that the Watch was miles out to start with
 

Mlrollin91

macrumors G5
Nov 20, 2008
13,477
8,687
Ventura County
I think Watch OS is getting smarter and is no longer detecting false steps. False steps = higher calorie count. For example, sometimes I have to roll silverware at my restaurant. Before Watch OS2.0, rolling silverware would count as steps and distance, giving me over 100 active calories for 1 hour of rolling. Now, it doesn't count for steps or distance and I get 10-15 calories for 1 hour of rolling.