I built the AI running coach that I think should already exist.
▲ 0 r/runcommunity+2 crossposts

I built the AI running coach that I think should already exist.

The app is Miles, an iOS running coach: https://apps.apple.com/app/id6763786354

Why I built it: we have the most powerful AI models ever at our disposal, and not a single running app is using them right. Look at the two biggest, Strava and Runna. Both added AI insights, and both use them to read your stats back to you in sentences. Your pace was steady. Your heart rate averaged 156. That's a recap, not insight.

On my last easy run I averaged 9:00/km, about as slow as I go, and Miles still told me I ran it too fast. It was obviously right. My heart rate in the second half was clearly higher than the first half at basically the same pace. That's called aerobic decoupling. If your HR drifts more than 5-6% against your pace between the first and second half of a run, the effort was above what your aerobic base can hold right now. It pointed that out specifically and told me what to focus on in my next run. No stat recap gets you that. A good human coach does, and that's the bar.

So that's what I'm building: a coach that knows your exact level instead of a template with your race date pasted in.

  • It builds the plan around where you actually are, and every run comes with an exact target pace, live mid-run
  • Every morning it tells you whether you're ready for today's session: a readiness score from your HRV, resting heart rate and sleep, measured against your own baselines. The thing people buy a Whoop for, except your Apple Watch has been quietly collecting all of it for years
  • It watches your training load over weeks and warns you when you're ramping up faster than your body is adapting, before that becomes an injury
  • After each run it tells you what the run actually means and the one thing to work on next time
  • And when you miss runs (you will, life exists), the week rebuilds itself instead of becoming a list of things you failed to do

Happy to answer anything, including what your current app gets wrong. It's just me building this, so feedback goes straight to the roadmap

u/abhicrysis — 1 day ago

I've started running ~6 times in last 4 years. Started Attempt #7 recently.

I have tried picking running like 6 times in last 3-4 years. Every single time I had to quit due to pain in shin bones. I followed almost every advice online, changed shoes, etc. The problem was the pace I was running. I always thought easy runs were when HR averaged at 174. In hard runs it reached upto 202.

This time I'm taking it super easy. So hard to stay in zone 2. Ran so slow still my avg HR reached 160. I wasn't tired but my HR is saying different story (max HR was 174). I regularly do strength training so I have the leg strength but running has always been elusive.

u/abhicrysis — 3 days ago
▲ 73 r/codex

Gpt 5.5 vs Fable 5: For first time codex preferred Claude Fable's plan

I asked both Gpt 5.5 and Fable 5 to generate the plan for a large feature request that involves major refactor.

I then shared both plans with GPT 5.5 and for the first time it preferred Claude's plan and found no major gap in it. Before this, it always found some big issues in Claude's plan.

Fable worked for 22 mins to generate the plan and GPT 5.5 generated the plan in 4 mins so there is that difference as well. Both at Extra High thinking.

--- Update: ---

Ran the same plan generation prompt with GPT 5.5 pro thinking on web. Used Github connector to give it access to the code.

Ran for 8 mins 55 seconds.

Used GPT 5.5 xhigh for evaluation.

It says Plan 3 is the best rollout strategy, but Plan 2 is still the best implementation spec. Plan 2 refers to Fable's plan. Plan 3 is GPT 5.5 pro plan.

The rollout strategy isn't an edge. It just mentions that move the feature behind a feature flag, add analytics events, etc. Those are trivial things so I wouldn't even consider them.

Fable 5 wins against GPT 5.5 pro also.

reddit.com
u/abhicrysis — 27 days ago