If staying active and exercising is one of your 2020 goals but you’re just not feeling 100 per cent satisfied with the classes you’re currently attending, you’ve found yourself in the right place. Earlier this month, fitness booking app ClassPass released its Best of 2019 report, which highlights the highest-rated studios and instructors in North America, Canada included. Below, a list of the best fitness studios in Canada according to ClassPass, which you should probably check out STAT.
MONTREAL: B.cycle Photograph courtesy of ClassPass
ClassPass Rating: 4.9 Type of Workout: Indoor cycling, barre, pilates, bootcamp Locations: 3 – Centre Ville, 2000 McGill College Avenue. #140, Montreal, QC., (514) 379-6649; Westmount, 1500 Atwater Avenue, Montreal, QC., (514) 379-4331; Vieux-Port, 601 de la Gauchetière West, Montreal, QC., (514) 393-1001
Don’t let the name of this studio fool you. In addition to its assortment of spin classes, B.cycle also offers various “body”-based classes, which range from sweaty HIIT (high-intensity interval training) pilates to gruelling bootcamps. If you’re feeling a little bored with your basic barre workouts, check out B.cycle’s Barre TRX class, which incorporates suspension training to ensure you’re exercising all of your muscle groups. And if you’re a first timer, know that you’re in good hands: new ClassPass users have reported feeling at ease at B.cycle’s three locations thanks to the studios’ knowledgeable and approachable instructors.
TORONTO: Elle Fitness and Social Photograph courtesy of ClassPass
ClassPass Rating: 4.7 Type of Workout: Strength training, bootcamp, HIIT, dance cardio Locations: 1 – 580 King Street W, Toronto, ON., (416) 920-1400
This King West establishment is known for its upbeat and challenging 55-minute group sessions, suitable for all fitness levels. Favourites include the HIIT-based Bodies by Elle class, which features a combination of bootcamp drills and treadmill work. Looking to get stronger? Check out Jacked, which is all about lifting heavy weights. As per the ClassPass reviews, instructors are attentive and will help correct your form to prevent injury. A water station, towels, private bathrooms, showers and lockers (bring your own lock!) are available. Hot tip: The studio facing King St. gets the most heavenly natural light in the A.M. which makes for a prime photo opp spot to track your progress.
ClassPass Rating: 4.7 Type of Workout: Indoor cycling and hot yoga Locations: 3 – Victoria Park (hot yoga only), 132 13th Avenue SW, Calgary, AB., (403) 452-4118; Silverado, 19369 Sheriff King Street SW #918, Calgary, AB., (403) 454-0405; North West University, 4625 Varsity Drive NW #208, Calgary, AB., (403) 457-4711
What makes this Alberta franchise unique is not that it offers two different types of workouts (indoor cycling and hot yoga), but that you can take classes that focus on spinning for one half, with the remainder of your session dedicated to hot yoga. According to ClassPass users, instructors are humble and knowledgeable, and you’ll most likely leave feeling energized and inspired. New to yoga? HotShop recommends the Yin, Yin/Yang or Hot Hips class, the latter of which is great for runners in pursuit of loosening up tight hip flexors.
VANCOUVER: Spin Society Photograph courtesy of ClassPass
ClassPass Rating: 4.7 Type of Workout: Indoor cycling Locations: 3 – Downtown, 1332 Granville Street, Vancouver, BC. (604) 558-4509; North Vancouver, 924 16th Street W., North Vancouver, BC., (604) 770-3477; Mount Pleasant, 229 Kingsway, Vancouver, BC., (604) 423-4004
Of all of the Vancouver spin classes offered on ClassPass, Spin Society tops the list as the best in the city. The app’s users describe the studio as boasting a “super fun and great atmosphere for newcomers,” adding that the helpful and accommodating front desk staff contribute to making it a fuss-free experience. Spin Society offers a number of classes, from its signature 50-minute rhythm-based ride complete with choreography to the 35-minute Sprint session rooted in interval training. For expecting moms, the SCTY Baby class is similar to the studio’s 50-minute ride, albeit less intense and with the music turned down a notch.
Some of the most effective items in history were born of serendipity. Penicillin, Viagra, x-rays and even microwave were found unintentionally throughout the pursuit of some other item or function. When Arnav Dalmia introduced Cubii with a special style for compact seated ellipticals, he believed his target audience would be desk task employees searching for methods to be more active at work. As more customers got their hands on the item, and examines started putting in on Amazon, they made a discovery.
” It was these evaluations that provided us our ““ aha ” minute and assisted us comprehend all of the various factors individuals were utilizing our items,” states Dalmia.
For something, they discovered that about half of their clients weren’’ t utilizing our item at their desks, at all, however rather in the house while enjoying TELEVISION, reading, knitting and even playing computer game.
” After digging deeper, we discovered something a lot more intriguing that has actually ended up being a huge part of our service today,” includes Dalmia. “We discovered that our items were being utilized for a range of factors associated with health and injury rehab—– all of which were unidentified to us prior to we check out these item evaluations.”
In reality, customers were utilizing the Cubii elliptical to 1) fight bad leg blood circulation and keep swelling down; 2) recuperate from knee injuries and hip replacements, utilizing it as a method to get back movement with low-impact workout; and 3) deal with physical treatment and health center clients, “even one who was recuperating from brain surgical treatment.
” That was all a surprise to us, however a great one since we understood there was a big, untapped market that we weren’’ t targeting previously,” he states, including that in addition to rehab, Cubii was a struck with “active agers,” or those who are 55 and older and wish to work out, and at nursing houses to assist mobility-limited locals remain active.
In the following Q&A, CEO Dalmia talks about discovering news markets in uncommon locations.
Once you recognized you had this unanticipated group, how did you alter your focus to accommodate? What did you do to record the brand-new market?
We didn’’ t actually move our focus. Rather, we committed more time to exploring this brand-new market.
In addition to checking out item evaluations, we administered an official study to our users to discover why they utilize Cubii items. We found out that Cubii resonates with clients on a deeply psychological level—– they see our items as life-altering and providing a much better lifestyle that they never ever understood existed. We understood pursuing this audience on a larger scale might assist even more individuals significantly enhance their quality of life since of the strong psychological connection to our brand name and items.
We likewise did a mix of both official analysis, that included classifying all our consumer examines into various groups so we can much better comprehend the varied requirements we are targeting, together with more casual sessions to take in all the subjective feedback, stories, &&letters shared by our clients to really put ourselves in their shoes.
It was through these studies and analyses that we continued to discover why consumers were utilizing Cubii—– whatever from getting an exercise in at work to recuperating from surgical treatment, and even physicians and physiotherapists were utilizing it to treat their clients. This resulted in us pursuing a relationship with a physiotherapist and a physician at the University of Chicago who utilize Cubii to assist back stenosis clients enhance their capability to stroll. Since of the success these physicians have actually seen utilizing our items, we’’ re committing more time to getting in touch with medical professionals.
After finding out all of this about our clients, we altered our brand name messaging from an extremely targeted declaration of ““ exercise while you work” ” to now “ physical fitness that is available for any ages, capabilities,” and way of lives, ” which resonates with everybody and much better lines up with the factors that individuals utilize Cubii.
To record this market a lot more, we concentrated on informing our consumers’ ’ individual stories. Our advertisements now interest a more varied audience, like individuals going through injury rehabilitation and ““ active agers.”
Is it challenging to be interesting 2 demographics that are sort of at opposite ends of the generational spectrum?
What’’ s specifically intriguing is that the Centers For Disease Control (CDC) approximates that 80 percent of Americans wear’’ t get the suggested quantity of workout. That’’ s over 250 million individuals!
We discovered that the primary factor that individuals put on’’ t workout is due to the fact that they either feel frightened by the health club or simply wear’’ t have the time or capability to exercise.
It’’ s not challenging to target these groups, although their intentions for utilizing Cubii may vary, since at the end of the day, we’’ re assisting them do the exact same thing: integrate more motion into their daily lives.
It’’ s likewise crucial to keep in mind that Cubii is far more friendly than a great deal of other physical fitness business out there. Health clubs, treadmills, elliptical business, and so on are normally aggressive in their marketing—– everybody has a 6 pack and is extremely lean. That sort of aspirational messaging doesn’’ t resonate with the majority of people, and the information from the CDC shows that. With Cubii, we make physical fitness available for everybody and assist them take the initial step towards a much healthier ““ you, ” without the pressure of sensation like you need to be a physical fitness design.
At the end of the day, we desire individuals to understand that it’’ s fine to take it one action at a time. Specifically now that it’’ s the start of a brand-new year, we put a great deal of pressure on ourselves to considerably alter something about our lives, which generally includes something associated to physical fitness. That method to health isn’’ t sustainable long-lasting and typically ends up in individuals stopping half-way through—– current information reveals that individuals stop their brand-new year’’ s resolutions on January 12, so a lot of folks have actually most likely offered up by now.
That’’ s why we believe our technique is more sustainable and relatable, particularly for individuals in the zero-to-one physical fitness phase who wear’’ t resonate with the severe physical fitness and health messaging you see out there today. No matter what end of the generational spectrum you’’ re on, those sort of hard-body physical fitness objectives simply aren’’ t practical for the majority of people.
Have you seen measurable outcomes or return from this effort yet?
We’’ re seeing strong returns on this, however what’’ s much more crucial in our eyes are the stories that we’’ re hearing from these consumers about how Cubii has actually had a substantial effect on their lives.
The story that has actually constantly stuck to me is when a client’’ s daddy lost among his legs in a mishap. As a marathon runner, her daddy lost a great deal of his self-confidence and seemed like he was bound to his sofa. She called me in tears and informed me that Cubii entirely altered her daddy’’ s life. He got a brand-new sense of self-regard and he was better and more stimulated. It’’ s those sort of stories that resonate with us and make us understand that Cubii is making a substantial effect in enhancing lifestyle.
At Cubii, we wear’’ t procedure effect by income or systems offered. We determine it by the lives we’’ ve touched and the effect we have. Now, we’’ ve touched over 250,000 lives, and the objective is to continue growing that.
Do you personally read your item evaluations?
What’’ s actually crucial to me, and the business, is keeping our consumer front and.
That’’ s why I read our item evaluations. I believe it ’ s essential for me to do so that I can comprehend what users take pleasure in about our items and what they believe might be much better.
In addition, our consumer success group beings in the center of our open workplace so that everybody in the workplace can hear the discussions that we’’ re having with Cubii users.
I likewise put my individual telephone number in every item box we send so our clients understand that they can call me anytime with feedback. I speak with a wide variety of clients each week about how they’’ re utilizing our compact elliptical items and how the items have actually assisted them recuperate from injury or assisted improve their self-confidence.
Collecting feedback from consumers isn’’ t special– a great deal of business do it. Extremely couple of take the time to act and gather on it in a significant method. I believe that’’ s how we ’ ve had the ability to continue developing items that have a genuine effect on the lifestyle for numerous countless Cubii users around the world.
Anything else you wish to include?
I can’’ t highlight enough the significance of checking out item evaluations and listening to your consumers.
After finding out more about how consumers were utilizing our item, we chose to produce a brand-new design to resolve that, which will be offered in Summer this year. We’’ re thrilled to see what both brand-new and existing consumers consider it.
This is a recent arxiv paper by Bryan Ford, EPFL. The figures I use are from Bryan’s presentation.The paper introduces a threshold logical clock (TLC) abstraction and uses it to implement decentralized asynchronous consensus on top. In contrast to Ben-Or which implements decentralized asynchronous binary consensus, TLC based Que-Sera-Consensus (QSC) achieves consensus for arbitrary values proposed.After I summarize the paper, I will compare/contrast QSC with Paxos, Texel/Avalanche, and Ben-Or.Threshold Logical ClocksTLC ensures that a number of nodes progress through logical time in a lock-step fashion. On reaching logical time-step s, each node waits for a threshold tm of broadcasts received from s before it can proceed to step s+1.Different nodes may see different subsets of the tm messages. The adversarial network schedule ultimately determines this, but can we at least measure a-posteriori the success/failure of a given message’s propagation to other nodes? For this purpose, TLC supports witnessing.Each time-step occurs in two logical phases. Each node broadcasts unwitnessed message and collects responses from at least t witnesses. Each node re-broadcasts witnessed message and collects at least t witnessed messagesA particular protocol instance TLC(tm, tw, n) is parameterized by message threshold tm, witness threshold tw, and number of nodes n. To get from step s to s+1, each node must collect not just tm messages but tm threshold witnessed messages from step s. Each threshold message must have been witnessed by at least tw participants.A problem still exists. Different nodes may see different subsets, and different messages may have been witnessed by different subsets of nodes. TLC observes that causal ordered message delivery adds some convergence properties to the protocol and simplifies reasoning about it. One way to ensure causal message propagation is to piggyback and gossip every message send so far. Each node i simply includes in every message it sends a record of i’s entire causal history. This makes time advancement events propagate virally.When configured with majority thresholds, TLC offers a useful property. Every witnessed message m broadcast in step s is seen by all n nodes by step s+2:By majority nodes by s+1 by definition of witnessing Each node collects majority step s+1 msgs by s+2 Since any two majorities intersect, there is at least a 1-node overlap at s+1Que Sera Consensus (QSC)QSC provides an asynchronous consensus built on top of TLC. Each round takes three TLC logical time-steps, in whichNode broadcasts proposal w/ random priority p Waits and observes for three TLC time-steps Decides if any proposal is undisputable winnerThis description is of course too high-level. Since there is a lot of subtlety involved due to network asynchrony, the QSC protocol is reached by way of explaining several strawman protocols leading to it.Here is the baseline and the first strawman (genetic fitness lottery) towards deriving QSC.Strawman 3 makes the nodes pick celebrity proposals, which a majority of nodes have heard of by the next time-step. This rule still leaves uncertainty, however, since different participants might have seen different subsets of confirmed proposals from step s, and not all of them might have seen the eligible proposal with the globally winning ticket.In order to seek a universal celebrity, Strawman 5 says we should watch the paparazzi.The paparazzi condition guarantees that, everyone knows the proposal’s existence by s+2, and everyone knows of its celebrity by s+3. But not everyone might have seen paparazzi message!This brings us to Que Sera, whatever happens happens, Consensus (QSC). Nodes prefer highest-priority celebrity proposal p and build on it in proposals for future rounds, but don’t assume everyone agrees on p! This says that only some consensus rounds may succeed, and that only some nodes may even realize that a round succeeded. And it also guarantees that when this holds, all nodes will build on that value and eventually decide.Nodes conservatively determine agreement when they are unaware of existence of higher-priority proposal and aware of at least one paparazzi node for p.Each node i will observe successful consensus with a probability of at least 1/2 in each round, independently of other rounds. Thus, the probability i has not yet finalized a unique proposal for round r by a later round r+k is at most $1/2^k$. What I really like is that by tying the consensus with a blockchain structure/formation, the delay in committing is made somewhat compensated/pipelined. When a commit is finally achieved, any round that i sees as successful will permanently commit both proposal p and any prior uncommitted blocks that p built on in the blockchain structure.QSC implementations are available in Promela/Spin & Go.How does this compare with other consensus algorithms?I am a distributed systems guy. I will be looking at this from a distributed algorithms perspective. It looks like Bryan is coming from security background, and he may be trying to emphasize other properties (like network adversary tolerance) of the protocol. So I may be missing some security related properties of the protocol.Before I go on to compare and at some points criticize the algorithm, I want to mention that overall this is a nice algorithm. I want to model this in TLA+ when I find some time so that I will be able to get a better understanding of what is going on in TLC and QSC.The paper claims that QSC is simple, and even simpler than Paxos, but I disagree with that strongly. It took 9 subsections with many strawman algorithms to describe the QSC algorithm in Section 4.10 after TLC is described in Section 2. That said, the protocol is nice and interesting, and it has some advantages not present in other decentralized consensus algorithms like Texel and Ben-Or.QSC is not binary consensus. This makes it more powerful than Texel and Ben-Or. However, if the domain is blockchain, a binary consensus works with no problems because you are deciding whether to include this proposed transaction in the chain or not. If only one value (one transaction) is proposed for a given UTXO, a binary consensus algorithm can guarantee termination for it. Well-formed clients propose only a single transaction for a given UTXO because otherwise it would be a double-spend attempt, and then the binary consensus does not need to guarantee termination for this instance.TLC enforces a single frame of reference for the rounds as it aligns rounds across a threshold of participants. In this sense, TLC is reminiscent of the Ben-Or algorithm which also aligns rounds across threshold number of participants. In Ben-Or, N-F participants proceed in lock-step for the two phases of each round. In Ben-Or the termination is again probabilistic with probability 1, as the non termination chance after k rounds reduce to $1/2^k$ probability. If one node decides at round k, it is guaranteed that all the other nodes will decide in the next round. As we mentioned above, while Ben-Or is restricted to binary consensus, QSC allows arbitrary proposals as input.It may be possible to argue that the single frame of reference for the rounds, simplifies reasoning. But as a distributed algorithms person, I think this is just unnecessary extra synchronization and not a good idea. In Paxos, the rounds not aligned across participants. Paxos uses concurrent/separate frames of reference for rounds with no problem at all. This is achieved by Paxos’s use of totally ordered ballot numbers to make rounds client-restricted. This allows multiple frame of reference rounds to exist concurrently without violating the safety/agreement property.This brings me to do a more in depth comparison with Paxos, and a speculation.QSC vs Paxos (and SDPaxos?)QSC is still randomized consensus. So is Paxos in an asynchronous environment. In an asynchronous environment, dueling leaders problem may be probabilistically avoided (using probabilistically backing off). However, if there is some little partial synchrony which allows the failure detectors can stabilize to $\diamond S$, stable leaders can emerge, and progress will be guaranteed. In comparison, progress in QSC will always be probabilistic.By using a leader based solution Paxos gets other benefits as well. Paxos uses much less communication to get the consensus done. Paxos communication is 1-to-all-to-1 (with 1 being the leader). In contrast communication in QSC is all-to-all-to-all across the three steps in the rounds.Here is the speculation part. In effect a leader also emerges in QSC. It is the higher-priority celebrity proposal. So QSC is closer to leader-based Paxos protocols rather than to the leaderless Ben-Or and Texel protocols. What is more the random priority assignment and the use of paparazzi seem to implement a dynamic version of the sequencer node in the SDPaxos protocol. Let me explain.Let’s recall the decision procedure in QSC. A node decides as consensus on a proposal p, when it is (1) unaware of existence of higher-priority proposal than p, and (2) aware of at least one paparazzi node for p.SDPaxos separates the leader into two roles of ordering/value-choosing done by the sequencer and the replication-checking done by any node. And it seems like QSC divides the sequencer role in to two, via the celebrity and paparazzi roles. QSC confines everything in single-frame of reference rounds by its use of TLC. On the other hand, SDPaxos allows multiple rounds occurring concurrently, via ballotnumber use for sequencer.Extensions for scalabilityQSC uses a lot of communication (all-to-all steps) and wouldn’t scale. Finding alternate ways for scaling QSC would be beneficial.Avalanche has extended Texel via sampling to large scale decentralized consensus.Is it possible to come up with a sampling based extension to QSC? Texel had two advantages going for it. It is pull-based solution, and it only considers binary consensus. In contrast QSC is push-based, considers arbitrary consensus, and uses a single-reference frame for rounds. These make it hard to apply sampling to QSC.It would be interesting to think about scalability extensions for QSC. Of course committee-selection based approaches should be applicable at least.