Originally Posted by An old Guy .
1) Perhaps you should read more carefully. I said you used the same names for power training zones as those used for heart rate training zones.
2) You have previously said that TSS predicts nothing. And that no papers have been published that test any of its predictions.
I gave a series of intervals that anyone can do that show that IF of 1.20 is easy to maintain for an hour or two. (I guess that deals with normalized power also. I guess that gets rid of that LT relationship.)
I gave an example ( low effort Long time) that showed that glycogen depletion can be 40% (if I recall correctly) different than what TSS "predicts." At that time you disavowed the relationship between TSS and glycogen usage. Simple ride anyone can do.
You made a claim that 1500TSS/week for extended periods of time is impossible. I guess that is one of those "impossible intervals." You made it without proof. I suggested that for $10K/month many people here would prove you wrong. (I don't get paid to prove you wrong, but I am doing ever 1500TSS/week.) I don't know what the other intervals are, but perhaps you could post one and do some "science" to show it is impossible.
3) I used the phrase "heart rate zones" where Dr. Banister and those who tested his theories used "heart rate." Unimportant slip of the tongue.
----
When you write your comments, you should make them consistent with your prior comments. Otherwise you paint yourself as a fraud.
What confounds you is that power can be coupled to or uncoupled from heart rate. While heart rate may be used to make the predictions, you make for power. Your claims are only true when power and heart rate are coupled and you misrepresent the causal factor as power rather than heart rate.