Sequencing Workouts/Intensity

[swampy1970]

So training for 5 hour rides makes the big TSS rides easier such that back to back to back 300+ TSS rides are just daily occourances?

You should tell that to Juan Antonio Fletcha - his power analysis for last years Tour de France is on TrainingPeaks. Even epic days like the stage that Andy Schleck won, traversing the Agnel, Izoard and Galibier was 'only' ~350 TSS and that was with producing some really mind boggling numbers at high altitude and 6.5hr in length.

If daily 5hr, 300TSS rides are that easy one wonders why Pro's have such a hard time doing 5hr TSS rides in France during July...

 

[alienator]

Originally Posted by swampy1970 .

So training for 5 hour rides makes the big TSS rides easier such that back to back to back 300+ TSS rides are just daily occourances?

You should tell that to Juan Antonio Fletcha - his power analysis for last years Tour de France is on TrainingPeaks. Even epic days like the stage that Andy Schleck won, traversing the Agnel, Izoard and Galibier was 'only' ~350 TSS and that was with producing some really mind boggling numbers at high altitude and 6.5hr in length.

If daily 5hr, 300TSS rides are that easy one wonders why Pro's have such a hard time doing 5hr TSS rides in France during July...

Ah, geez. You forget that Old Guy used to ride 5000 mile weeks. Really. Honest. Don't listen to the training experts. Listen to Old Guy. He's been there, done that.

 

[An old Guy]

Originally Posted by swampy1970 .

So training for 5 hour rides makes the big TSS rides easier such that back to back to back 300+ TSS rides are just daily occourances?

You should tell that to Juan Antonio Fletcha - his power analysis for last years Tour de France is on TrainingPeaks. Even epic days like the stage that Andy Schleck won, traversing the Agnel, Izoard and Galibier was 'only' ~350 TSS and that was with producing some really mind boggling numbers at high altitude and 6.5hr in length.

If daily 5hr, 300TSS rides are that easy one wonders why Pro's have such a hard time doing 5hr TSS rides in France during July...

Perhaps you should ask the TdF riders why the rides are hard. What are the TSS for those who ride the Race Across America - while they are riding it?

As I said TSS is a poor measure.

Originally Posted by alienator .



Ah, geez. You forget that Old Guy used to ride 5000 mile weeks. Really. Honest. Don't listen to the training experts. Listen to Old Guy. He's been there, done that.

I think you have me confussed with someone else. 1400 miles (84 hrs = 7 12 hour days) seems like a reasonable estimate based on my abilities when I was doing long miles. There are several people I know of who have done close to 2000 mile weeks.

 

[dkrenik]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .

I'm starting to think that maybe you're under estimated your FTP or your power meter simply hasn't been zero's correctly.. me and you can do the same workout and at the end have very different TSS's at the end of the day if we are of different abilities..

I'm inclined to agree. When you look at TSS the other way, whether your FTP is 150 or 400, a 300+ TSS ride is damn hard.

Dave

 

[An old Guy]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .

I'm starting to think that maybe you're under estimated your FTP or your power meter simply hasn't been zero's correctly.. me and you can do the same workout and at the end have very different TSS's at the end of the day if we are of different abilities..

It is more likely that the TSS formula does not predict what you think it does.

===

Perhaps you could measure my FTP and calibrate my PowerTap. My billing rate is $100/hour door to door plus expenses. (I know my FTP is correct and that my PowerTap is properly calibrated. I am not willing to incure the expense of showing that you are wrong.)

 

[Alex Simmons]

Originally Posted by An old Guy .


It is more likely that the TSS formula does not predict what you think it does.

Perhaps it does not predict what you think it does. And I am wondering what you think TSS is?

I somehow doubt your TSS calc was a "typo" but rather a misunderstanding of how TSS is calculated and what it represents.

TSS is training stress score, not a training prediction score. It is direct measure of training stimulus (since it accounts for both duration and intensity), which needs to be taken in context of training history.

If you have a high CTL, then high TSS days are less relatively stressful than for someone with a low CTL. That should be relatively obvious.
("The more you train, the more you can train")

 

[An old Guy]

Originally Posted by Alex Simmons .

TSS is training stress score, not a training prediction score. It is direct measure of training stimulus (since it accounts for both duration and intensity), which needs to be taken in context of training history.

If you have a high CTL, then high TSS days are less relatively stressful than for someone with a low CTL. That should be relatively obvious.
("The more you train, the more you can train")

I think we agree. At least for the better part.

Because the TSS predicts the same stress for people regardless of CTL, I would make the claim it is not a good measure to compare the stress for people with different CTLs. (I did say TSS was not a good measure several times.)

----

Today I was on my trainer at 90+% FTP for 30 minutes - 43TSS, 8Nm torque. My knees hurt more from that effort than on a day with much higher TSS but lower average torque. But the pain does not affect my power production - I will simply use a lower gear and higher cadence on my next ride.

Of course, TSS does not take into account the stupidity of training in the wrong gear. (I did say TSS was not a good measure several times.)

----

I guess you have explained why TdF riders can do 300TSS days and not be affected as much as amateur racers.(I did say TSS was not a good measure several times.)

 

[doctorSpoc]

OG... let's narrow this down... you are saying that TSS is not a good what.. exactly?

 

[An old Guy]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .

OG... let's narrow this down... you are saying that TSS is not a good what.. exactly?

Felt_Rider provided the following:

I saw this guideline from Dr. Coggan a while back and even though it is just a guide my current conditioning it seems to be right on the money for me.

The following scale can be used as an approximate guide:

• Less than 150 - low (recovery generally complete by following day)
• 150-300 - medium (some residual fatigue may be present the next day, but gone by 2nd day)
• 300-450 - high (some residual fatigue may be present even after 2 days)
• Greater than 450 - very high (residual fatigue lasting several days likely)

----

I am saying that TSS is not good at predicting recovery periods. And that one should not measure their training effort by keeping track of TSS.

I am sure that amateur racers who race less than an hour at a time and train according to plans similar to Dr. Coggan's plans feel it is a good measure. I am sure that both you and Felt_Rider are such riders.

 

[Felt_Rider]

I have no problem following (as a guide) something written or expressed to me by the likes of Dr. Coggan, Hunter Allen, Alex Simmons, Ric Stern, Bill Black, Frank Overton, Rapdaddo, Dave Ryan even though my FT is ranked in the recreational level. TSS, CTL, ATL and all the other metrics can be used as a training guide to the recreational cyclist as much as the Cat 1.

 

[doctorSpoc]

Originally Posted by An old Guy .




Felt_Rider provided the following:

I saw this guideline from Dr. Coggan a while back and even though it is just a guide my current conditioning it seems to be right on the money for me.

The following scale can be used as an approximate guide:

• Less than 150 - low (recovery generally complete by following day)
• 150-300 - medium (some residual fatigue may be present the next day, but gone by 2nd day)
• 300-450 - high (some residual fatigue may be present even after 2 days)
• Greater than 450 - very high (residual fatigue lasting several days likely)

----

I am saying that TSS is not good at predicting recovery periods. And that one should not measure their training effort by keeping track of TSS.

I am sure that amateur racers who race less than an hour at a time and train according to plans similar to Dr. Coggan's plans feel it is a good measure. I am sure that both you and Felt_Rider are such riders.

well i would not use TSS to predict recovery periods... the scale presented actually says right on it, it is "an approximate guide".. for typical riders.. i guess.. so i'd actually agree with you on that point to some extent... If wanted to predict recovery period I would use a performance management chart and look at my TSB.. then look at my journal and see how a TSB like that affected my workouts previously at a similar CTL..

I don't use TSS to measure training effort.. it's not for that.. i use it as a measure of volume of training STRESS.. there is actually a really big difference.. by training effort I assume you mean how hard a workout felt OR how much it added to your current fitness OR even how much training effect it had period.. TSS is not that.. TSS is used just used to log or prescribe how much you did or are going to do... not how much it hurt.. not how much it affected you.. not how much it affected you in the context of your current training.. not necessarily how much good it did you.. it's none of that... it's simply how much you did.. volume and intensity... the only context is in the context of your FTP.. if I want to get an idea of how much I did in a workout in the context of my current training,, what good it did me etc.. then I'd look at ATL and CTL.. they take into account my other workouts and as above short term and long term respectively, if i wanted to get an idea of what a workout took out of me and how much i can likely do the next day then i'd look at my TSB and historically what that TSB meant at a similar CTL..

 

[An old Guy]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .


well i would not use TSS to predict recovery periods...

I don't use TSS to measure training effort..

Perhaps you should read your posts #16 and #18. And reread the comments attributed to Dr. Coggan.

You might even read your post #20 where you indicate that the TSS numbers that I routinely put up should be hard for anyone.

---

It is clear that you have no knowledge of the validity of your training rituals.

 

[doctorSpoc]

Originally Posted by An old Guy .


Perhaps you should read your posts #16 and #18. And reread the comments attributed to Dr. Coggan.

You might even read your post #20 where you indicate that the TSS numbers that I routinely put up should be hard for anyone.

---

It is clear that you have no knowledge of the validity of your training rituals.

350 TSS, 0.75 IF, 5hrs... Yup.. that ride should be hard for anyone..

CTL, ATL and TSB are functions of TSS..

 

[Alex Simmons]

Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .

CTL, ATL and TSB are functions of TSS..

Was about to post the same thing.

CTL (and ATL & TSB) are expressed in units of TSS/day.

These (and the TSS they are derived from) are exceptionally useful.

 

[Felt_Rider]

Originally Posted by An old Guy .
Perhaps you should read your posts #16 and #18. And reread the comments attributed to Dr. Coggan.

You might even read your post #20 where you indicate that the TSS numbers that I routinely put up should be hard for anyone.

---

It is clear that you have no knowledge of the validity of your training rituals.

As you attempt to discredit doctorSpoc and others, I hope that the community here is starting to understand that you in fact have little to no knowledge on training.

 

[danfoz]

Is it possiible for someone to have a very high TSS and be less fatigued than someone with a lower TSS? When Jonothan Boyer (a TDF guy, not an ultra-marathoner) did the RAAM for the first time he beat his competition quite severly.

Jonathan Boyer did not train the way for instance that Lon Halderman trained, who was doing epic Zone 2 rides. In retrospect, Halderman mentioned he had wasted years training this way. i.e going too easy. Boyer was still using his traditional methods including intervals. If they had been using power meters back then, is it possible that Lon could have had higher TSS scores than Boyer, with his much longer rides, but was not as "damaged" from his efforts and needed less recovery than did Boyer, whose training took less time but with higher intensity?

Edit: I'd surmise the anwser to this directly correlates to the threads current sparring match.

 

[An old Guy]

Originally Posted by Felt_Rider .


As you attempt to discredit doctorSpoc and others, I hope that the community here is starting to understand that you in fact have little to no knowledge on training.

I am not trying to discredit anyone.

A series of quotes from doctorSpoc in this thread:

"300 + to 325TSS... HARD rides"
"well i [doctorSpoc] would not use TSS to predict recovery periods"
"I [doctorSpoc] don't use TSS to measure training effort."
"I [doctorSpoc] use it as a measure of volume of training STRESS."
"350 TSS, 0.75 IF, 5hrs... Yup.. that ride should be hard for anyone."

From my point of view doctorSpoc discredits himself with regard to knowledge about training by continuning to make conflicting statements such as these.

---

From Dr.Coggan (who invented the term) at Training Peaks:

training stress score (TSS) ... might be best viewed as a predictor of the amount of glycogen utilized in each workout. Thus, a very high TSS resulting from a single race or training session can be used an indicator that one or more [recovery] days should be scheduled.
.

 

[doctorSpoc]

Originally Posted by An old Guy .


I am not trying to discredit anyone.

A series of quotes from doctorSpoc in this thread:

"300 + to 325TSS... HARD rides" I was describing a Hard rides that I had personally had.. like how you completely left that part out.. you're dishonest and kind of low.. that's pretty cheap! i think you can do better than that.. well maybe not.. lol..
"well i [doctorSpoc] would not use TSS to predict recovery periods" ..I wouldn't... one in general needs context of your CTL,TSB in order to do this.. but if you do a very big day, you will/should know based on your history and current training volume what that workout will mean.. but there IS context.. you're still not JUST looking at TSS..
"I [doctorSpoc] don't use TSS to measure training effort." related to below..
"I [doctorSpoc] use it as a measure of volume of training STRESS." "effort" is your word.. I don't know what that means.. I interpreted it.. and asked in my reply if I interpreted it correctly.. you never said if I did or did not or what you meant by it.. you still don't seem to understand the difference between stress and strain..
"350 TSS, 0.75 IF, 5hrs... Yup.. that ride should be hard for anyone." when you include the IF and time and/or TSS one can make a pretty good judgment about how hard that ride was.. I stand by that.. a 5hr, .75IF ride would be a hard ride for anyone.. would it be more or less hard if one considered training volume.. yes, but fresh or not.. that is a hard day on the bike for anyone..

From my point of view doctorSpoc discredits himself with regard to knowledge about training by continuning to make conflicting statements such as these.

---

From Dr.Coggan (who invented the term) at Training Peaks:

training stress score (TSS) ... might be best viewed as a predictor of the amount of glycogen utilized in each workout. Thus, a very high TSS resulting from a single race or training session can be used an indicator that one or more [recovery] days should be scheduled.
.

I don't think you realize that every time you write you show the true depths of your ignorance.. and dishonesty really, by removing the context and qualifiers/caveats from your quotes...

"Thus, a very high TSS resulting from a single race or training session can be used an indicator that one or more [recovery] days should be scheduled."

the above statement is true because of the caveat that totally escapes you.. a very high single TSS day would tend to spike ATL and put TSB through the floor.. but if you were doing training days in-line with what you have been doing this wouldn't happen.. for a person who doesn't have a good grasp of this stuff it may seem contradictory.. but it really isn't.. you just don't understand this stuff though.. that is obvious..

since you seem to be more interested in parsing words and winning arguments over tiny points that have more to do with poor writing skills than content or meaning.. than actually discussing cycling training and physiology.. I guess from now on Ill just do like everyone else and just ignore you.. you're too hard headed to learn anything and to ignorant to impart anything on anyone so I think I'm pretty safe to just ignore your posts..

this doesn't have to be some combative pissing contest.. we can share ideas and discuss.. even vigorously at times, but you need to understand the limits of of your knowledge and understanding.. you have to understand that somethings are just your opinion or your understanding and that understanding might be wrong sometimes.. and if you don't know something for sure then maybe it's better to phase it as a question or qualify it as 'I think" or 'I believe'.. if you say 1 + 1 = 3.. people are going to call you on it.. and that's a good thing because we don't want the spreading of misinformation. there are a lot of smart, knowledgeable people here and you have show your knowledge of lacking in many areas.. your enthusiasm for the sport is great, but you need to stop being so defensive and combative.. we are all here to learn and pass on anything that we might be able to contribute.. why are you getting caught up in this petty pissing contest BS? crazy! you need to open your mind.. you'll be a better person for it..

 

[An old Guy]

You seem to miss the point of the quotes. The point of the quotes was to compare your use of TSS to the correct use of TSS. TSS has nothing to do with how hard a ride is, how much training stress you are subjected to, or how much effort is expended. TSS (and those related concepts - CTL, ATL and TSB) has everything to do with recovery period.

It only has to do with how much glycogen has to be replaced and the time frame necessary to replace it.

---

TSS is a poor measure of the recovery period because it does not include a number of other factors such as muscle fiber damage but it does not claim to include those factors.

---

I gave you Dr. Coggan's definition you should be able to determine that all I have said is consistent with that definition and what you have said is not.

---

I am still waiting for you to produce a 10 year old who can produce the torque necessary to produce 500w.

 

[An old Guy]

You seem to miss the point of the quotes. The point of the quotes was to compare your use of TSS to the correct use of TSS. TSS has nothing to do with how hard a ride is, how much training stress you are subjected to, or how much effort is expended. TSS (and those related concepts - CTL, ATL and TSB) has everything to do with recovery period.

It only has to do with how much glycogen has to be replaced and the time frame necessary to replace it.

---

TSS is a poor measure of the recovery period because it does not include a number of other factors such as muscle fiber damage but it does not claim to include those factors.

---

I gave you Dr. Coggan's definition you should be able to determine that all I have said is consistent with that definition and what you have said is not.

---

I am still waiting for you to produce a 10 year old who can produce the torque necessary to produce 500w.

---

If I wanted to be rude to you, I would point out that a .75 IF is top of recovery/bottom of endurance and walk away. (That fact is from a paper by Dr. Coogan.)

But IF was not a good measure of how hard the 5 hour ride was for you. I will accept that the ride was hard for you. It is easy to beat yourself up in ways not accounted for in TSS or IF.