Training Load

by mechgt

Downloads: 12,931 (47) • Reviews: 18

Version:

2.0.7

Updated:

Aug 26, 2015

Training Load Plugin

Postby smaryka » Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:08 pm

Apologies for the long-winded post, but I thought I should chime in with what I've been reading about Intensity Factors for calcuting TSS.

According to Coggan's book "Training and Racing with a Power Meter", the TSS value of 100 was derived as a baseline measure by using a typical cycling activity -- racing a 40km time trial -- done at threshold HR or watts. Generally speaking a good cyclist can do 40km in an hour, hence one hour at threshold = 100 TSS.

Coggan also lists some Intensity Factor (IF) values in his book to multiply against the base TSS for other workouts (either above or below threshold).

Level 1, Active Recovery = 0.75
Level 2, Endurance = 0.75-0-85
Level 3, Tempo = 0.85-0.95
Level 4, Lactate Threshold = 0.95-1.05
Level 5 and higher = 1.05-1.15 etc.

TSS = (s x W x IF)/(FTP x 3600)
where s is seconds, W is watts produced, IF is intensity factor, and FTP is your tested functional threshold power (you can assume that your threshold HR is a roughly equivalent measure to FTP). Multiply the fraction by 100 to get the actual TSS value.

Since mechgt's plugin for Training Load appears to be based on minutes (a factor of 60) rather than Coggan's baseline (a factor of 100) -- i.e., an hour at threshold would count for 60 TSS points in the plugin instead of 100 -- what I did was multiply each of the IF numbers by 1.67 to get my values for my HR chart.
Image

To make things even more complicated for runners, I was reading a bit about rTSS here, http://kriskarsten.blogspot.com/2008/02 ... ormat.html , and the idea that the cyclist's 40km TT is similar to the runner's 10k race. And that time spent at threshold as a runner is harder on your body than as a cyclist so that needs to be taken into account. Therefore, taking my 10km running time as 42 minutes (which is 70% of 60 minutes), I could then divide my calculated cycling intensities by 0.7 to get my running intensities for TSS.
Image

For example, my zone4 has an IF of 1.0 according to Coggan. Translated for the Training Load plugin, my cycling zone4 is 1.67 X 1.0 = 1.67. For running, it's (1.67 x 1.0)/0.7 = 2.39.

Hope this makes sense for people (and I hope I've done the math right! But I did check my results against some 5k running races and 1 hour cycling races and the calcuated TSS scores seem to make sense).
smaryka
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:38 am
Location: United Kingdom

Postby draystex » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:05 pm

I've been playing with the TL factors to match my WKO+ CTL/ATL/TSB results based on power. I've got things pretty close which allows me to use one as a proxy for the other when I don't have data (e.g. I only have HR when mountain biking). There's no magic formula, just trial and error and there are outliers but on average I'm getting close results. Two cases where I'm seeing outliers - both relate to the nature of power vs HR and the way TSS/TRIMP are calculated:

1. Short max effort (12x30 sec.) intervals on the trainer - power is easily recorded, while HR never gets a chance to rise given the short nature of the interval. TSS in WKO+ captures the intensity, TRIMP in TL does not. TRIMP < TSS by a significant amount

2. I had a week where my HR just did strange things - I cannot match the WKO+ and TL data at all without upsetting the rest of the data. I'm putting this down to the variability of HR which can be significantly influenced by environmental factors (fatigue, sickness, stress, heat, humidity etc.).

Interestingly, even with these outliers on specific workouts, the over result (as measured by current ATL/CTL/TSB values)is pretty close.

Current WKO+ CTL/ATL/TSB: 55.3/87.4/-32.1
Current TL CTL/ATL/TSB: 55/83/-28

Thought I'd share my results and see if anyone else is trying the same. The result is a stepped curve with inflection points rather than one that is perfectly smooth. Also note that given the time of year, I haven't been doing many workouts that take me above LTHR (161) so above the 160-165 zone has not been tested and compared yet (why those zones are missing).

Factors:

Zone HR Factor
1 0-100 0
2 100-105 0.25
3 105-110 0.3
4 110-115 0.35
5 115-120 0.55
6 120-125 0.7
7 125-130 0.9
8 130-135 1.1
9 135-140 1.3
10 140-145 1.4
11 145-150 1.6
12 150-155 2.1
13 155-160 2.2
14 160-165 2.4
15 165+ 3

Max HR (cycling) = 174, LTHR = 161 Resting HR = 50[/img]
draystex
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:20 pm

Postby HENNES » Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:36 pm

So Im reading, reading, reading as probably many people here do now - just to throw in a practical question.

This are numbers from 2 Marathons from me:

Image

Can somebody who is familar with this indicators tell anything from the plain numbers of the outcome of the 2, i.e. which is faster/slower. Or would one need more data before the event to judge?

thanks
rgds hennes
- kickbiking with FR 305 and STs 3

runner´s map ... EURE Karte für Laufveranstaltungen - zum MITMACHEN!!!
http://www.runnersmap.info
...mehr als DREI TAUSEND Laufveranstaltungen!
User avatar
HENNES
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:55 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany

Postby smaryka » Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:01 pm

Well Hennes, you left the min/km part uncovered so I could see which one was faster. :wink:

But I would say that the one with the higher TSB value should have been your better race, just based on your being less fatigued and more well-rested. The one that you ran with a -15 TSB means you probably weren't rested enough -- hence the higher HR yet slower time.
smaryka
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:38 am
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Switch » Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:04 pm

HENNES wrote:Can somebody who is familar with this indicators tell anything from the plain numbers of the outcome of the 2, i.e. which is faster/slower. Or would one need more data before the event to judge?

My guess would be, that you were faster in the second one. CTL is higher (better trained) and ATL is higher as well (better rested / recovered from your training), resulting in a higher TSB (before).

Oh, and your average speed is higher the second time as well, and the distance was less :lol:

But... Your TRIMP score, your average HR and maximum HR in the second one are lower. So here is a question back at you: how do you explain that?

Switch
Switch
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:25 am
Location: Switzerland

Postby Gunnar » Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:58 pm

I would agree with Switch for the same reasons. And would go on to say that the heart rate and TrImp score was lower because his body was better conditioned, for the same percieved effort.

But, more info prior to the event would give a better indicator.
Gunnar
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 11:47 pm
Location: Rochester, MN

Postby mechgt » Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:20 pm

HENNES wrote:So Im reading, reading, reading as probably many people here do now - just to throw in a practical question.

This are numbers from 2 Marathons from me:

Image

Can somebody who is familar with this indicators tell anything from the plain numbers of the outcome of the 2, i.e. which is faster/slower. Or would one need more data before the event to judge?

thanks


I would guess the 2nd:
- CTL higher
- TSB positive (higher)
- ATL being higher here is not relavent I don't think, I might be wrong though; and note higher = MORE fatigued, but I think it's relative to your CTL, thus TSB is the real indicator.

Looks like you had to work harder for a similar result because TRIMP is quite a bit higher (I think fatigue may be the culprit here).
Enhance SportTracks with Training Load, Fit Plan and more plugins at mechgt.com. Garmin FR310XT & iBike iPro
User avatar
mechgt
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA

Postby racerfern » Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:10 am

I too would say the 2nd event was the faster one. If this is a major event for you, then your TSB needs to be higher than -15 at the start. That indicates fatigue (not well rested).
Fernando
racerfern
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:49 pm
Location: East Atlantic Beach, NY

Postby ildibad » Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:07 pm

problem report :

- while creating future events with TRIMP=xxxx , TSB doesn't accrue. (TSB before = 0)

- dynamic zone doesn't work : it is always using "norm" .
Running with :
acics kayano 18 - Sports tracker pro (android) - polar wearlink bluetooth
my dog : Ithaq (border collee) (Shimly - a happy mixing - retired in 2012)
ildibad
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:56 am
Location: Belgium - Liege - 50°39N - 5°35'E

Postby HENNES » Fri Jan 16, 2009 2:02 am

Before I come back to the marathon puzzle - i just ran into a different question:

See this chart:



Image



I wonder why TSS does not go into the upper part of the scale. Ok, its says HIGH at the "1" and at the "2", but I think those were nearly ultimate session as

1. was a HM ran at PB with averaging 87% HFmax
(see for details in the table underneath the picture)

2. was 35km at 70% HFmax and lastet 3:08

Interesting to learn that both are judged for about the same level - which probably is right, but what shall I do to reach the upper part of the scale if thats not enough?


@mechgt:
BTW: as those numbers in the table and the grey square in bottom right are highly dependend on the user settings, which we are all experimenting with (and changing around all the time) I think it would be a good idea to list the actual settings (ATL CTL) in that grey square, so other people do notice and one can remember self, please - there seems to be enough space. Maybe aditional "data" from settings page, can be displayed there.
rgds hennes
- kickbiking with FR 305 and STs 3

runner´s map ... EURE Karte für Laufveranstaltungen - zum MITMACHEN!!!
http://www.runnersmap.info
...mehr als DREI TAUSEND Laufveranstaltungen!
User avatar
HENNES
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:55 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany

And another question...

Postby Switch » Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

First things first: respect! Half marathon under 1:30 8)
What strikes me as odd, is the small changes in TSB. Example: 29.11. where TSB only changed 5 points. If I remember correctly (can't check right now) my TSB changes are much higher.
@Hennes: what zone settings are you using?

Switch
Switch
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:25 am
Location: Switzerland

Re: And another question...

Postby HENNES » Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:16 am

Switch wrote:First things first: respect! Half marathon under 1:30 8)
What strikes me as odd, is the small changes in TSB. Example: 29.11. where TSB only changed 5 points. If I remember correctly (can't check right now) my TSB changes are much higher.
@Hennes: what zone settings are you using?


Thanks for the flowers :lol: quite ok for an old elephant!

I read and changed a lot around last days - and as said before - the settings should be in the "picture" as otherwise nobody can analyze the data.

As per "the boss" I set a special HR-zone and tunded that as fine as possible by the automatic split - the factors are the standard as provided by TL.



Image



as you mentioned TSB - here is the chart and more table data.




Image



...going for a 30km run now and already looking forward for that spike :D
rgds hennes
- kickbiking with FR 305 and STs 3

runner´s map ... EURE Karte für Laufveranstaltungen - zum MITMACHEN!!!
http://www.runnersmap.info
...mehr als DREI TAUSEND Laufveranstaltungen!
User avatar
HENNES
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:55 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany

Postby clackerz » Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 am

I'm still only scratching the surface here on all the data and info available regarding reading, understanding and analysing the graph in this plugin.

However I'm currently attacking every ride differently and seeing how it affects the outcome.

So I'm sure I'm going to learn alot as I learn to utilise this plugin correctly.
Image
User avatar
clackerz
Contributor!
Contributor!
 
Posts: 1299
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 10:26 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Postby IanPV » Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:13 am

First things first: respect! Half marathon under 1:30 Cool
What strikes me as odd, is the small changes in TSB. Example: 29.11. where TSB only changed 5 points. If I remember correctly (can't check right now) my TSB changes are much higher.


I think it is because Hennes is using such a long constant in his ATL calculation (21 days). This will mean that really big efforts won't have the same weighting that they would if he was using a shorter duration (say 7-11 days) to calculate ATL.

As for scoring really high on TSS, you should take up cycling :wink: it is a lot easier to ride for 5-6 hours at 75% max HR than it is to run for that length of time I think!
IanPV
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 1:21 pm

Postby Switch » Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:10 am

IanPV wrote:I think it is because Hennes is using such a long constant in his ATL calculation (21 days). This will mean that really big efforts won't have the same weighting that they would if he was using a shorter duration (say 7-11 days) to calculate ATL.

Oops :shock:
That ATL-21 might have been a result from one of my postings earlier on in this thread. The desired effect was to get Hennes' taper date three weeks prior to the event. Looking at his settings, this goal was not achieved.

@Hennes: to get to your desired tapering date, three weeks prior to your 1. February event, you should adjust your ATL constant to something like 16.

Switch
Switch
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:25 am
Location: Switzerland

Postby Stumpjumper68 » Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:13 am

Hennes wrote:
I wonder why TSS does not go into the upper part of the scale. Ok, its says HIGH at the "1" and at the "2", but I think those were nearly ultimate session as


TSS it's just another description of TRIMP. If you take a look at your full Marathon TRIMP (TSS)it shows 450 to >500 and means epic.

If you would like to get it higher rated you just need to set higher trimp factors :lol: just kidding
Image
User avatar
Stumpjumper68
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Bad Vilbel, Germany

Postby texmurphy » Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:53 am

IanPV wrote:As for scoring really high on TSS, you should take up cycling :wink: it is a lot easier to ride for 5-6 hours at 75% max HR than it is to run for that length of time I think!


HENNES wrote:@mechgt:
BTW: as those numbers in the table and the grey square in bottom right are highly dependend on the user settings, which we are all experimenting with (and changing around all the time) I think it would be a good idea to list the actual settings (ATL CTL) in that grey square, so other people do notice and one can remember self, please - there seems to be enough space. Maybe aditional "data" from settings page, can be displayed there.


Mashup below shows both the "EPIC" effects of cycling and what the Settings info would look like on the TrainingLoad view.
Image
User avatar
texmurphy
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:38 pm
Location: Maryland, USA

Postby mechgt » Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:40 am

HENNES wrote:@mechgt:
BTW: as those numbers in the table and the grey square in bottom right are highly dependend on the user settings, which we are all experimenting with (and changing around all the time) I think it would be a good idea to list the actual settings (ATL CTL) in that grey square, so other people do notice and one can remember self, please - there seems to be enough space. Maybe aditional "data" from settings page, can be displayed there.

texmurphy wrote:Mashup below shows both the "EPIC" effects of cycling and what the Settings info would look like on the TrainingLoad view.

Nice!!! That's pretty sweet, like the idea. I'll get that in there when I get a moment.
Enhance SportTracks with Training Load, Fit Plan and more plugins at mechgt.com. Garmin FR310XT & iBike iPro
User avatar
mechgt
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA

Postby texmurphy » Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:51 am

mechgt wrote:Nice!!! That's pretty sweet, like the idea. I'll get that in there when I get a moment.


I should have spent a little more effort and added the Accumulated distance graph to the chart window :wink:
User avatar
texmurphy
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:38 pm
Location: Maryland, USA

Postby mechgt » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:00 pm

ildibad wrote:problem report :

- while creating future events with TRIMP=xxxx , TSB doesn't accrue. (TSB before = 0)

- dynamic zone doesn't work : it is always using "norm" .

I'll be sure to take a look at #1.

What exactly do you mean doesn't work, and what is 'norm'?
- The intention is that the plugin will automatically calculate your factors based on HRresting and HRmax on the activity date. It'll probably look just like the data you had before, except as your HR range moves over time, the factors will drift with it and data from the past will not change. It uses the default factor profile, not anything that you setup manually.

You can test it by:
- turning it on and looking at the TRIMP for a particular event.
- change the previous day's (or whatever the last entry was prior to the activity) for your resting or max HR in the Athlete view
- You should notice that the TRIMP the the activities after the modification date have changed.

NOTE: TL uses LastEntrySince(date) to find HRrest and HRmax if this make my explanation any clearer.
Enhance SportTracks with Training Load, Fit Plan and more plugins at mechgt.com. Garmin FR310XT & iBike iPro
User avatar
mechgt
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA

Postby ildibad » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:41 pm

@mechgt:

Image

normaly, Training load should take the last zone (dated 7/12/2008). In fact, it take the other end (norme)

Image

Here, you can see what happend with the planned training

thanks for caring
Running with :
acics kayano 18 - Sports tracker pro (android) - polar wearlink bluetooth
my dog : Ithaq (border collee) (Shimly - a happy mixing - retired in 2012)
ildibad
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:56 am
Location: Belgium - Liege - 50°39N - 5°35'E

Postby mechgt » Fri Jan 16, 2009 1:36 pm

ildibad wrote:@mechgt:
normaly, Training load should take the last zone (dated 7/12/2008). In fact, it take the other end (norme)

Here, you can see what happend with the planned training

thanks for caring

Because you don't have SingleZone checked, TL will use the category associated with the activity. Check Single Zone and then select the category you want to use from the drop-down if you'd like to use a different zone for calculations.

If you're using dynamic Zone Factors, your Single Zone will only be used to define each zone range (Hi and Low heart rate values).
Enhance SportTracks with Training Load, Fit Plan and more plugins at mechgt.com. Garmin FR310XT & iBike iPro
User avatar
mechgt
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA

Postby HENNES » Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:31 pm

texmurphy wrote:Mashup below shows both the "EPIC" effects of cycling and what the Settings info would look like on the TrainingLoad view.


Well done, texmurphy - as usually "a picture tells more than a thousands words from me" :lol:

Looks like we got the boss in good mood (maybe he got some more sleep and less diapers changing)
- and need to push that a bit, so other answers have to wait - sorry to my "analysts" :lol:



Yep, thats was my wish list too - running 30k today I had a bit time to get some ideas so the boss will soon hate me.

So here is Hennes´ wishlist:

1.) As CTL and ATL are the most important settings, how about to superimpose them even on the chart itself - just a top line with the settings will do.


texmurphy wrote:added the Accumulated distance graph to the chart window


2.) Yes +1 thats very important for me also. As described above Im interested in some number like rolling 28d sum of distance, rolling 7-10 day sum of distance. Those need to be configurable.

As for the point of "information overflow": we already have that and we have configurable chart options so we dont see all things at the same time. A thin line representing each of these numbers shouldnt disturb that much. A scale could be put to the left axis as there is space.

As for the point TRIMP is similar information. I can tell much more of my kilometers and especially with using forecast I can see how much I still can add to reach a certain level. This is an important gauge for me to prevent injuries.


3.) Also I would like/need to see that number in the table.


4.) Talking of the table, I realized today, that most tables in STs can be copied (right mouse, COPY) into Excel very very easily. So far that doesnt work here. Maybe it wasnt planned as most stuff can be charted here, but sure some poeple do other stuff with those numbers and a simple copy of those numbers to excel would be great.


5.) Clicking on the chart and hitting a date with an activity selects that activity in the table below - nice - and draws a line down to the date - nice!

Hitting a date where was no activity shows nothing - unfortunately sometimes its not that easy to hit the correct date.

I suggest to allways show the table and not just a single day and highlight that day in the middle of the page if that would be possible.


6.) Clicking on the table hightlights that row nice - but how about that would result also in a marker line on the chart for that very date go up to the indicators?

If we would have that: Now scrolling through the table should move that line through the charts.


7. clicking on a "low number" indicator drops the line to the date, but doesnt "touch" any lines of higher indicators. How about to have that line allways stretch the full window size, so one can easy "eyeball" all lines for that date. Also might be interesting to show that number of other lines for that "line"/date.


Will give you a break now :lol: thanks for considering and hopefully will find some people who support one or the other point here.
rgds hennes
- kickbiking with FR 305 and STs 3

runner´s map ... EURE Karte für Laufveranstaltungen - zum MITMACHEN!!!
http://www.runnersmap.info
...mehr als DREI TAUSEND Laufveranstaltungen!
User avatar
HENNES
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:55 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany

Postby mechgt » Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:26 pm

HENNES wrote:So here is Hennes´ wishlist:

1.) As CTL and ATL are the most important settings, how about to superimpose them even on the chart

I think I can get them on there somewhere. I'll find somewhere the looks nice. Might be that little panel in the bottom right.
HENNES wrote:
texmurphy wrote:added the Accumulated distance graph to the chart window


2.) Yes +1 thats very important for me also... rolling 28d sum of distance, rolling 7-10 day sum of distance. Those need to be configurable... A scale could be put to the left axis as there is space.

3.) Also I would like/need to see that number in the table.

I hadn't forgotten about you here... I'll see if I can't come up with something on this. Can't do the left axis though, think you can only have 1 of those as far as I can tell. Just one of those things.

Anything that gets charted can/will be made available on the table.

HENNES wrote:4.) ...most tables in STs can be copied (right mouse, COPY) into Excel very very easily...

I'll have to look at how to do this. I think I can figure that one out, and it'd be good enhancement.
EDIT: COMPLETE
HENNES wrote:5.) Clicking on the chart and hitting a date with an activity selects that activity in the table below...I suggest to allways show the table and not just a single day and highlight that day in the middle of the page if that would be possible.

The intention here was if you select a range of activities, that range is shown in the table below, and that's going to stay the same.

However I can change it to where if you select a single activity, the 'highlight' just goes to that activity, rather than filtering all the others out. Sounds like a good idea to me.
EDIT: Looked at it, and this will not happen in the near future.
HENNES wrote:6.) Clicking on the table hightlights that row nice - but how about that would result also in a marker line on the chart for that very date go up to the indicators?

7. clicking on a "low number" indicator drops the line to the date, but doesnt "touch" any lines of higher indicators...

I think it'll be difficult to highlight the chart from selections made on the table, and sliding the chart around sounds a little confusing.

On #7 though, I didn't even notice this... I'll see if I can figure out why this chart doesn't highlight all of the data points in a vertical 'slice' of the chart.
EDIT: Looked at this, and still have no idea why it's different, but it is.
Last edited by mechgt on Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Enhance SportTracks with Training Load, Fit Plan and more plugins at mechgt.com. Garmin FR310XT & iBike iPro
User avatar
mechgt
Donated!
Donated!
 
Posts: 1370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA

Postby gerhard » Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:33 pm

smaryka wrote:Apologies for the long-winded post, but I thought I should chime in with what I've been reading about Intensity Factors for calcuting TSS.
.....
Hope this makes sense for people (and I hope I've done the math right! But I did check my results against some 5k running races and 1 hour cycling races and the calcuated TSS scores seem to make sense).


Really good post!
I have a similar feeling but have not enough good activities to compare for a high confidence answer. It is one thing to compare two cycle rides done in a certain way to comparing a cycle training and similar length run - I do them too differently.
A friend of mine (that is into triathlon, I am primarily a runner that bikes occasionally) and me agreed that since running is constantly bouncing it takes more effort from a all out run than a similar length all out cycling race. The developer of rTSS (Steve McGregor) does not agree though (as in your links).
rTSS is using normalized graded pace, similar to TSS for biking and GOVSS, not TRIMP, but the situation seem to be similar: Effect from running seems to be underestimated.

I like the "single zone", minimizing the corner cases but not bloating all other zone views.
It would be useful to apply factors to each category. Not so simple as a single setting though.

Side note: the plugin calculates Normalized Power. Normalized Graded Pace would be interesting. GPS2Power calculates some kind of "running average" and GOVSS (see physfarm.com) gives some kind of running score. WKO+ users seem relative satisfied, it would be interesting to have something similar in ST.
User avatar
gerhard
Contributor!
Contributor!
 
Posts: 2254
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:07 pm
Location: Sweden

PreviousNext

Return to Training Load

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron