Sure we do, we just call them joules, usually expressed as kJ or converted to (kilo) calories. They’re all just measures of work.
1 Like
@Chris1982 and coincidentally if you look at the two rides, baird and your race, they have the same kjs.
1 Like
This is not correct.
TSS weights duration as it does (i e., linearly) because of lack of any solid data on how to weight it otherwise. The same weighting is used in the calculation of Banister’s TRIMP, Rusko’s EPOC, Foster’s session RPE, etc. It has nothing to do with how much energy is derived from oxidative vs. non-oxidative metabolism.
Note that I have shown (using data from my UT Austin days) that TSS is a decent predictor of glycogen utilization.
3 Likes
Yeah, you’re right, that was totally incorrect.
I guess it’s just how I rationalize it in my head with how it’s much easier to rack up big TSS numbers on a long, easy ride than a shorter, hard ride.
2 hours of endurance will get you ~100TSS while an all out hour will get you the same. But that 2 hours is going to be significantly easier from an RPE perspective. So I guess it’s not the TSS equation that weights it but rather just the precipitous drop in TTE above threshold and much higher RPE that makes the effort/TSS point higher for shorter rides.
1 Like
@all: I’m quite sorry about all this. Sometimes, I brain sorta ok, but then I really, really don’t words very guud! 
Again, I very sincerely appreciate all your time. Each of you has legitimately changed my understanding of the system, and therefore, improved the consistency I will be able to achieve in my training, going fwd. I do not want to keep missing days unnecessarily from being over cooked.
I totally understand now that TSS just is not meant to measure your net fatigue / damage after an all out sprint for 240 s, vs a 60 min ride @ 50%. It’s a tool to measure accumulated training stress.
But we all know damn well that we wouldn’t feel the same after a 30 - 45 min race vs. even a 3 hr recovery WO, even though TSS may be equal, and a few above have mentioned this.
I’m suggesting it would be cool to have a measure for this, if TSS is not it. Like below.
Dead out, bottom line: Although there is obvi some tom foolery in nailing the exact equation of the curve, and would vary massively rider-to-rider, I strongly think having this metric, and banking on it, and knowing that score would, of course, decrease linearly over time, as you recovered, would be extremely valuable.
Perhaps the RLGL is doing something sorta like this in the background… but… I’m like 99% sure it’s based on TSS, and ignoring this massive deficit / damage hole / whatever you want to call this.
I deeply hope below makes a shred of sense to at least someone, and that this helps clarify the mess in my head that I just couldn’t get out onto paper clearly. 
This could absolutely be used to produce scores for WOs that would be extremely, extremely different from TSS. This score might help riders who have extremely different abilities [ie rider 1 is very strong at TT; at or just above thresh, but terrible at sprinting, rider 2 has terrible stamina, but is an absolute watt monster in sprints, etc] to compare different WOs and get a feel for what “total damage” scores each of them would mean to the rider, and what kind of recovery might be needed afterwards / how well a given WO would suit them, and fit into their current Training Plan, and whether they would be ready to hit it hard again at the next WO.
Edit to add: Actually, you could probably nail a pretty rider-tailored curve by forcing a rider through a ramp-ish test, where they rated RPE at every step. That data could be used to customize their personal curve, and then would forecast pretty accurately their exact “fatigue / damage profile”, for any given future WO.
You don’t have to miss workouts unnecessarily. Just listen to your body. I honestly thing this RLGL is a bad idea. Without fully understanding it, a rider might assume is the end all be all. Everything is suggestions. If you feel you can do a hard ride, do the hard ride. If you feel you should go easy that day, go easy that day, regardless of what RLGL is suggesting.
I personally would use RLGL as a reminder to reflect as opposed to act. If I see yellow or red on a workout day, I should consider why it might be saying that and think about how I feel, then make an informed decision for myself.
1 Like
You’re trying to drink from a fire hose right now. There is simply too much to get acquainted with to expect to have a grasp on it in a day or two, let along try to come up with shortcomings in the current understanding/technology. It takes time just to become semi-conversant in this stuff. And from there you only just begin to realize just how much you still don’t know. But that’s ok, we are also accumulating experience in how our own body responds to certain efforts under certain conditions.
Right now you are both learning the endurance/training concepts and gaining experience. Don’t discount the importance of experiential learning as part of the process of understanding.
1 Like
@daness40 yes, exactly!! Thank you for your comment, and I agree; listen to your bod.
The issue is when looking at poss WOs in the future, and trying to gauge the “total damage” taken on in a given WO, and thus recovery the rider would need.
After thinking about it a bit, I think the ramp-ish test + ranking RPE at every step would produce a pretty damn accurate customized rider curve, against which it could be pretty accurately calculated.
But honestly, even this shot-in-the-dark curve is going to do some much more interesting and valuable numbers than straight TSS. [Which has it’s own, very valuable, but separate, use.]
EDIT: To add: I mean, there’s a very obvious reply, along the lines of “You just need to learn what WOs are hard for you, and it takes time.” but that’s not super helpful… and personally, while I’m absolutely in love w TR now, I spent my first 6 - 12 mo on the platform struggling to learn how to stay out of the hole and stay consistent!!
I almost quit the platform, like three times. Glad I didn’t! But not having to walk that road would certainly be preferable…
There are standard tools out there that can help, but keep in mind that even for the same person if you look across different seasons, what you are asking about will depend on fitness at that time.
You posted this:
Which tells me nothing, in terms of the questions you are asking.
Here is another fire hose for ya…
Below is a drop ride / practice race broken into
- 20 minute ride from home to the start, into headwind, at .84 IF
- 12 minutes waiting for start
- 38 minutes hard .97 IF effort with group into a strong headwind
- 4 minute regroup
- 40 minutes slightly harder .99 IF effort with a tailwind (not much drafting) including ride home
Hour and 40 minutes moving time. 152 TSS.
Key things I look at post-ride in WKO… and I’m trying to paint a picture but not providing full context
Energy System Impact and Training Impact Score (TIS) Training Impact Score in WKO5
- Aerobic 6 out of 10, good stimulus to drive adaptations without too much fatigue
- Glycolytic/Anaerobic 10 out of 10, drive adaptations at high cost (high fatigue)
- would need to write comments about how often I could push those 8-10 out of 10, and then we could debate if that was good training during racing
Relative VO2max stimulus
- 24 minutes above 85%
- 16 minutes above 90%
- very strong stimulus for myself
- example: late base targets for structured workouts are 8-12 minutes, during build 14-20 minutes, this is a race ride
- these are rough estimates, but useful for comparing workouts and on weekly basis
dFRC
- “only” went deep 3 times in this practice race
- “only” as opposed to a structured above threshold workout where I might have intervals that go deep say 8 times, here again we could debate what type of training makes sense during race season
Time in Zone
- using iLevels, where FTP/FRC is basically level 5 or vo2max
- strong “vo2max” stimulus which we saw above
MMP vs 90-day, 1-year, and All-time Bests
- nothing to see here other than this was a strong effort from ~2 minutes to 40 minutes (relative to recent workouts and practice races)
Again all of this needs to be taken in the context of where I was at in the “big picture”
Cursor for the above ride is about 75% thru the timeline. More traditional view from TP:
You might notice I wasn’t ramping up training load. When you switch from base to race, its common to trade off intensity for volume, another way to see that:
The last 3 bars don’t include the 4th month at the end of my race season (which is in PMC). Point being:
- 3 months base
- 1 month start to race plus an unplanned week off
- 3 months practice racing on weekly drop rides
And that was on top of the prior year building up to support that level of consistent hard efforts.
This post should be overwhelming.
And incomplete.
And I’m not showing some other graphs/charts, etc.
Some of it is data to help inform feelings. Some of it is big picture to remind myself where I’m at, what I’m possibly capable of, and some of it helps me understand how hard I pushed myself.
Various people will find issues with this post, and I’m not here to defend it. I’m not a coach, I’m simply trying to explain there are existing tools that help paint the big picture and allow self-coached athletes make better decisions on training.
You wake up, get on the bike again, and after warming up you either got it or you don’t. If you don’t, adjust your training and be consistent as it pays dividends. Right now, I couldn’t do that practice race posted above. When I got started the folks with experience would say “If you are getting smoked, and you are properly fueling and hydrating, you don’t have the fitness yet so suck it up buttercup and slowly build your fitness. Eventually you’ll get there.”
Both with a coach and self-coached I’ve found myself on the verge of over-reaching at the end of hard training cycle. In my world that was by design, and it juiced super compensation. The trick is knowing when to do them. When motivated, the hard part is holding yourself back, slowly building the 3 week cycle to a crescendo, to drive super compensation and the adaptations to happen. My best cycles have usually ended with big rides (or harder 3+ hour rides) at the end of the 3rd week, timed to achieve some level of over-reach knowing that I’m going into a rest week.
Patience is a virtue. I didn’t learn this overnight. Over time I accumulated an understanding of the individual elements of the picture, how they relate, how they behave, etc., etc.
Sorry for rambling, hope there is something useful for you.
2 Likes
@WindWarrior this is spectacularly informative, thank you a ton for taking the time to post this. Will take me a few hrs to fully digest; going to go through all of it, and extensions, etc. EDIT TO ADD: Only 10 - 15 mins in, this is absolutely fascinating stuff!! 
And, I think, possibly exactly along the lines of what I was asking about / thinking about!
FWIW it took me years to slowly learn how to analyze both individual rides, how rides are put together to form blocks, and blocks to form seasons.
1 Like
Tim Cusick calls this “training rhythm”, which is a great way to describe the ebb and flow, I think.
2 Likes
@WindWarrior so do you use WKO5 to plan & build your WOs and run them on a Garmin or something, and also use it to plan out your blocks, cycles, and seasons? Or TrainingPeaks, and / or combo of other[s] ?
TrainingPeaks, and workouts sync to Garmin. WKO for analyzing rides, prior seasons, etc.
1 Like
@WindWarrior really fascinating stuff. Is there a website, eBook, etc, that you’d recommend as a “for Dummies” type intro, smash-info-as-quick-as-possible-directly-through-the-forehead-into-the-brain type situation, to get versed in this kind of stuff?
Or nah, not really, just jump onto their respective websites; TP & WKO, and smash through the FAQs & guides?
Be patient, there is no smashing.
Unless you have no job, and can treat this as a full-time, only 1 class, semester or two in college.
For starters one easy to read book:
- Scientific Training for Endurance Athletes (Skiba)
And one more challenging book:
- Training and Racing with a Power Meter (3rd edition Allen, Coggan and McGregor)
Start with the easy to read book.
And in parallel, go to YouTube and start watching the WKO Webinars.
1 Like
Thank you very much. I am going to do all of the above. Already have T&RWAPM, but haven’t started it.
[Did read Friel’s Cyclist’s Training Bible.]
Note strongly taken on be patient; thank you. Needed that.
@WindWarrior so you use Training Peaks free version just to log workouts, and WKO5 to analyze, & plan future WOs ? Like you’re building WOs in WKO5, and adjusting / modifying next planned WOs based on performance during recent WOs ?
Or you just by now have a collection of saved workouts in Training Peaks free, tried and true, that you use over and over, and just progressively adjust difficulty ?
Any experience w trying out intervals.icu vs. WKO5 ?
To be more concise: I get you’re using WKO5 for all analysis of completed WOs.
But how do you then take those analyzed results from completed WOs, and:
1 - Plan & adapt the next few WOs intensity vs. the few recent WOs’ results?
and
2 - Plan larger training blocks ?
yes I use wko analyze and make decisions about upcoming workouts.
I’m paying for TrainingPeaks, and I have got a good size library of workouts and plans.
This weekend I manually created the first 4 weeks of the CTS Intermediate Gran Fondo 9-12 hour plan (previously available on Strava), took about 10 minutes of copy&pasting and editing while watching Tokyo Vice (had to look up a lot to read subtitles). Then dropped it into a time when CTL was around where mine is right now:
That basic skeleton worked really well for me in 2016 and 2017. Ramping CTL by 3-4 each week with a plan like that worked for me back then, and with a coach custom plan (different workouts). Edit: I’m only using that as a skeleton for load progression and a focus on improving muscular endurance. Am in the process of rearranging and building around Wed/Sat group rides.
Intervals.icu visually looks better, but TrainingPeaks I’ve been using it for 10 years and its fine.
1 Like
@WindWarrior very very cool. Super interesting stuff, thank you again.
So when you’re doing VO2 work, how does the system handle adaptations / dialing-in based on performance, WO to WO ?
Does it make recommendations / changes to scheduled future WOs ? Or nah; that’s the WKO part; you take a look at the last one, and make changes based on the analysis ?