So what’s the answer then?
A separate TSS graph and PMC for the various energy systems (or at least, separating aerobic vs anaerobic)?
David, same problem with today’s TR workout not syncing from Strava to intervals.icu:
Strava Activity ID: 2606225671
7th August was the last time it synced correctly.
I doubt anyone is saying that it’s the be-all and end-all, just one of a number of useful tools to have at your disposal, should you want to use it. While it may not be perfect, it’s the best thing out there right now and has become the defacto standard for measuring training load.
What I don’t really get is why there is so much resistance to including a feature that is, to be frank, almost trivial to implement.
Mike
3 Likes
Maybe…
Or maybe they can be high level markers for planning and executing a thoughtfully developed training plan? Possibly even a plan developed by/for a serious athlete? 
Not sure when it started, but the “my training metrics, plan, device, whatever is better than yours” mentality is pretty tired. Training is an art and a science. Figure out what works for you and have fun.
4 Likes
@robertbb There are many of us “serious cyclists” that very much disagree with . . .
In addition to me (I just finished a 4 week block of 3,000 TSS; and do 30,000/yr), there are district, national and world champions with extremely knowledgeable coaches that do as well. The important thing is that you need to understand what’s behind the numbers - that is what is the block of training that you have been doing that led to these numbers, and if you are comparing them to a prior block, you need to understand what went into those as well (TP Premium makes this very easy to do with the calendar and dashboard in adjacent tabs). However, if you do understand your training, then these charts become very useful. On a personal level, I could give you a lot of examples to demonstrate it.
However, serious cyclists also use WKO4/5 metrics in addition to just the PMC. And, to answer your question, it is Time-in-Zone (TiZ).
TrainerRoad uses Andy Coggan’s pre-2015 approach to prescribing workouts, known as Coggan Classic Levels where all training zones are measured as a % of FTP (both below and above FTP). For such users, WKO4/5 provides TiZ reports by week or month that track how long (hrs:mins:secs) you have spent in each training zone.
In 2015, Andy Coggan (along with fellow researches) demonstrated that work above threshold (FTP) should be individualized, and as such, is measured using his newer iLevels. So WK04/5 also provides similar reports measuring Time in Coggan iLevels (which I use).
3 Likes
But this is exactly the point. CTL/ATL/TSB are not worth much on their own. I agree completely with you that you need to know what goes into those numbers (ie. TiZ) because otherwise they are just as useful as what TR has already provided with the rolling 6wk TSS average.
I feel the biggest issue with CTL/ATL/TSB is they seem complicated enough that they give the basic user some idea that they are making progress if the numbers are growing, but mislead many because they don’t understand what is going into them.
EDIT:
An example why CTL can be dangerous;
Summer is going to wind down soon, most in the northern hemisphere are going to have a high(er) CTL due to outside rides. We’re going to buckle down and start really focusing on structured training mainly done again indoors. CTL/ATL/TSB is going to all plummet. What is this telling us?
Are we less fit than we were during the summer months? Are we less fast?
If you’re following a TR structured plan you might actually be getting MUCH quicker, but you’ve cut out the filler TSS you get from outdoor rides where you may have no structure and may not be really making any improvements. But your CTL/ATL metrics aren’t going to show that. They’re just going to show a rider a downward trend and people are going to make of that what they will. And what an uneducated rider MAY do is think they need to heap more workouts/stress into their plan indoors…which could lead to some pretty poor results.
Even Coggin who made the metrics has commented about its effectiveness and is pretty clear to point out the caveats, the issue is many don’t know what those are and the metrics end up being misused.
3 Likes
Particularly with your added “edit” section, it appears that your and my understanding are the same. And I do understand your point all too well regarding the decline in CTL when going from outdoor-based riding to indoor (e.g. pre-TR last summer my CTL was mid 90s and dropped to low-80s on TR). However, the converse is also true and this is where the real PMC (not a 6 week rolling average) has real value.
For reasons not important to explain here, I decided to go on a real fitness ramp (mentioned above - 3000+TSS/4 wks). That block was filled with huge TSS days (e.g. “race pace” 60-100mi w/6-12kft). ATL was in the 110-125, CTL was climbing from 60s to 80s. The real TSB (which I kept between -7 and -50) was extremely useful input for determining subsequent rides (e.g.how many days rest; how hard/long could I go). A 6 week TSS rolling average would not have been a useful metric. (and FWIW: Based on my age and related recovery requirements, I use the ATL constant at 14 days.
I use WKO5 and keep an eye on TSB for the day around key events, but i also know that I have raced well at a -25 and a +15. So I take that for what it’s worth.
I don’t want to belabour the point, i think we are both agreeing with each other. CTL/ATL/TSB can be used, but going back to the original comments about adding it into TR analytics, I would argue for the purpose of making users faster, it’s not the right metrics to be pulling as it’s far to easy to misuse than use properly.
I would honestly far rather see them emulate the TiZ metrics like they have in the ride analytics and have that in a summary dashboard format for the trailing 6 weeks (and could even create a forecast 4wks due to plans) which would undoubtedly be more useful for all riders basic or advanced for helping to assess their training and planning, as you could really see where you were focusing your time as you move through B/B/S and start to move from aerobic or sweet spot to more pointy anaerobic efforts.
you are a better competitor than me. -10 is about my lower limit 
yeh, i’m a wko4/o5 user as well. and even there, i am looking for more (see wko5 thread).
I’m coming around to see why you (and perhaps others) see TiZ as the next step in TR analytics for TR users vs. PMC (that I have always viewed as a foundational need). After watching the difficulty that Coach Chad had in the podcast explaining CTL (IMO not one of his finer moments), I’m realizing that all of these metrics are a slippery slope for the TR business model, including its “sweet spot” (target) user.
Depending on who your are putting into the “advanced” user category, I’m “quite sure” that, based on statements of direction by TR in other threads, that TR will not provide the calendaring and analytics that this group of user “needs”. I, for example, love TR for its workouts (although I’m looking for advancements in its search) and workout creator (for modifying these workouts and creating my own; looking forward to WCv2!), and podcasts and the Forum (!!!), of course. But both TR calendaring and analytics would be a big step backwards for my training planning and workflow as compared to TP Premium and WK04/5 that I currently use.
1 Like
Just that.
1 Like
This is cool
1 Like
I agree with the comments on this thread re the limitations of TSS, CTL, ATL, TSB etc… But there is some value in tracking those numbers. If I look back on my own training history, the times when I have had the highest CTL are also when I have had my highest FTP (estimated by Intervals.icu based on a max 7m or so effort) and when I have posted my best times on my favourite climbs.
For sure TSS doesn’t give enough credit to v02max intervals and rewards volume over intensity but it still has some value IMO.
Have a look at the way Golden Cheetah calculates AeTISS and AnTISS. I can’t completely get my head around the code, but the general gist is that it uses Time in Zones, and for each of AeTISS and AnTISS it allocates a weighting (three values each with a lot of decimal points, to constants a, b and c) and then provides a distinct number (I think somewhat analogous to CTL) for Aerobic and Anaerobic work. Would be great to see intervals.icu do this!
This is amazing. I’ve been tracking this same data with an obnoxious Excel chart and I think I’ve gotten screwed up (my own fault) with the data and now don’t really trust it. However, I just linked my Strava profile with your tool. This is legit. Many thanks for sharing.
Thank you @davidtinker
4 Likes
There are certain CTL targets that TP suggests for different type of events and training without understanding what’s your target CTL and TSB will look like in your race day is like riding with no power meter. I use TR plan but I have to manually put week’s TSS to TP to see if I meet the ATP’s current projected CTL. And yes, I have to manually adjust workouts when I don’t meet what’s prescribed by ATP. Using TR workout editor is a pain, that’s one area where IMO development should be focused.
@BadSanta What is “ATP”? I have been reading through this and am not sure what the acronym refers to?
I assume it is not adenosine triphosphate It does not seem to make sense in this context.
Is it some reference to Training Peaks?
1 Like
It means: All The Phitness
2 Likes
In this context - Annual Training Plan
2 Likes
Doh! was not that obvious thanks.
Hi there,
Just curious, is it possible to add the FITNESS/FATIGUE/FORM status to my TrainerRoad dashboard?
Since TrainerRoad has all my training data, I guess it is not too hard to get my fitness status right.