Does anyone track "different" TSS differently?

Since “not all TSS is created equal”, I’m wondering if it would be worthwhile to track it differently based on some criteria (>FTP vs <FTP, etc)? And if so, does anyone do that?

Like most riders, I find that TSS/CTL/ATL, etc tracks nicely with Zone1/Zone2/Zone3/Low Zone4 type sessions. By “tracks nicely”, I mean it more or less accurately reflects how I feel subjectively, and at the end of a training block if I’ve ramped up properly I’m usually fitter in some way.

Thanks for any thoughts,

(not talking about tri here, as of course running and swimming stress would be accounted for separately)

I’ve always been of the opinion that this statement relates to the quality of the session rather than the intensity. The TSS calculation, whilst not perfect, does try to take into account the difference (or similarity) of workouts of differing lengths and intensities.

Having said that…

Does 2 hours at 71% FTP have the same physiological cost as an hour record attempt? Surely that depends on the rider and exactly where their aerobic threshold sits.


1 Like

I wonder if you could use IF and TSS together to form one metric

1 Like

Not TSS, but TiZ (Time in Zone)

I look over the course of a training block by week to see what the progression of time in a particular zone looks like. The TR plans seem to equally weight increasing TiZ, intensive (power in zone) and extensive strain (length of interval in zone) although I haven’t explicitly run the numbers.

For example, a TR Build plan will work you towards longer VO2 intervals at a higher power in the VO2 zone and more time in the Vo2 zone per week.

1 Like