TSS question

Sep 23, 14 2:25

Post #1 of 18 (3032 views)

Using this online TSS estimator, I'm getting the following TSS for these 2 workouts.

http://spinloose.co.uk

20 min threshold / FTP 32 TSS
16 min threshold 4 min anaerobic threshold 38 TSS

The 2nd workout would be done at FTP with every 5th minute done at anaerobic threshold.

I find the 2nd workout far more hurtful than doing 20 min at threshold and don't feel only 6 extra points reflects this.

I don't have a real power meter, but am using a Wattbike

FTP 260 watts, the anaerobic efforts at 320 watts.

FTP based on .93 of 20 min power.

It isn't so much the efforts over 300 watts that gets me but how much harder they make the threshold minutes.
Is this online calculator correct? Or do I find the anaerobic efforts harder than most?

Last edited by: Richard H: Sep 23, 14 4:00

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 3:57

Post #2 of 18 (2967 views)

20'@100% are 20/60 * 100 * 1^2 = 33 TSS points

16' @ 100% are 16/60 * 100 * 1^2 = 26.7 TSS points
4' @ 123% are 4/60 * 100 * 1.23^2 = 10.1 TSS points

So workout 2 is approximately 37 TSS points, the calculator is correct.

Re: TSS question [nchristi] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 5:18

Post #3 of 18 (2916 views)

Thanks.

So, if I extend the FTP workout to 23min 30sec I get 38 TSS.

Now that would be considerably easier than doing the 20 min effort at FTP, with minutes 4 60 second efforts spaced out minutes at 4, 9, 14 and 19, which also scores 38 TSS.

I could easily do 6 days of 2 x 23.5 min at FTP, but I wouldn't be able to do 6 days of 2 x 20 min with the 4 hard minutes incorporated, and if I did complete them, I would be in a far more fatigued state, but only get the same TSS score.

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 5:54

Post #4 of 18 (2878 views)

You can't really calculate TSS the way that estimator is doing it. You are throwing an estimation (the calculator) on top of an estimation (tss) and wondering why the result isn't entirely in line with another estimation (perceived effort)

=)

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: TSS question [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 6:39

Post #5 of 18 (2824 views)

But would the estimated TSS be any different if I used an SRM on a turbo and did the same workouts?

Re: TSS question [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 6:59

Post #6 of 18 (2789 views)

jackmott wrote:

You can't really calculate TSS the way that estimator is doing it. You are throwing an estimation (the calculator) on top of an estimation (tss) and wondering why the result isn't entirely in line with another estimation (perceived effort)

=)

It's the last part that is really the problem. That is, one really shouldn't try to compare how difficult a race or training session feels while actually doing it to the lasting physiological strain that it creates. This is why, e.g., Foster's session RPE approach has you wait 30 min after a workout before rating it.

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 7:00

Post #7 of 18 (2784 views)

Richard H wrote:

But would the estimated TSS be any different if I used an SRM on a turbo and did the same workouts?

I don't understand the question.

If you took a power file and dumped it into golden cheetah or WKO you can get the actual TSS. The result would be different than the estimator.

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: TSS question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Sep 23, 14 8:43

Post #8 of 18 (2721 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

jackmott wrote:

You can't really calculate TSS the way that estimator is doing it. You are throwing an estimation (the calculator) on top of an estimation (tss) and wondering why the result isn't entirely in line with another estimation (perceived effort)

=)

It's the last part that is really the problem. That is, one really shouldn't try to compare how difficult a race or training session feels while actually doing it to the lasting physiological strain that it creates. This is why, e.g., Foster's session RPE approach has you wait 30 min after a workout before rating it.

I find one session harder than the other, during, 30 seconds after, 30 minutes after, and 24 hours later, and they have a far greater cumulative effect on me as well.

Re: TSS question [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 1:44

Post #9 of 18 (2599 views)

jackmott wrote:

Richard H wrote:

But would the estimated TSS be any different if I used an SRM on a turbo and did the same workouts?

I don't understand the question.

If you took a power file and dumped it into golden cheetah or WKO you can get the actual TSS. The result would be different than the estimator.

I'm asking if I used an SRM and downloaded the session into WKO or Golden Cheetah if the TSS would be much different, would it score the session with the 4 hard 60 second efforts higher than the estimator?

The power read out on the Wattbike is far from smooth, so the power I see is alternating between over and under the target power. Think it displays power every 3 seconds. Would Normalised power come out higher due to this?

Does TSS score a given wattage higher later in the session, i.e. Would it score 105% FTP higher at the end of an hour than at the beginning?

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 3:29

Post #10 of 18 (2565 views)

Richard H wrote:

Andrew Coggan wrote:

jackmott wrote:

You can't really calculate TSS the way that estimator is doing it. You are throwing an estimation (the calculator) on top of an estimation (tss) and wondering why the result isn't entirely in line with another estimation (perceived effort)

=)

It's the last part that is really the problem. That is, one really shouldn't try to compare how difficult a race or training session feels while actually doing it to the lasting physiological strain that it creates. This is why, e.g., Foster's session RPE approach has you wait 30 min after a workout before rating it.

I find one session harder than the other, during, 30 seconds after, 30 minutes after, and 24 hours later, and they have a far greater cumulative effect on me as well.

And yet others complain that normalized power and hence TSS overweights intensity. It brings to mind the famous saying "You can please all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time..."

In any case, I've been saying since 2006 that I don't think attempting to invent ever-better/ever-more-complicated ways of quantifying training stress is the "way forward". Like others before you, though, I encourage you to give it a go if you think you can come up with a better way.

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 3:31

Post #11 of 18 (2564 views)

Richard H wrote:

Does TSS score a given wattage higher later in the session, i.e. Would it score 105% FTP higher at the end of an hour than at the beginning?

No, the only metric that attempts to account for such effects is rTSS.

(Note that others complain because TSS isn't additive across segments...but as your comment illustrates, from a theoretical perspective it shouldn't be.)

Re: TSS question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 4:10

Post #12 of 18 (2535 views)

I suppose if you did a few intense efforts off a ride of mostly 50% FTP it is possible that might be the case, but then I suppose people could spend their time deliberately training in ways which might expose the limitations of the TSS approach instead of training sensibly and using the system to their advantage.

I wasn't aware that running TSSr did account for the affects of a given pace getting harder later in a session.

I can see how cycling would be less fatiguing but why did you decide to ignore it for cycling? Was it to avoid unnecessary complication or is there a physiological reason?

Re: TSS question [nchristi] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 5:15

Post #13 of 18 (2500 views)

What metric do you use for running and/or swimming (HR, 10k pace, 400m Swim TT) to calculate TSS?

Re: TSS question [micaza75] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 5:32

Post #14 of 18 (2487 views)

micaza75 wrote:

What metric do you use for running and/or swimming (HR, 10k pace, 400m Swim TT) to calculate TSS?

On the run I use threshold pace. I use 15k pace since it's about 1hr.
On the swim I use my 1500m pace. This isn't quite right but close enough.

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 5:59

Post #15 of 18 (2475 views)

AOG?

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 6:51

Post #16 of 18 (2447 views)

Richard H wrote:

I'm asking if I used an SRM and downloaded the session into WKO or Golden Cheetah if the TSS would be much different, would it score the session with the 4 hard 60 second efforts higher than the estimator?

yes, not sure how much more though.

Quote:

Would Normalised power come out higher due to this?

not much no

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: TSS question [Richard H] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 7:44

Post #17 of 18 (2409 views)

Richard H wrote:

I wasn't aware that running TSSr did account for the affects of a given pace getting harder later in a session.

I can see how cycling would be less fatiguing but why did you decide to ignore it for cycling? Was it to avoid unnecessary complication or is there a physiological reason?

Principle of parsimony.

Re: TSS question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Sep 24, 14 8:09

Post #18 of 18 (2380 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

Richard H wrote:

I wasn't aware that running TSSr did account for the affects of a given pace getting harder later in a session.

I can see how cycling would be less fatiguing but why did you decide to ignore it for cycling? Was it to avoid unnecessary complication or is there a physiological reason?

Principle of parsimony.

Razor sharp as usual Dr Coggan. Good to see William of Ockham is still relevant.

Last edited by: Richard H: Sep 24, 14 8:11

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.