I just usually add about 100 TSS every time I go to the gym, It boosts my self confidence.

geotechjohn wrote:

For reference, the suggestions in the book are RPE for the weight lifting session * 10 = TSS, or (weight lifted / 2000 ) * 10 = TSS.

But with the devices available to measure acceleration / speed (and thus power / force) surely something better could be developed?

I think one major challenge is that TSS is designed to mostly consider steady-state efforts, whereas weight-lifting (unless in large sets of low-load reps**) consists of episodic exertion at power levels much above what's aerobically sustainable. In some cases, little power is exerted but large forces are (the limiting case being isometric exercises where there is no motion and thus no power). Viewing weightlifting through a mean-power lens would miss this, but it would be captured well if you had data on displacement of weights at sub-second time scales -- you might see power varying between 1000+ W and 0 repeatedly for a set of squats, for instance. Ideally, the TSS for this would capture that the "normalized power" was wayyy above the simple time-average power.

** for bodyweight exercises, I thought about this a bit some time ago. Some musings below:

general bodyweight lifting through a power lens:
(numbers specific to me; I'm 5'11" 160 lb so rescale appropriately!)


power = (m*g*dz)*f
m = body mass, kg
g = gravitational acceleration, 9.81 m/s^2
dz = change in *center of mass* (COM) height in the power phase of one rep, m
f = frequency of reps, 1/s


Pushups: dz ~ upper arm length is ~0.3 m, vertical displacement of COM is probably about 0.6 times this or ~0.18 m because COM is around top of hip bones
->power = 130.5*f ~65 W for 0.5 pushups/second (30/minute)


Pullups: dz ~ 2 times upper arm length ~0.6 m
->power = 435*f ~72.5 W for 1 pullup/(6 seconds) (10/minute) or 43.5 W for 1/(10 s)


Squats: dz ~ upper leg length is ~0.6 m, COM displaced less than this because the lower leg is vertically displaced little, and the upper leg less than the upper body, so say 0.5 m
-> power = 363*f ~ 180 W for 0.5/s (30/min) or 240 W for 0.67/s (40/min)


So, clear from this why pullups are *hard* and their frequency should be low (or time per rep long) if they are being done to improve aerobic power output from back muscles.


Lunges probably displace the COM a similar amount vertically to squats (maybe slightly more since one leg drops a lot, but are difficult to do as quickly just from a form standpoint -- so perhaps power ~400*f but f might be 1/(3 s) so power ~133 W which is not that taxing for me on a leg-dominant motion using big muscles.

Easier to earn that beer by biking at 250 W for 10 minutes IMO!

Yeah, I don't use a PM

I just use a standardized point system adapted from the Big Kahuna Challenge

1 Mile run = 1 Beer
4 Mile Bike = 1 Beer

Other than that "Did you swim today? Yes? you get ONE beer" "Did you do weights today? Yes? You get ONE Beer"

Given that you're in the 4 dozen and <something> club like me, I'd be derating that by about 1/2. Unless I skipped a meal in order to have more beer...not that there's anything wrong with that.