Is it worth to buy this software to track my power training? I already use the software that came with my Powertap. Also Trainingbible. Is it worth it to spring another $75 for this? My trial is about to run out.
I’ve only used the trial version but if I had a power meter on anything but my trainer I’d definitely buy it. I think the Tss graphing and Normalized power is really useful. It’s too bad we don’t have a similar tool for the other sports. I’ve been thinking about making a Tss algorithm for all 3 sports - I guess you could use TRIMPS (which is what Tss is based on) but it would seem more logical to base off of LTHR for different sports rather than Max HR.
- Dennis
I think so, but it depends on how you use the software. If all you want is to keep a record, the PowerTap software is plenty. If you want to be able to pick rides apart, and track specific aspects of your training (i.e. the TSS function or tracking your 20min w/kg over time) though, CP is without equal.
Scott
I think I basically understand TS and IF numbers, but could you quickly explain to me in laymans terms how you would use them as a triathlete mapping progress and changing your workout plans.
Mahalo.
I think I basically understand TS and IF numbers, but could you quickly explain to me in laymans terms how you would use them as a triathlete mapping progress and changing your workout plans.
Mahalo.
“IF” tells you, after your workout is done, what it is you just did. On a group ride, pace and wattage is all over the place, from zero to 400. And for all different durations. “Average” wattage just does not tell you what sort of intensity you just trained at, since efforts above a certain level induce a different level of physical adaptation that easy efforts. Coggan came up with the Normalized Power algorithm (details on cyclingpeakssoftware.com) to account for this.
The IF number is the ratio of Normalized Power to your estimated Functional Threshold Power, or 40k TT power. If, for example, you are constantly at IF = 0.90, you are headed for overtraining or burnout.
The main advantage to the IF number is if you are following a “best bang for your buck” training regimen, where every workout has to count. If you are banging out huge mileage at low intensity (ala Gordo B.) then it’s not so useful.
As an example, my long ride data a few weeks ago showed that my normalized power was right where I wanted it to be. At the same time, the ratio of normalized to average was higher than I wanted. This told me that the 4-hour ride had too much variation in effort; I had wanted a nice steady endurance workout. The next week, I took care to keep the effort more evenly paced, while still working hard on hills. The normalized power ended up the same, but the average came up. This was more what I had in mind, and tells me to keep doing that ride that way.
My first few “fartlek” rides of the year came in with lower normalized power than I wanted to achieve, so I worked to up the intensity to get the training effect I wanted.
I think TSS is most useful for committed cyclists that are training hard every day on the bike. Life as a triathlete is more complicated since we are balancing fatigue in three sports – only one of which is reflected in TSS. I’ve only once run the TSS up high enough to where I knew I needed a day off. And that was after a 106 mile ride, and I knew without any software that I needed a day off.
I think it’s worth it - I like the range of data the software can display for files as well as the search or find functions - very useful for picking out how much time you spend over your LT for eg in a given ride or workout. Also, the normalized power is a good tool as well.
I no longer use the powertap or SRM software, just cyclingpeaks. In addition it can display computrainer performance files, so you can view those without the CT coaching software (at least the non-encripted versions if I understand it correctly, although I’ve yet to come across an encripted file).
Joel