TSS and racer category

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Is there any relationship between the category a racer is in (e.g. category 1, category 2, etc as in the "Training with a power meter" book") and the average TSS a racer can typically handle within each category?

I'm not thinking about TSS on a particular day, but is it possible to say that for example a caterogy 3 racer could handle 100TSS on average for weeks without running into problems, and a category 1 racer could handle 120TSS on average?

Is there any relationship between the category a racer is in (e.g. category 1, category 2, etc as in the "Training with a power meter" book") and the average TSS a racer can typically handle within each category?

I'm not thinking about TSS on a particular day, but is it possible to say that for example a caterogy 3 racer could handle 100TSS on average for weeks without running into problems, and a category 1 racer could handle 120TSS on average?It is probable that higher category riders will a have higher CTL than lower category riders (at least those lower cat riders who aren't burglars;) ). Part of this is capability and part of it is capacity (e.g. time contraints/availability). Part of it is the sheer necessity to train sufficiently to be competitive at the higher levels. And part of it is prior training history (what you've done before dictates to some extent what you can do next).

Two issues:

1. TSS is a score calculated as a function of i. ride intensity and duration and ii. your FTP. Hence you could rack up say 100 points in a 1hr TT irrespective of your category. So average daily TSS in that sense is not much of an indicator of your category. Just an indicator of how stressful your riding is relative to your own current functional threshold power capability.

2. There is a saying - "the more you train, the more you are able to train". By more I mean increasing your CTL (a measure of longer term TSS averages) both within a season and also season to season.

More training however still does not imply a rider's category (but assuming it is executed in a well structured manner, will most likely result in performance improvements).

There in lies the rub - you work hard building up TSS to lift your FTP - which then means you have to ride at a higher average power overall to score the same TSS! (but that higher average power is now no more "relatively stressfull" than before, since you are now a more powerful rider).

So I could have a high CTL but still be Cat 4. But I'd expect a Pro couldn't be one with a low CTL.

Two issues:

1. TSS is a score calculated as a function of i. ride intensity and duration and ii. your FTP. Hence you could rack up say 100 points in a 1hr TT irrespective of your category. So average daily TSS in that sense is not much of an indicator of your category. Just an indicator of how stressful your riding is relative to your own current functional threshold power capability.
Thank you for your reply!

I'm aware of what you're saying here, but I also recall from the "Training with a power meter" book a table where TSS for different types of rides were listed. One example is a ride (can't remember what kind of ride it was) which had a TSS between 200-300TSS, and one of the comments in the book was that e.g. Armstrong could do this day after day for three weeks and continue to get stronger, while it could seriuosly overreach the capabilities of a less fit rider.

My interpretation of this was that fitness must somehow correlate with how advanced rider we're takling about.

Maybe the TSS vs category correlation is not that great, but is there then some other indicator (e.g. TSS vs rider "experience", or TSS vs rider recovery abilitiy) that could be used to assign a particular training load to riders on different levels?

_________
CycleFast

Thank you for your reply!

I'm aware of what you're saying here, but I also recall from the "Training with a power meter" book a table where TSS for different types of rides were listed. One example is a ride (can't remember what kind of ride it was) which had a TSS between 200-300TSS, and one of the comments in the book was that e.g. Armstrong could do this day after day for three weeks and continue to get stronger, while it could seriuosly overreach the capabilities of a less fit rider.

My interpretation of this was that fitness must somehow correlate with how advanced rider we're takling about.

Maybe the TSS vs category correlation is not that great, but is there then some other indicator (e.g. TSS vs rider "experience", or TSS vs rider recovery abilitiy) that could be used to assign a particular training load to riders on different levels?

_________
CycleFastSee my previous paragraph 2.

See my previous paragraph 2.OK, I got it. :rolleyes:

So, if I were to train e.g. myself and set up a training program that fits my abilities, my best approach is to just start training and see kind of TSS I'm able to handle without overreaching?

If I then learn that I could e.g. do 110TSS a day without any problems, I could then use that knowledge to plan the rest of my workout regime based on a 110TSS average?

_________
CycleFast

OK, I got it. :rolleyes:

So, if I were to train e.g. myself and set up a training program that fits my abilities, my best approach is to just start training and see kind of TSS I'm able to handle without overreaching?

If I then learn that I could e.g. do 110TSS a day without any problems, I could then use that knowledge to plan the rest of my workout regime based on a 110TSS average?

_________
CycleFast That's a way to look at it. But this approach would be irrespective of training intensity though.

Say one's FTP during the CTL buildup is around 250w. In order to maintain it one needs to train at (slightly under or slightly over) this level often enough to elicit adaptation. That will require this rider to recover enough to meet these challenging workouts.

In other words, I believe it's easier to pile in some low level CTL. Fortunately for elite riders, this lower level CTL corresponds more closely to their actual racing intensity (during stage races). Therefore it appears to me (though I may be wrong) that focussing on raising CTL may be more beneficial for elite riders as they get involve more and more into stage events that are longer and longer.

In other words, I believe it's easier to pile in some low level CTL. Fortunately for elite riders, this lower level CTL corresponds more closely to their actual racing intensity (during stage races). Therefore it appears to me (though I may be wrong) that focussing on raising CTL may be more beneficial for elite riders as they get involve more and more into stage events that are longer and longer.
Hmm. While I agree that there's an intensity where it's easy to pile on alot of CTL, I don't think it's exactly "low level." See the sst threads where riding at a moderate subthreshold intensity seems to be the best way to raise training stress. I would also guess there is a strong correlation between FT and CTL in this scenario, which would benefit pretty much any endurance cyclist, from Cat 5 on up.

Hmm. While I agree that there's an intensity where it's easy to pile on alot of CTL, I don't think it's exactly "low level." See the sst threads where riding at a moderate subthreshold intensity seems to be the best way to raise training stress. I would also guess there is a strong correlation between FT and CTL in this scenario, which would benefit pretty much any endurance cyclist, from Cat 5 on up. Did I say low level?

I meant lower level. Thanks Whoawhoa.