TSS and training hours???

frenchyge

So I've gathered from some of your other posts. I think most of the more prolific posters here train for and race in local amateur circuits (RR and crit). Given the differences in time and resources available to me and others, I'm not sure whether it would be appropriate to focus on the same things that Pro and track riders do, but that would certainly help explain the differences (besides incompetence) in training approach. Keep in mind that it's winter here in the North, so there's not a lot of race stories to swap, and incremental improvements in 1-hr power or MAP are about all we have to cheer about at the moment.


I like to think that's my approach, too. Last year, when I joined this forum, I was looking for advice on training for a 120 mile orgainized ride (not race) over 3 mountain passes, which was my most aggressive undertaking to date. Here, I discovered the need to raise my sustainable aerobic power, and the importance of longer intervals at just over LT to accomplish that. This year, having just started racing, my racing goals involve the 40-60 mile road races and 35-45min criterium races in which I'll be competing. Still can't go wrong with a high LT power and MAP, which is my current focus, with more race specific short surges and recoveries, and sprints, as race season nears. My goal races aren't until June, but I'll start racing again in March.


Well, for me personally, this is my first winter with power monitoring, and power is certainly not a prerequisite for seeing good ride results. In the past 4 months since I've had my power monitor, I've seen my 1-hr power go up 5% and have been able to raise my training volume by ~60% without worrying about overtraining. That's all boring data stuff, but the reality is that I'm more confident that I can plan a series of workouts on paper and be able to complete them day-in and day-out, and have them be more aggressive and *more race specific* than I would have been able to do before. At the same time, those workouts themselves tell me how where my next training focus needs to be. For a self-coached rider, I'd say that's a lot of bang for the buck. When the results come in next spring, I'll be more than happy to share them here.

whoawhoa

But TSS is just part of what they are focusing on, not the whole thing. I would guess most of the posters also focus on functional threshold power, sprint power, the things that will win you races. Racking up TSS points is just part of how to maximize those things. I'm sure they recognize that what you do with those TSS points is also important. Also, I'm not sure there is a need to break down goals into "ride fast for 2 hrs, ride fast for 30 minutes, ride really fast for 5 minutes" because they're all related. Shouldn't nearly all training improve v02max and functional/anaerobic threshold (which limits all the above efforts)?

RapDaddyo

You ain't seen nothing yet! I actually think that we (competitive cyclists) have exploited about 10% of the potential value of power data on the bike for both TTs and mass-start races. I have only two goals: increase my sustainable power (1 hr MP, or FT, is a good summary measure) to my maximum personal limit and exploit my sustainable power to my maximum advantage in races. I plan to be able to ride a "perfect" race (subject to my sustainable power) by 5/13/06. As to my results, I only got back on my bike last March after a few decades of "retirement," but I think my results will speak for themselves next year. BTW, I have increased my FT by ~60% since last March, organizing my training rides exclusively with power goals.

peterwright

The only thing I am having trouble reconciling with TSS planning is that although I may be able to tolerate another hard session from a TSS point of view and overall training load, if I am feeling tired from today's workout then surely tomorrow's will be compromised. My training plan is all about being fully recovered from one hard session to complete the next one correctly. My TSS may indicate that I am fine to continue with another hard session but if I cannot complete if effectively due to fatigue then in my book it is better to ride a recovery session.

beerco's alias

Fergie,

I think you're making a lot of assumptions about a lot of people with just a little information in the form of people's postings on these boards.

What should I infer about you just from reading your last two posts on this forum?

acoggan

Try telling that to one of the top female road racers in the world this year.

acoggan

Never fear, there are ways of dealing with this issue:

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3331

And for Fergie's sake: a certain coach credits this approach with enabling one of their riders to nearly medal at World's on a course where they wouldn't be expected to excel.

n crowley

Is it wise for a person coming out of retirement to push himself to the limit so suddenly.

RapDaddyo

Probably not, but I have suffered no ill effects other than sore glutes in June-August. I don't actually think I am pushing myself that hard. I just ride hard one day and rest the next. If I get sore or have any other signs of overtraining, I'll back off. Until then, it's pedal to the metal. I think the human body is capable of far more than most of us subject it to.

frenchyge

It'll take a little experimentation to find your TSS limit. We all have days where low motivation, lack of sleep, psychological stress, etc. affects our performance on the bike, and a typical training plan doesn't account for those days. We still have to be flexible with the plan once it is written. Some residual fatigue may not affect your ride at all, a little more may necessitate a shorter or less intense ride, and lots may force a recovery day -- you'll just need to test it, a recovery ride is not always necessary.

Last winter I rode 4 days per week, S/S/Tu/Th. I assumed that a day of rest was necessary between workouts, and was a bit afraid to ride hard on back to back days. This year, after reading stories of what other people were doing, I tried riding 5/wk and found that I can ride for 2 or 3 days in a row. Sometimes you just have to test things out, but at least TSS gives you a way of relating a 2x20 workout to a Tempo ride to a VO2 workout, so you don't have to test every single combination.

Dini77

Playing devils advocate if i may (BTW - i don't deny the value of power based training/TT/pacing. I'm on the verge of putting my $$ down for for a PT SL laced to a set of DT Swiss RR wheels ) :

What incremental improvement would a 'well trained' person (ie reasonable way up personal development curve) with a 'well structured' training program and a coach expect to see via incorporating a PM into the mix? I've seen people throw up numbers about before & after PM, but how much of this is attributable to them just training smarter and with a more structured program?

RD - After such a long lay off the bike, i'd expect a large improvement in FT going from untrained to trained state. But you could have seen this order of magnitude via a well structured HR/RPE based program as well right? Maybe the time taken would be the difference.

The only thing i raise eyebrows at is when i see many posts out there from people equating PM as being the deliverer of big improvements when what it appears has actually happened is that people have more clearly defined their goals, have better structured their program and have a more consistent method of monitoring progress. The PM has facilitated the process rather than delivered the benefit on its own. I'm no expert and will probably be back here in a few months posting my power data and asking what it all means and then scratching my head furiously trying to comprehend Andy C, Ric & co's comments. That's my 2cents worth.

RapDaddyo

Play devil's advocate all you want. It doesn't bother me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dini77 What incremental improvement would a 'well trained' person (ie reasonable way up personal development curve) with a 'well structured' training program and a coach expect to see via incorporating a PM into the mix? I've seen people throw up numbers about before & after PM, but how much of this is attributable to them just training smarter and with a more structured program?

I have no idea. I have never attributed my improvement in sustainable power to my PM. Clearly, the reason for my improvement has been my training and perhaps I could have achieved comparable or greater improvement with a HRM or RPE. All I know is that a PM allows me to ride highly structured training rides with very specific goals of minutes by level, and overall IF and TSS. And, I have a tool to track and manage total training volume and intensity (TSS).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dini77 RD - After such a long lay off the bike, i'd expect a large improvement in FT going from untrained to trained state. But you could have seen this order of magnitude via a well structured HR/RPE based program as well right? Maybe the time taken would be the difference.

From FT=200w to FT=316w in 9 months? I'm glad to know it was so easily achieved that I could have attained the same result with any well structured HR/RPE program. Gives me something to look forward to if I really go at it right, maybe with a coach.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dini77 The only thing i raise eyebrows at is when i see many posts out there from people equating PM as being the deliverer of big improvements when what it appears has actually happened is that people have more clearly defined their goals, have better structured their program and have a more consistent method of monitoring progress. The PM has facilitated the process rather than delivered the benefit on its own.

I'm actually not making the point you are countering. I am talking about exploiting power data, for training and racing. There are two completely separate issues: (1) maximizing one's sustainable power; and (2) managing one's sustainable power in a race. Even if you argue that (1) can be achieved with or without a PM, I don't think that affects the value of (2).

frenchyge

The PM is a training tool. Don't trust anyone who tells you that a PM makes them ride their bike faster (except maybe as a pacing tool such as Rapdaddyo describes).

Dini77

I never said it was easily achieved (you still have to put in the hard training). All i meant here is when you're well down you're own performance curve, The initial rate of improvement is high and i dont think that having/not having a PM is the factor - it's the training program that's more important. You probably went from 200W to 250W pretty quickly and the rate of improvement may have slowed down since - don't know?

Sorry - didn't mean to imply that was what you said. It was more related to other posts out there i've seen when the question of how much improvement has been asked. I agree with your points 1 & 2 above. In the case of (2), i would think the greatest benefit a PM offers is in the area of pacing for TT's (no surprise you've invested so much time on this). Managing sustainable power via PM in a bunch race is a different story though (again, not implying you were saying this either)