# How much TSS per week?



## soulfly_nyc

I notice that over the past few weeks I'm training about 500-600 "TSS" per week. In addition to my training, i race a 36-42 mile race on the weekend (but no powertap used since i am using carbon wheels sans powertap). I'm guessing that my total weekly TSS is around 700-800. 

This training load is a significant increase from my early season. 

Is this a good training load for a competitive Cat 4? I have noticed that every 3 weeks or so i fatigue to the point that I need an active recovery rest week. 

Thanks


----------



## Undecided

soulfly_nyc said:


> I notice that over the past few weeks I'm training about 500-600 "TSS" per week. In addition to my training, i race a 36-42 mile race on the weekend (but no powertap used since i am using carbon wheels sans powertap). I'm guessing that my total weekly TSS is around 700-800.
> 
> This training load is a significant increase from my early season.
> 
> Is this a good training load for a competitive Cat 4? I have noticed that every 3 weeks or so i fatigue to the point that I need an active recovery rest week.
> 
> Thanks


First, I'd be shocked if you get a 200 TSS in the 36-42 mile road race (I'm assuming it's a road race). That said, feeling like you can maintain it for three weeks and then need an easier week broadly matches a fairly common style of training schedule.


----------



## soulfly_nyc

Thanks Undecided.

Yes, you are probably right about the 200 TSS in a road race...just a bad guess, maybe.

Maybe 150ish? I've had 1h30m workouts with 140TSS, and so i'm guessing that a race of similar time would be more TSS, right?


----------



## Undecided

soulfly_nyc said:


> Thanks Undecided.
> 
> Yes, you are probably right about the 200 TSS in a road race...just a bad guess, maybe.
> 
> Maybe 150ish? I've had 1h30m workouts with 140TSS, and so i'm guessing that a race of similar time would be more TSS, right?


Doesn't Training Stress of 100 equal one hour of normalized power at CP60 (in other words, an hour as hard as you can go)? You probably can't continue to ride that hard for another 30 minutes, which is what you'd need to do to get 150 TSS in 90 minutes. Unless you are very experienced and have a really exceptional mental state, I would guess that 140 TSS in 90 minutes is not something you'd do in training (I'd guess that's about limit for a 90 minute race, but that's just a guess). Which is all another way of saying: You probably need to retest what you're using as your CP60. You're most likely stronger than you think (which, unfortunately, means your TSS over a recent period is probably lower than you think).


----------



## soulfly_nyc

Undecided said:


> Doesn't Training Stress of 100 equal one hour of normalized power at CP60 (in other words, an hour as hard as you can go)? You probably can't continue to ride that hard for another 30 minutes, which is what you'd need to do to get 150 TSS in 90 minutes. Unless you are very experienced and have a really exceptional mental state, I would guess that 140 TSS in 90 minutes is not something you'd do in training (I'd guess that's about limit for a 90 minute race, but that's just a guess). Which is all another way of saying: You probably need to retest what you're using as your CP60. You're most likely stronger than you think (which, unfortunately, means your TSS over a recent period is probably lower than you think).


Hmm, i'm not sure of the formula for calculating TSS. Anyone?

Neither my average nor my normalized wattage were greater than my 60 minute LT on the training ride where I measured 140 TSS in 84 minutes...found a 2nd workout where I did 154TSS in 87 minutes... Maybe there's some quirk with my Powertap?


----------



## STARNUT

I think your FTP is set to low.

Starnut


----------



## soulfly_nyc

STARNUT said:


> I think your FTP is set to low.
> 
> Starnut


Hmm, my average wattage was way lower than my last FTP field test #'s...

Wouldn't my average wattage be much higher than my last FTP if set too low?


----------



## Undecided

soulfly_nyc said:


> Hmm, my average wattage was way lower than my last FTP field test #'s...
> 
> Wouldn't my average wattage be much higher than my last FTP if set too low?


I think TSS is based on normalized, not average, wattage, but you see where this is going. And a silly question: Did you update the "Threshold" on the "Athlete Home" page after your last test? How are you determining your "Threshold"?

http://www.velonews.com/article/71991


----------



## iliveonnitro

soulfly_nyc said:


> Hmm, my average wattage was way lower than my last FTP field test #'s...
> 
> Wouldn't my average wattage be much higher than my last FTP if set too low?


Much higher? No.

But, something is definitely suspect. At first I thought you were estimating TSS from your HR, in which case I would tell you to multiple your IF by 0.925.

Do you have WKO+, or are you doing this manually/guessing?


----------



## Andrea138

FWIW, I usually range from 750-850 per week (according to Training Peaks) depending on the week. I usually follow a pattern of building for three weeks then taking a rest week (though it changes around during race season in order to accommodate race schedule)

I think that outside of top sprinting speed, I'd hold my own in a field of cat 4 men... my TT times are usually competitive.


----------



## stevesbike

I've hear 1000 TSS thrown around as an upper limit (see Coggan's comments here:
http://www.cyclingforums.com/power-training/298799-average-weekly-tss-2.html). 

I'd add that TSS is only partially revealing in itself and the real insights come from looking at the whole picture of related measures in the performance manager. For example, I suspect a lot of riders do not incorporate enough variation in their training load,don't drive down TSB far enough (like to -40) and then allow recovery etc. One thing I find interesting in some pro files (e.g, http://www.slideshare.net/TrainingPeaks/training-peaks-performance-management-chart) are the period of ATL nearing 200 TSS/D followed by recovery and form.


----------



## Shaggybx

Thanks Steve:thumbsup:


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

A Chronic Training Load of ~ 150 TSS/day is generally acknowledged as an upper sustainable limit, although that does not often correlate with best performances which tend to come from lower CTL levels.

As to how much TSS/week you need, well that depends on the stage of season, what your training focus is, your current CTL and stress balance and what you are trying to achieve.

In general ramping CTL by 3-8 TSS/day per week is a medium term sustainable increase in load for general aerobic fitness development phases and does not generally require canned recovery periods. But ramp rates will vary during race prep and racing phases, generally plateau or be negative and what is sustainable for one rider may not be for another. Much depends on rest of life factors.

The higher your starting CTL the more TSS is required to lift CTL by a given fixed rate.

e.g. to go from a CTL of 30 to 35 TSS/day would require ~ 440 TSS/week
40 to 45 ~ 510 TSS/wk
50 to 55 ~ 560 TSS/wk
60 to 65 ~ 650
70 to 75 ~ 720
80 to 85 ~ 790
90 to 95 ~ 860
100 to 105 ~ 930
110 to 115 ~ 1000
120 to 125 ~ 1070


----------



## G A /\/\ /\/\ A

iliveonnitro said:


> Much higher? No.
> 
> But, something is definitely suspect. At first I thought you were estimating TSS from your HR, in which case I would tell you to multiple your IF by 0.925.
> 
> Do you have WKO+, or are you doing this manually/guessing?


I am getting this from wko+.


----------



## soulfly_nyc

Thanks everyone. Is there a place that i can look up formulas for TSS and CTL?


----------



## stevesbike

soulfly_nyc said:


> Thanks everyone. Is there a place that i can look up formulas for TSS and CTL?


check out the power training forum on cyclingforums (the link I put in above should be the one below). It contains extensive discussion of these terms and the rationale behind them:

cyclingforums.com/power-training/298799-average-weekly-tss.html


----------



## soulfly_nyc

stevesbike said:


> check out the power training forum on cyclingforums (the link I put in above should be the one below). It contains extensive discussion of these terms and the rationale behind them:
> 
> cyclingforums.com/power-training/298799-average-weekly-tss.html


Very cool. Thanks.


----------



## BooBah

Wouldn't the answer at least in part depend upon how you are accumulating that TSS?

How would you determine if it's enough, not enough, or just right? Race results? Improvements relative to established performance benchmarks?


----------



## TedH

From the racing and training with a power meter book; TSS = ((s*NP*IF)/(FTP*3600))*100

s= workout in seconds

If I run a 90min workout at the upper end of threshold, that gets 122 TSS; 120min gets me 162. I put this in XL and that way I can figure out how much I'm getting for a given workout to get a good, rough estimate for planning.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

TedH said:


> From the racing and training with a power meter book; TSS = ((s*NP*IF)/(FTP*3600))*100
> 
> s= workout in seconds
> 
> If I run a 90min workout at the upper end of threshold, that gets 122 TSS; 120min gets me 162. I put this in XL and that way I can figure out how much I'm getting for a given workout to get a good, rough estimate for planning.


That's nice but you wouldn't be able to sustain an effort at the upper end of threshold* for more than about an hour.

* being 100-105% of FTP


As for the formula, it's a bit easier expressed this way:

TSS = IF^2 * duration(hours) * 100

Where
IF = NP/FTP


----------



## soulfly_nyc

Thanks. What does the abbreviation "NP" stand for?


----------



## STARNUT

Normalized power 


and 




your FTP is still set to low.







In my experience (personally and the guys I coach) the "average" amount of sustainable TSS/week comes out to about 700 ish. Thats a 52 week average. This covers guys from cat 3 to pro track, mountain, and road.

That is not to say that you cannot have 1200 TSS weeks. It's possible but highly unlikely that you'd be able to do that for weeks on end.

Also, we are making a _huge_ assumption that your FTP is set correctly. It's not uncommon for guys new to PMs and uncoached guys to have FTP set to low or WAY to high. Either one is going to throw off TSS scores, which in turn throws off ATL, which in turn throws off CTL, which in turn throws off TSB. However, it does feel good to roll up to a start line and say that your CTL is at 110, and then promptly get dropped by someone with a score much lower.

In theory the minimum amount you could ride and get 700 TSS/week is 7 hours ( I hope that much is obvious). Since no one can actually do that, it's a floor. Even if you're including your races in there it's pretty difficult to maintain that on low hours. 

Pay attention to your IF scores. I'm willing to bet (free analysis time) that some where you have a file (or 5) that have a 60min IF score of 1.05+. How much _time_ is your 700-800TSS worth, including racing? I could care less about miles.

Starnut


----------



## iliveonnitro

STARNUT said:


> ...
> In my experience (personally and the guys I coach) the "average" amount of sustainable TSS/week comes out to about 700 ish. Thats a 52 week average. This covers guys from cat 3 to pro track, mountain, and road.
> 
> That is not to say that you cannot have 1200 TSS weeks. It's possible but highly unlikely that you'd be able to do that for weeks on end.
> ...
> In theory the minimum amount you could ride and get 700 TSS/week is 7 hours ( I hope that much is obvious). Since no one can actually do that, it's a floor. Even if you're including your races in there it's pretty difficult to maintain that on low hours.
> 
> Pay attention to your IF scores. I'm willing to bet (free analysis time) that some where you have a file (or 5) that have a 60min IF score of 1.05+. How much _time_ is your 700-800TSS worth, including racing? I could care less about miles.
> 
> Starnut


Going on what Starnut said, 12-13hrs/wk of mostly solo/small group rides (with a couple races) will get me to 700 TSS.

I somewhat disagree with Starnut that the yearly sustainable TSS from cat3 to pro is 700. It's much lower for cat3's (mine was about 550 after a crappy winter as a cat3) and some cat2s, but I know that I (and with that, everyone above me) can average 800/wk with some consistent training. It takes dedication, but it can happen. No doubt that 700TSS average per week is a good number to shoot for, especially for sustainable growth. Remember, at that point, you're looking at increasing weekly training hours from 12 to 15 to 20 to 25hrs/wk with each passing [length of time] due to FTP increases.


----------



## STARNUT

given enough time anyone can go over 700 a week. If you have 35 hours to train it's going to be high just because of sheer volume. I have several "pros" that only do 700-800 a week in the "build" parts of the year. 

I know you know this but TSS if the great leveler and is hugely individual. Since it is based of FTP a Cat 1's 700 TSS is significantly higher in terms of Kj turnover than a 3. There is a point at which, as Coggan would say, "alls you can do is alls you can do".


A pretty popular formula with a lot of guys is a 4 or 6 week section of SST and Tempo that looks like

700 - 700 - 1000 - 700

or

700 - 700 - 650 - 1100 - 650 - 800.

both of those will average out to just over 750 ish a week. Of course each of these is made of entirly different workout to achieve different things but the point remains; I have a few guys that raced downers grove and this is their staple diet. They are _cooked_ after one of these cycles.

I've always advocated that fitness is never static and it's always going up or down. Because of that small tweaks in the program can make large difference 14-42 days out. Thus the reason I advocate a coach  

I hate using this example but look at the Tour data we have from last for the some of the Columbia riders. Those guys were pulling monster days. You can see it in the HR data from the start and the end. Combine that with the one descriptive word they each used (tired) and it doesn't take a genius to figure out............ you can't have 1000 TSS weeks (that are real anyway) back to back to back.... even the Pros get tired.

The first thing I think when I hear someone say their CTL score is "over a 100" I roll my eyes a bit that or they have a bunch of time of their hands. If your FTP is set correctly and your watching closely and your actually doing something other JRA in zone one for 30 hours a week......... it's not.

Starnut


----------



## Undecided

STARNUT said:


> The first thing I think when I hear someone say their CTL score is "over a 100" I roll my eyes a bit that or they have a bunch of time of their hands. If your FTP is set correctly and your watching closely and your actually doing something other JRA in zone one for 30 hours a week......... it's not.
> 
> Starnut


I don't think over 100 is unrealistic for somebody who's dedicated to their training and has ~16 hours/week for it (and has time for recovery and is willing to take real recovery weeks), so how many hours is "a bunch of time"?


----------



## STARNUT

I routinely see 100 with 20-22 ish hours a week I routinely see 75-85 on 15.

Alex said it best above, CTL composition does itself not lead to performance. In that, a CTL of X does not lead to good results. Particularly if the FTP your CTL has been based on is incorrect. If you have routine systematic error (think an entire block of training) how long does it take before your PMC chart goes from an informative tool to a pretty graph of what you *think* you are? I'll never understand why people are so hung up on making the blue line "go high" without so much as a passing glance at the pink or the yellow line. If CTL was the only indicator of future race performance, the person with most amount of time would win; easy. Very, very rarely do I see any talk about what actually made the "blue line go up". 

In a way, PMs are a blessing and a curse. I see guys some obsessed CTL and "making it to 100" that they will forsake high end (L5-6) fitness in favor of SST rides, since by in large, an SST ride will garner more TSS points than a dedicated VO2 interval ride. But hay, your CTL is high.

I always tell my guys, not all TSS is created equal and a watt is a watt.

100 on 16 hours a week as a 52 week rolling average (or less than 52 for a typical offseason build) is pretty much busting your ass and only doing TTs and crits.

Starnut


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

I have previously been over 100 CTL. Not for long and working 1.5 jobs at the time.
It's possible and not from stupid big hours either.

An IF of 0.75 will earn you 56 TSS/hr.

That's 12.75 hrs/week @ average IF 0.75 = 700 TSS

14:25 hrs @ 0.7 IF = 700 TSS
10.9 hrs @ 0.8 IF = 700 TSS

I should also add that it also resulted in best ever form, winning races and on the podium at masters nationals.
But you need to choose carefully when to overload and it's not a focus on volume per se but on the power you generate specific to your target events that matters


----------



## iliveonnitro

starnut - I think everyone here knows that CTL composition is more important than the raw CTL number; that's not at all what we're questioning. Alex said, in the post right above, what we are getting at.

Also, an athlete who only has a CTL of 75-85 on 15hrs/wk needs to reevaluate his own composition (or race goals in his category). Even you are saying that composition is more important than the raw CTL #. Those would be some easy miles.

550TSS/wk = 79CTL
TSS=time*IF^2*100, IF=sqrt(TSS/time/100)=sqrt(550/15/100)=0.606.

If your weekly IF is only 0.606 for the season, your composition is wrong.


----------



## Undecided

iliveonnitro said:


> If your weekly IF is only 0.606 for the season, your composition is wrong.


And CTL 100 at 20-22 hours/week (a set of numbers offered above) is an even lower IF. 

Alex hints at something very important in his remark about working 1.5 jobs while he was at 100+ CTL---I know that really having genuine recovery time makes a huge difference in how much training load I can sustain (for myself, I can compare this year to last year to see how much of a difference that has made). It's important that any one rider (and coach) figure out how much of a training load s/he can take (or needs), and I'm disinclined to think people should be too much weight on others' anecdotal observations about TSS sustainability.


----------



## STARNUT

:lol: my last post didn't have the tone I'd had in mind. It should've looked like I was agree with you. 

You're 100% correct that most people, in this conversation, know that composition is important but _most_ people don't. There is still that old-school volume = speed thought out there, even with the advent of SST and PMs.

Starnut


----------



## iliveonnitro

STARNUT said:


> :lol: my last post didn't have the tone I'd had in mind. It should've looked like I was agree with you.
> 
> You're 100% correct that most people, in this conversation, know that composition is important but _most_ people don't. There is still that old-school volume = speed thought out there, even with the advent of SST and PMs.
> 
> Starnut


Volume does equal speed...to a point 

Most recently, I'm falling back on the more traditional definition of "base." A big movement by a lot of WKO users (sorry to discriminate, but they are also the SST followers) feel like L2 rides should completely go to the wayside. They think that if you aren't doing at least low-end SST/upper L3 rides, it is a waste of time. L1, high L3-L7 only. L2 and low L3 is not worth the time.

Well, those zones exist for a reason and they are important. Are they important to someone only doing 4-10hrs/wk? Maybe not. But, long _steady_ distance riding is important to build capillary density, mitochondria, myoglobin, increase FFA utilization and glycogen stores.

Just keep it above 45% VO2max, which is the minimum exercise training-intensity for improving aerobic capacity.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

iliveonnitro said:


> Volume does equal speed...to a point


Yes, to a point that's right.

Pithy Power Proverb: "CTL = Fitness" 
applies quite well when building from relatively modest CTL levels. Until it doesn't  See here for an example:
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2008/11/ctl-fitness.html



iliveonnitro said:


> Most recently, I'm falling back on the more traditional definition of "base." A big movement by a lot of WKO users (sorry to discriminate, but they are also the SST followers) feel like L2 rides should completely go to the wayside. They think that if you aren't doing at least low-end SST/upper L3 rides, it is a waste of time. L1, high L3-L7 only. L2 and low L3 is not worth the time.


Not this WKO user. Steady endurance work still has its place. It isn't of course tooling along though, L2 is still good quality work.

Here's a chart showing the training levels, based on FTP and on MAP and the associated physiological adaptations.
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2008/01/graphical-representation-of-training.html

I think the point to make is that training levels are descriptive, not presecriptive, and that adaptations occur all along the intensity spectrum.


----------



## keebo

Hi to all this is my first post
I stumbled across this thread, 
I've had my SRM since August 2012 my TSS is running at
CTL = 124 TSS/d 
I have no rides/races > IF factor of 1.002 this was a handicap RR
rode mainly as a two up 1hr 19mins, also a short 4.5 min hill climb 
with IF of 0.99 
I have loads of questions but to start with
My Threshold watts are set at 277
Mileage is about 250/wk
Weight is 80kgs, age 55, max HR 165

Do you think my threshold is set correctly


----------



## woodys737

After reading this thread again I'd like to say:

1. Thanks to Starnut, Alex, Nitro and others who clearly have a good understanding of how to use the PM data to get the most out of training. Sharing your thoughts really helps those of us who don't have the same understanding gain valuable insight on how to better adapt our training.

2. As Starnut stated, it's easy to get caught up in making the blue line go up w/o considering quality of data. ie. making sure your FTP is accurate and up to date. My TSB gets pushed down pretty deep but, going off an inaccurate CTL has led me to ease up on the training for fear of training too much. Should I have been going deeper? Which leads me to...

3. I would like a coach for Christmas.


----------

