Modifying the Norwegian approach to lower mileage

No, my only contribution to this area is the original TSS.

If you scale the equations you can better compare the proportionality in which the load is assigned across the spectrum of intensities that are generally applicable to runners. With LT as the basis, per Coggan's approach, you can see how TSS is over and under assigned (below and above LT, respectively), in relation to Daniels and Tinman's approach.

P.S. I think you may have used the 60 minute point value based on %HRmax for Daniels, instead of %VO2max, was that intentional? Also, because Daniels equation is given as a %VO2max, Tinman's as a %MAS, and rTSS as a %LT (or FTP), you need to do some conversions first to consistently define the relationship based on your chosen basis. In this case, %LT (or FTP). I wouldn't be overly concerned with these equations though.

docs.google.com

Scaled Training Load Equations

Link:docs.google.com/document/d/1vDdyPdLqBL...

Sweet. What are you using for your equations for Daniels and Tinman? For Daniels, I got the equation from Golden Cheetah, but couldn't find anything for Tinman.

Regarding the 60 minutes, it was arbitrarily chosen based on the premise that if you cycle for 1 hour at FTP, the TSS value is 100. As someone else mention, normalizing all the equations on a score of 100 and plotting them against intensity and time would show how they each bias volume versus intensity.

I'm not all that concerned about them from a training perspective. I use RSS from Stryd for my training load tracking given that I train with power. The other training load metrics are strictly a curiosity of mine, given that I am a mathematician and computer scientist. My math distractions are the bane of my wife's existence. Heh.

That has seen some stuff. Well done.

We've been over this already. There are at least, if not more, methods that have been used to calculate CP (CV). So no, it isn't better, at least in that regard.

I used the table from Daniels book, 2nd edition. Tinman never released a formula, but did present a graph displaying the training load score as a function of %MAS. It should be easy to find and easy to work out when you see it... so in that spirit, this proof is left as an exercise to the reader : )

Sorry, I should have been clearer regarding the 60 minute comment. It seems Golden Cheetah made a mistake and took the one hour value assigned to 83% VO2max (88% HRmax) instead of 88% VO2max (92% HRmax), which is where Daniels places T-pace (~60 min race pace). Not a great tragedy, but it does change the per hour value to 41, instead of 33. So that's what I meant when I asked about the 60 minute point value.

And yes, I both normalized and scaled the three equations, so that you can compare them as a percent of vLT (or FTP if you prefer).

Lastly, here's a spreadsheet I saw you mentioned. Calculates both pace and power for the three variations of sub-T intervals, based on your VDOT value.

docs.google.com

Norwegian Singles Approach Calculator - VDOT and Running Power

Link:docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FYbSoT...

Not being a runner, I have not thought about the best way of quantifying the stress of training.

That said, a point I have been trying to get across for >20 y is that there is little to be gained by inventing/reinventing new stress scores (i.e., the input . What is really needed is to improve upon the model structure itself (i.e., how the input is used to predict the output, i.e., performance).

Great to see Hard2find return. Much missed and thanks for the link. Of all the academics in the thread I've always found you the one who can apply this use most practically with your tools. To the point and old pleb like me can even follow you mostly. The sign of a top academic is one not only who has the knowledge but can pass that on to the widest amount of people possible. It's a real skill and has always provided a nice balance to the thread.

I heard finally Lard2find and sirpoopy got married and are living out their lives in Minnesota.

Like a good TV show, always fun when a former main character comes back and makes a cameo.

Probably the question I get asked most, is what happened to Hard2find.

OK maybe not the most, that's usually what speedwork do I do, or hills, or what pace should I run out, or what rest should I take, or do I have to run my easy runs that easy, or shall I do a workout within the long run, or how would I structure things on 3 hours a week, or what strength work do it do, or how often I do strides.

But apart from all that, Hard2find is usually mentioned somewhere now and again.

But it's weird. He told me he had quit Letsrun forever. So it's likely just an imposter. If it is him he will be getting a telling off when he gets home from work and picking the kids up. It'll prove lexel was right all along, he's untrustworthy.

Did I hallucinate a few weeks ago or did sirpoc post a graph on Strava demonstrating his performance progress as 5k times vs CTL or something? I can't find it and Strava search says he hasn't posted anything all year.

Seems about 6 hours before you posted this, someone reposted sirpoc's Strava post in the reddit group.

I guess only up to 5% of the athletes have even a lactate meter or have access to it.

A stop watch has anybody.

For more learnings:

"The best predictor of performance is performance itself." - me, ca. 1980.

At least we agree on that :)

I'll add this to the list: why you haven't run since Saturday? The answer better be "Garmin outage" and not "I finally quit because I realised how much I hate it."

I told everyone before and nobody listened. He will end up sircrocked and now he has. Finally run himself into the ground and now we can say for sure this training is DUMB and doesn't work.

INJURED LOL

To be honest, injurys happen. But, kind of is ironic that the guy who is seen as the most sustainable hobby jogging program , is injured.