To make it clear, I think this basic way of looking at it is mostly limited to a time crunched athlete. As in, to take it to a basic level , I would be surprised if someone who was on 5-7 hours a week wasn't at their fittest, if they just maximised their training load whilst balancing recovery. We are 40 pages in and I still stand by that for me to do that on my 7 hours a week, sub threshold 3x a week is almost certainly the best way , whilst looking at the theory of the stress it will accumulate but also looking at my fitness progression in real life. Obviously that's only applicable to me over a year, but KI is also a very good case study anyway can go look at , because he's literally shared a couple of years of data.
I get your points.
However, this might get you the best bang for your buck metabolically, but if you were preparing for say, a HM, I think you would need more stimulus that stresses and challenges your musculoskeletal system as well.
This is why some cyclists get injured when the pick up running. They have a big aerobic base and they are metabolically ready and fit to hit the pace, but their body cannot sustain the impact of the sport.
Running a race that lasts over an hour would need a traditional long run, even if not weekly.
Agree with this, and I think time in zone (LT) is an important variable to be optimised alongside TSS. In other words, for the same amount of TSS per week, 100% easy would be worse than 80/20.
For a marathon there is more reliance on energy efficiency, fat burning, etc which are improved through long runs. So creating that stimulus is more important in marathon training relative to 5k-HM (where training at higher paces is more beneficial).
Yes. That work work fine as well. But if I'm not doing a traditional "long" long run, but only 75-80 mins, the off day is where I'm going to do that in your concept 1 + the 3 easy runs and 3 quality and not have a day off. So to the 375 you can add another 75-80 TSS which is where I've been at for a the last few weeks (that is the current TSS numbers, it was obviously less before with less reps on workout days and less time on easy runs, hopefully that makes sense and shows how I've built up from maybe 380 TSS a week to around 440+ now). This is basically a very simplistic view of what I'm doing.
I think if you hit this right, you really don't need a day off. I've never felt the need for one and I don't think Kristoffer often if ever has one. That's the point, to cram as much as you can cram in. If for some reason you can't run everyday, you may as well do concept 2. But I totally concede there is not much difference to your concept two, than what I'm doing, other than I'm probably racking up 20 or so TSS a week more. Over time, I'm my experience, that is worth something. If I was doing a marathon, no doubt I would probably do a much longer run, that's without question. Then on the Monday , probably a very easy run. But still do 7 days a week.
If it makes for anyone's interest, I'll keep trying to creep up the length of my long run like Kristoffer. I went 80 mins and just over 10 miles this weekend, the longest I've done. Will require some life planning to keep increasing it, but might be doable. So far, my progress has been incredibly steady and I'm seeing PBs at a nice incremental increase in line with CTL. Making the long run longer gradually, will increase the training load slightly faster than it has been. Question will be if I can handle it or if PBs increase at the slightly quicker speed CTL increases. I'll see if I can plan something out that works around life.
Thank you very much for your contributions to this thread. As well as guys like jiggy, shirtboy, Hard2find; to name just few. I have just finished the thread after a Google search of running TSS brought this up 😊
I am absolute fascinated by a lot of the stuff you have posted and how to apply to running, no less so than fact that I have always used CTL to guage if I am ready to race Tri. Example, if I am in Kona mode and need qualify I will know to be in the shape to compete when I am there, "xxx" CTL will be required. This has always worked out pretty accurately. I just don't have time to dedicate to the Tri scene. However, I intend to hit some running goals this year and next and this thread has totally made me realise I don't have to necessary take the plunge like the hoard of running plans I've read, seen or coaches that i have talked to with regards to a lot of faster than race pace work, which always I raise eyebrow at.
I hope you don't mind, but based on your username on telegram I found you through the older Ingebritgsens Strava , knowing you followed him. I saw the user here *Fusio* messaged you on Strava, so I figured you would mind me adding you. Btw, your cycling is off the charts, in next level. I'm surprised you are only 17 for 5k. Maybe more to come.
One thing I would add though, is that for me ( and quite a few other cyclists) is that there's a pattern to FTP and CTL, no matter how you got there. I've reached my peak cycling CTL on a number of different training cycles, with totally different training to get there (sub threshold was the fastest way) but my 10 mile TT times were always mid to low 18s and my FTP around 315-20. If my CTL dropped off hugely in the winter, I could also roughly guess as a % of decrease what when I did my dreaded power test in January, the condition I was in. It's definitely not linear, but I'm seeing the same patterns now in running, using basically the same principles.
To make it clear, I think this basic way of looking at it is mostly limited to a time crunched athlete. As in, to take it to a basic level , I would be surprised if someone who was on 5-7 hours a week wasn't at their fittest, if they just maximised their training load whilst balancing recovery. We are 40 pages in and I still stand by that for me to do that on my 7 hours a week, sub threshold 3x a week is almost certainly the best way , whilst looking at the theory of the stress it will accumulate but also looking at my fitness progression in real life. Obviously that's only applicable to me over a year, but KI is also a very good case study anyway can go look at , because he's literally shared a couple of years of data.
Way back I shared the example of me just doing the turbo for a couple of hours a day or so 7 days a week, which also got me really fit (was probably just below sweetspot). I could have easily got even fitter doing that and throwing in one or two threshold or above work. But long term, I couldn't find the time. I only did it because I was off work with a broken collarbone so had limitless time. With limitless time, a more traditional approach with lots and lots of running and a lower % of harder work, will almost certainly be better. As in a pro might double and do 4x sub threshold sessions a week + some hill work, but % wise, almost certainly less than the 25% of weekly time proposed here. It's why I've always been iffy on Seiler the more I've thought about it. On 5 hours a week, I mean really, say 1 hour sub threshold is that really all one can handle? Not in my experience.
As I said yesterday, once you get into the elite territory, it's much more of a balancing act and issues like overtraining actually become genuine concerns.
What I find most interesting, as it’s not that dissimilar from my experience, is that you have achieved equivalent performances generated by such different approaches. Mathematically, that’s not interesting as you’d expect the CTL to converge to the same value with in a certain amount of time from starting if the varying methods are averaging the same daily TSS. However, from a training perspective (particularly the example you gave where you rode about 2.5 hours per day at an easy-moderate effort), it’s rather curious as so much attention seems to be given to designing the optimal training plan. It provides a lot to contemplate in regard to what is optimal, I think. I like it!
At the start of next week I’ll be 12 weeks out from a half, 18 weeks from a marathon. I ran my Garmin data through the algorithm and may try targeting the same CTL as last year but based on a 1 threshold, 1 medium long, and 1 long run approach. I enjoy experimenting a little each build up.
Thanks all for the thorough responses! I think I will reduce the long run to around 75 minutes like suggested.
Yes, that's the way to go when you just go for no more than half marathon race. 70-80 min runs compared to 60 min or less gives in scientific studies a huge extra mitochondria boost and enzymes for the energy process.
I was getting ready to go for my run, and I put on my HRM (gotta know my resting HR), then I tested my Lactate. It was then that I noticed that the humidity outside had spiked several points higher than when I ran the day before, so I tested my urine to see if my sodium levels were in line, and that's when I noticed a terrible drop my my vitamin D! To my chagrin the protein levels were way way way off too! What was I to do???? Eat an egg, take a protein powder?
Wait maybe I'd eaten too many eggs! My cholesterol levels were .2 higher than my previous test three days before! Now what???
How will I ever know what pace to run today with all these problems? I MUST break 18 minutes in the 5k next Saturday or my life is over!
I was getting ready to go for my run, and I put on my HRM (gotta know my resting HR), then I tested my Lactate. It was then that I noticed that the humidity outside had spiked several points higher than when I ran the day before, so I tested my urine to see if my sodium levels were in line, and that's when I noticed a terrible drop my my vitamin D! To my chagrin the protein levels were way way way off too! What was I to do???? Eat an egg, take a protein powder?
Wait maybe I'd eaten too many eggs! My cholesterol levels were .2 higher than my previous test three days before! Now what???
How will I ever know what pace to run today with all these problems? I MUST break 18 minutes in the 5k next Saturday or my life is over!
Lol, did you know eating eggs is not the cause of high cholesterol?
Thanks all for the thorough responses! I think I will reduce the long run to around 75 minutes like suggested.
Yes, that's the way to go when you just go for no more than half marathon race. 70-80 min runs compared to 60 min or less gives in scientific studies a huge extra mitochondria boost and enzymes for the energy process.
I thought the studies showed the mitochondria larger increases started between 90mins and 2hours? At all aerobic intensity mitochondria development is improved though, hence the running more and long produces the big performance improvement.
What I find most interesting, as it’s not that dissimilar from my experience, is that you have achieved equivalent performances generated by such different approaches. Mathematically, that’s not interesting as you’d expect the CTL to converge to the same value with in a certain amount of time from starting if the varying methods are averaging the same daily TSS. However, from a training perspective (particularly the example you gave where you rode about 2.5 hours per day at an easy-moderate effort), it’s rather curious as so much attention seems to be given to designing the optimal training plan. It provides a lot to contemplate in regard to what is optimal, I think. I like it!
At the start of next week I’ll be 12 weeks out from a half, 18 weeks from a marathon. I ran my Garmin data through the algorithm and may try targeting the same CTL as last year but based on a 1 threshold, 1 medium long, and 1 long run approach. I enjoy experimenting a little each build up.
The only issue with running the old data through, is if your fitness changed a lot during the cycle and you hadn't been careful to update threshold to current fitness etc.
I'll see if I can find my old laptop, it's in the house somewhere. Has years of golden cheetah data on it I reckon you would enjoy just playing around with . Maybe you can find out if there is anything from a scientific standpoint of why, my PBs and CTL peaks match up nicely. Or even more interestingly, what potentially is about what is happening (especially when not doing much above threshold) that means CTL is CTL, no matter how I got there.
I was getting ready to go for my run, and I put on my HRM (gotta know my resting HR), then I tested my Lactate. It was then that I noticed that the humidity outside had spiked several points higher than when I ran the day before, so I tested my urine to see if my sodium levels were in line, and that's when I noticed a terrible drop my my vitamin D! To my chagrin the protein levels were way way way off too! What was I to do???? Eat an egg, take a protein powder?
Wait maybe I'd eaten too many eggs! My cholesterol levels were .2 higher than my previous test three days before! Now what???
How will I ever know what pace to run today with all these problems? I MUST break 18 minutes in the 5k next Saturday or my life is over!
lol trolls cant get their criticisms straight any more.
So now it’s focus on too many factors where it started out there was too much focus on too few
but we all know the real problem, dont we, sweetheart — there’s just not enough focus on you :)
The only issue with running the old data through, is if your fitness changed a lot during the cycle and you hadn't been careful to update threshold to current fitness etc.
I'll see if I can find my old laptop, it's in the house somewhere. Has years of golden cheetah data on it I reckon you would enjoy just playing around with . Maybe you can find out if there is anything from a scientific standpoint of why, my PBs and CTL peaks match up nicely. Or even more interestingly, what potentially is about what is happening (especially when not doing much above threshold) that means CTL is CTL, no matter how I got there.
Actually, part of the reason I used the 24 week lead up to last years race was that I ran a 10km time trial every six weeks, so I programmed into it that update based on my time trial time. Out of curiosity, I estimated an “improvement curve” so that the threshold would scale more evenly across the six weeks blocks as opposed to just discrete jumps with each 6 week update. Wasn’t really worth the extra complication haha
I don’t want to shoot my mouth off too soon, but my guess, based on the mathematics of the system, would be that using an exponentially weighted moving average, particularly without bias correction (which is just a technical term to say that the CTL would start at a higher value more representative of what you are doing at the start of training as opposed to taking a while to build up to where your average is), will require a while to build up to a CTL that is reflective of approximately your average daily TSS. So, if for example, you literally scored 60 TSS every day, it would still take about 100 days to get to a CTL value that will be within a few points of where it will level off. In this case the CTL would probably reach about 56. So you’ve put in about 14-16 weeks of training at that point. Using the physiological principle of ~6 weeks for “full adaption” you’re getting to that point where, for that cycle, you’re likely not going to improve much more. And assuming, as is true for most of us, that when we start a new cycle, we aren’t starting from “zero”, reaching a high CTL within a shorter time span is completely possible.
I’d definitely be open to going through you’re data though and seeing if there are any further relationships. I’d say you’re intuition and observations have been insightful. I think the only thing I could add would maybe be a “mathematical” interpretation. Which I can’t imagine anyone cares to hear haha
For a 6days/week concept, and with your TSS provided in page 39, we have:
E=1 TSS/min, Q=75TSS
Concept 1): Q, E, Q, E, Q, E, OFF = 375 TSS
Concept 2): Q, E, Q, E, L (120min), E, OFF =420 TSS
Yes. That work work fine as well. But if I'm not doing a traditional "long" long run, but only 75-80 mins, the off day is where I'm going to do that in your concept 1 + the 3 easy runs and 3 quality and not have a day off. So to the 375 you can add another 75-80 TSS which is where I've been at for a the last few weeks (that is the current TSS numbers, it was obviously less before with less reps on workout days and less time on easy runs, hopefully that makes sense and shows how I've built up from maybe 380 TSS a week to around 440+ now). This is basically a very simplistic view of what I'm doing.
I think if you hit this right, you really don't need a day off. I've never felt the need for one and I don't think Kristoffer often if ever has one. That's the point, to cram as much as you can cram in. If for some reason you can't run everyday, you may as well do concept 2. But I totally concede there is not much difference to your concept two, than what I'm doing, other than I'm probably racking up 20 or so TSS a week more. Over time, I'm my experience, that is worth something. If I was doing a marathon, no doubt I would probably do a much longer run, that's without question. Then on the Monday , probably a very easy run. But still do 7 days a week.
If it makes for anyone's interest, I'll keep trying to creep up the length of my long run like Kristoffer. I went 80 mins and just over 10 miles this weekend, the longest I've done. Will require some life planning to keep increasing it, but might be doable. So far, my progress has been incredibly steady and I'm seeing PBs at a nice incremental increase in line with CTL. Making the long run longer gradually, will increase the training load slightly faster than it has been. Question will be if I can handle it or if PBs increase at the slightly quicker speed CTL increases. I'll see if I can plan something out that works around life.
For me a 7day/week approach will be never an option and i would not recommend it to any hobby athlete. If you are a pro we can discuss, however a lot of pros have a rest day/week. Not so common with running. Strange, because it is a high impact sport and it would be even more important and helpful.
The dynamic changes completely if you train 6 or 7day/week, because if you train 6 days/week you can overload your body a little bit more before the rest day. Possible even more interesting for fast twitchers. So Concept 2 looks strong. I have to study more papers about longer endurance training adaptations sounds like an interesting topic to me.
Your approach to increase the length of your 'long' run sounds good to me.
Yes, that's the way to go when you just go for no more than half marathon race. 70-80 min runs compared to 60 min or less gives in scientific studies a huge extra mitochondria boost and enzymes for the energy process.
I thought the studies showed the mitochondria larger increases started between 90mins and 2hours? At all aerobic intensity mitochondria development is improved though, hence the running more and long produces the big performance improvement.
I’m guessing 90 minutes wouldn’t kill me if I dropped the tempo portion of it
Thank you very much for your contributions to this thread. As well as guys like jiggy, shirtboy, Hard2find; to name just few. I have just finished the thread after a Google search of running TSS brought this up 😊
I am absolute fascinated by a lot of the stuff you have posted and how to apply to running, no less so than fact that I have always used CTL to guage if I am ready to race Tri. Example, if I am in Kona mode and need qualify I will know to be in the shape to compete when I am there, "xxx" CTL will be required. This has always worked out pretty accurately. I just don't have time to dedicate to the Tri scene. However, I intend to hit some running goals this year and next and this thread has totally made me realise I don't have to necessary take the plunge like the hoard of running plans I've read, seen or coaches that i have talked to with regards to a lot of faster than race pace work, which always I raise eyebrow at.
I hope you don't mind, but based on your username on telegram I found you through the older Ingebritgsens Strava , knowing you followed him. I saw the user here *Fusio* messaged you on Strava, so I figured you would mind me adding you. Btw, your cycling is off the charts, in next level. I'm surprised you are only 17 for 5k. Maybe more to come.
No problem, I'm not sure my Strava is that interesting to be honest or very exciting ha ha but absolutely no issue with the follow request.
Interesting you being a Tri guy, having spoken to a few of the guys who were going amazing on the time trial scene in the UK, on limited hours, a lot of what they picked up with regards to CTL came from even further back from one particular guy who came over from the Tri scene.
In conclusion, it can be summarized that the main goal is to become as fit as possible, no matter how. The higher the CTL value, the greater the chance of performing well in a race. Regarding the Tanda Test mentioned by Lexel, there's an example of a runner from Cambridge who was injury-prone at high speeds. He achieved excellent marathon times by incorporating high weekly training volumes and maintaining a slow pace, even though he never trained at or near marathon pace. The tapering period was also brief, as extended rest could lead to a loss of fitness.
In conclusion, it can be summarized that the main goal is to become as fit as possible, no matter how. The higher the CTL value, the greater the chance of performing well in a race.
I wasn't paying much attention to the CTL/TTS discussions at first, but started to over the past few days and started looking at my numbers on TrainingPeaks. Here's where I am lost a bit.
My weekly CTL/TTS have been high, both on a relative and absolute scale, as TrainingPeaks classifies a weekly CTL/TTS of 160/990, respectively, to be high for a HM runners (since I'm mainly training for the HM at the moment). Last week I hit CTL 172/TSS 1388 and been averaging +160/+1100 for the past few weeks.
While my workouts have been going well (mainly on the treadmill), I chocked up big time on my very rocky dirt-trail 5 km race yesterday. I decided to let go of lead two runners after 2 km (7:52.5), partly because I almost rolled my ankle on the course, and I am very injury prone when it comes to the ankle, so I shut it down thinking it was not worth sacrificing my massive training for a small club race, and partly from it being run in +90% humidity at 30 degrees C. I ended up jogging it in to the finish.
I don't know if I'm just not cut for summer racing, or whether I just did not mentally have it in me yesterday to push the envelope, whether it be fearing injury or just not wanting to dig deep.
Looking back at my weekly CTL/TTS before the 37:45 10K I've run at the end of last March, it was in the 120-144 / 1000 range. I'm running much more now, so I expected a better result going into the race yesterday. I have 6 weeks till the half marathon now, but it will be in Europe where the weather is much, much more conducive to running fast.
There is a similar 5K next week, also off-road and hot/humid.. I'm torn between letting it go and trusting the work I've put, or giving it another go. I realize that I won't run anything fast in relation to my PBs, but the competitive part of me wants some form of redemption.
I must be the least talented individual out there if I'm running these sort of times with this much CTL/TTS.
I wasn't paying much attention to the CTL/TTS discussions at first, but started to over the past few days and started looking at my numbers on TrainingPeaks. Here's where I am lost a bit.
My weekly CTL/TTS have been high, both on a relative and absolute scale, as TrainingPeaks classifies a weekly CTL/TTS of 160/990, respectively, to be high for a HM runners (since I'm mainly training for the HM at the moment). Last week I hit CTL 172/TSS 1388 and been averaging +160/+1100 for the past few weeks.
While my workouts have been going well (mainly on the treadmill), I chocked up big time on my very rocky dirt-trail 5 km race yesterday. I decided to let go of lead two runners after 2 km (7:52.5), partly because I almost rolled my ankle on the course, and I am very injury prone when it comes to the ankle, so I shut it down thinking it was not worth sacrificing my massive training for a small club race, and partly from it being run in +90% humidity at 30 degrees C. I ended up jogging it in to the finish.
I don't know if I'm just not cut for summer racing, or whether I just did not mentally have it in me yesterday to push the envelope, whether it be fearing injury or just not wanting to dig deep.
Looking back at my weekly CTL/TTS before the 37:45 10K I've run at the end of last March, it was in the 120-144 / 1000 range. I'm running much more now, so I expected a better result going into the race yesterday. I have 6 weeks till the half marathon now, but it will be in Europe where the weather is much, much more conducive to running fast.
There is a similar 5K next week, also off-road and hot/humid.. I'm torn between letting it go and trusting the work I've put, or giving it another go. I realize that I won't run anything fast in relation to my PBs, but the competitive part of me wants some form of redemption.
I must be the least talented individual out there if I'm running these sort of times with this much CTL/TTS.
Damn Jiggy, that's insane CTL. Are you sure you've been inputting all the data correctly? If it is, you might just be busted and fried. Like for real. But I can't help but think you must have miscalculated something and just mentally had a bad day going into this race. Your weekly TSS seems insanely high.
"...experience to date indicates that, across a wide variety of athletes and disciplines (e.g., elite amateur track cyclists, masters-age marathon MTB racers, professional road racers), the “optimal” training load seems to lie at a CTL somewhere between 100 and 150 TSS/d. That is, individuals whose CTL is less than 100 TSS/d usually feel that they are undertraining, i.e., they recognize that they could tolerate a heavier training load, if only they had more time available to train and/or if other stresses in life (e.g., job, family) were minimized. (Note that this does not necessarily mean that their performance would improve as a result, which is why the word “optimal” in the sentence above is in quotes). On the other hand, few, if any, athletes seem to be able to sustain a long-term average of >150 TSS/d." - Coggan
"At least at this stage, the only think I might change about what I wrote above would be to lower the limits from 100-150 TSS/d to perhaps 90-140 TSS/d..." - follow up from Coggan a few years later.
Above are two quotes from Coggan with regards to CTL from the Time Trial forum. Also bear in mind that he is mainly talking about cycling and that runners you can probably drop that a little bit more (but not as much as people think, runners are very scared of their legs falling off as this thread has shown at times ha ha).
Damn Jiggy, that's insane CTL. Are you sure you've been inputting all the data correctly? If it is, you might just be busted and fried. Like for real. But I can't help but think you must have miscalculated something and just mentally had a bad day going into this race. Your weekly TSS seems insanely high.
Thanks for the quick response Sirpoc.
I mean, the data is paired/synced automatically from my Garmin to my TrainingPeaks, so I'm not inputting anything manually per se. My LTHR and Max HR and Resting HR are set correctly. So I would assume the data is correct? I would appreciate any insight on how to validate.
The thing is, I don't feel "fried" at all, I've been tolerating this load/mileage quiet well I feel, and last week's VO2 session was very promising given it was the first such session since the 10K.
Damn Jiggy, that's insane CTL. Are you sure you've been inputting all the data correctly? If it is, you might just be busted and fried. Like for real. But I can't help but think you must have miscalculated something and just mentally had a bad day going into this race. Your weekly TSS seems insanely high.
Thanks for the quick response Sirpoc.
I mean, the data is paired/synced automatically from my Garmin to my TrainingPeaks, so I'm not inputting anything manually per se. My LTHR and Max HR and Resting HR are set correctly. So I would assume the data is correct? I would appreciate any insight on how to validate.
The thing is, I don't feel "fried" at all, I've been tolerating this load/mileage quiet well I feel, and last week's VO2 session was very promising given it was the first such session since the 10K.
How many hours are you doing a week and stuff? I still think something may have gone wrong with your data somehow. It's hard to share pics and stuff here. and we can share and easier way to communicate if you want. Your numbers are so high, I want to either help you get to the bottom of it or REALLY dig down into what you are doing lol