Hey everyone, I’m gonna build up my own training plan and what I need to understand is how the load is allocated within certain time frame ahead. By “allocated” I mean both Time in Zones and TSS in Zones. I tried to find this functionality in TP and WKO5 but it’s missing everywhere. I personally find it strange since this is where you are supposed to start from 
By levels we may want to see Classic Zones or iLevels.
Thanks much,
Egor.
“supposed to start from” I am not so sure about Meaning I know a lot of coaches and one would start kind of like this and he is much lower on the totem pole than the others. In the right hands I guess there is nothing inheriently wrong with this, but I think it would be easy to obsess on this and miss the bigger picture. I actually think this idea is interesting meaning, first you design what you believe is an optimal plan and then you kind of review this to see your TIZ “flow.”
Cycling math is very fun but like Dr Seiler says it causes a lot of problems, especially in the wrong hands. He is not a TIZ advocate per se, but more focused on one or two (if you ride a lot) hard rides a week in the most simplistic terms. I fully agree with keeping the math simple. Cycling math has caused what many belive are a lot of problems such as focusing on maximizing our CTL and FTP. The guys I respect feel this is the wrong approach. High FTP and CTL are byproducts not the goal.
As you likely know TrainingPeaks online and IntervalsICU are good for designing plans focused on TSS managment. We opt for keeping to the real basics as much as possible. I think TSB can be very useful. I would say your best bet is to propose a weekly forward looking TIZ report to IntervalsICU and if David likes the idea you might get it rather quickly.
Not sure this helps since it appears you have a different opinion but just providing insights into our thinking as it might help you or others a little.
Hey Alex,
thanks for your thoughts which in general I totally agree with.
I missed the obvious stages like understanding a phenotype of a rider, analysing the demands of the event, defining the advantages and limiters and setting a training goal.
Next, you probably look at your PD curve and you want to decide if you need to improve your 5 min power, 5s of 5h power and you want to shift your PD curve either to the right or up.
And here you come to the point where you design your ATP - and this is where you need to look if the designed ATP works (in theory). This is where you need to look into Planned TiZ (among other things, of course).
If you need to improve endurance, TTE, that’s one way. If you gonna compete in crit, this is a totally different story, you need anaerobic power and you probably will gonna work in zones 5, 6 and up.
All in all, I totally agree with you, that math is just a tool, not a goal. In wrong hands it indeed may bring more harm, than good. But one have to try and get her own experience. And it’s important to constantly analyse if the designed plan indeed brings you expected benefits and works well. Trial and error, modify, test again etc. etc.
Ok, cool. Yes sounds like you have a good approach. “starts with” got me confused and since a signifcant portion of performance cyclists and even many coaches start with math such as this as the basis so I am sensitive
In the end every solution/answer is “it depends” but as a platform I feel like we should recommend what is most likely to work for the majority of our users and possibly give them an alternative (I believe healthier and more beneficial) approach.
I don’t know if something like below solves your problem, but generally I like this idea from a reporting standpoint. I am not saying this is good distrobution, just a quick idea.
We kind of do this now but just at the entire plan level.
@Alex, I believe math here is very basic, all you need to do is to set zones just like in TP, or you can use any preset like Classic or iLevels and get a TiZ as plan as a whole is any part of your calendar. And, ta-dam, TrainerDay is the very first who has built it.
I’m not sure though if this is really demanded, you make your own decision if it’s worth to spend time in that or not.
Agreed math is basic. We have avoided metrics as much as possible because that is a never ending list of requests. Everyone has their own needs. That is why I suggested adding it to intervals. We want to keep our costs to the minimum and pass that on to our users and keep it as simple as we can.
