View Single Post
Old 04-16-24, 12:29 PM
  #12  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 9,974
Liked 5,868 Times in 3,620 Posts
Originally Posted by Hermes
If one is a Coggan follower and subscribes to the validity of TSS as determining a training stress score and fatigue then a TSS of 100 generated in either zone 2 or zone 3 provide the same amount of fatigue. Zone 3 produces the fatigue in a shorter period of time. Coggan is a smart guy so it he would have thought that zone 3 produces more fatigue, he would have used a different formulation for calculating TSS. By formula, the only way to increase TSS faster is to have normalized power increase for greater than 30 seconds. That adds a quadratic component to the TSS equation versus having TSS solely generate by linear function - force X time.

As I remember, in the bookTraining and Racing with a Power meter, the formula for NP was about the rate of change of lactate at efforts above FTP.

And another fact that I am sure Coggan is aware of is that as power increases there is a point where more glycogen is burned for a unit of ATP produced. I assume that occurs somewhere in high zone 2 / zone 3. Does that effect generate more fatigue. If Coggan thought it did, then he could have included it in the formula.

What do I think? I just ride these things. My personal experience is that zone 2 is just as fatiguing as zone 3 with the proviso that I ride at constant power with few if any "mini rests".

When I climbed Mount Hamilton with constant force in my muscles in both zone 2 and zone 3 it kicked my ass. Riding flat to rolling terrain in silicon value with traffic lights, stop signs and etc zone 2 was easy.

IMO, I self select zone 3 when I need more / higher constant power. For me, it is the constant effort that generates more fatigue not the zone.

Time trials ridden in zone 4 which is very fatiguing but once again, may produce the same TSS as a 2 hour zone 2 ride. However, during a TT, I try to make every pedal stroke count which tends to be quite different from a ride through Silicon Valley in zone 2.

And then there is the San Millan zone 2 and the protocol he requires during the ride. For me, riding a San Millan zone 2 ride where I am producing power at a point where talking is just starting to feel labored is a tough and fatiguing ride.

Hopefully, the above provides enough right and wrong information to provide all the zone 2 v zone 3 nazis something to complain about.
For me the fatigue really kicks in when I ride close to FTP or higher for a significant length of time eg a 1 hour Zwift race or a full gas mountain climb. Then I need much more recovery than the TSS would suggest compared to the same TSS accumulated in Z2 or Z3. Fatigue in Z2 and Z3 feels pretty similar for the same TSS. My mental fatigue is a little higher in Z2!

Since most of my training rides are sub 2 hours I like to mix in a few harder efforts. Riding only in Z2 doesn’t seem very efficient on these relatively short rides. If my training rides were longer I would probably stick more to Z2 in order to manage fatigue. But while I’m only riding about 6 or 7 hours per week I don’t see much point in holding back. When I ramp my volume up over 10 hours per week I try to pay more attention to zone management ie easy vs hard percentage split.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski: