The Beginner's Guide to Stravistix or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the TRIMP

[DopeyBadger]

My form figure has been in the mid-20s for a few weeks now. Pushing hard, but fitness score improving. Wondering if anyone has seen their form scores this high for a long period of time without getting dead legs. My legs feel fine - tired after my long run and speed work, but fine. Should I be concerned?

Here's an article (Part 1 of 3) that talks some about the use of a training load calculator (link).

*I do often wonder if the Hard, Moderate, Easy is an applicable idea to endurance running (like a marathon) training.



I mean my "Fitness" is about 62.9. Does that really mean I should limit myself to a hard workout of 94 - 125.8. Because an easy LR of 13 miles (90 min) is a stress score of 118. My M Tempo of 13 miles (16 total) was a HRSS of 149. A 19 mile LR is about 165. I guess it's possible these workouts are just too aggressive for my current chronic training load.

And another describing the appearance of the graph trends (link).

So a form that stays constant means your training load is increasing at a steady rate. In theory, if you continued to increase at a steady rate you'd never drop out of "optimal" training. But we know that can't be true. Because eventually you will hit a wall of sorts physically that tells you, "this isn't optimal anymore". So there has to be some reason we can't stay in optimal forever, nor should we. And I think that comes down to the muscular/skeletal system in running. The training load (Stravistix) is very good at approximating training load via heart rate. But one of the key fallbacks to using this tool as a sole method of evaluating training load in my opinion (I wasn't able to find anything to back this up) is that I think it misses the mark on muscular/skeletal recovery. There's good research to show that bone remodeling happens every 28 days. Important for runners, but much less important for cyclists. The data suggests that having a cutback week every 4 weeks is a vital component to avoiding bone injuries because that "recovery week" allows the muscles/bones to rebuild and recover. But if someone stayed in a constant state of "optimal" and a steady form value it may (or may not) suggest that they may be lacking in cutback recovery weeks. So I think it's important to see some ebb and flow in the form value. Sometimes in the -20 range and sometimes in the -10 range. If things are moving consistently but with cutbacks, then you should see the value rise and fall. I think the one place where you might not see some ebb and flow is when someone is returning to fitness from an injury. When returning to a prior training load previously achieved, I could see the argument for a consistently increasing training load without the need for cutback weeks.

How To Analyze Runners' Training Load In WKO4 Using The Performance Manager Chart

Here's how mine looks:



Dec - Jan = Dopey Challenge
Jan - Feb = Stress Fracture
Feb - March = Biking
March - Mid-April = Recovery Running
Mid-April - Now = Training for October Marathon

There have been a few bumps in the road along the way (stung by wasp in mid-April, HM in June, missed 1/2 run 2 weeks ago). I did intentionally cutback this past week's mileage from what was scheduled because I didn't want an aggressive increase in training load (from 48 miles to 70 miles was too aggressive, so I went from 48 to 60). Thus, I have stagnated my training a bit here the last few weeks. You can see my ebb and flow with the sole purpose of reducing training load to attempt to stave off a bone injury though through most of the training from March to now.



This training on the other hand did lead to a stress fracture. This was post marathon October 2017 to Dopey 2018. Not much ebb and flow. Stayed right on the line of optimal for most of the training. Ended up with a stress fracture with the first run back in mid-January.

I guess we'll see if the change pays off.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Here's an article (Part 1 of 3) that talks some about the use of a training load calculator (link).

*I do often wonder if the Hard, Moderate, Easy is an applicable idea to endurance running (like a marathon) training.

View attachment 343766

I mean my "Fitness" is about 62.9. Does that really mean I should limit myself to a hard workout of 94 - 125.8. Because an easy LR of 13 miles (90 min) is a stress score of 118. My M Tempo of 13 miles (16 total) was a HRSS of 149. A 19 mile LR is about 165. I guess it's possible these workouts are just too aggressive for my current chronic training load.

And another describing the appearance of the graph trends (link).

So a form that stays constant means your training load is increasing at a steady rate. In theory, if you continued to increase at a steady rate you'd never drop out of "optimal" training. But we know that can't be true. Because eventually you will hit a wall of sorts physically that tells you, "this isn't optimal anymore". So there has to be some reason we can't stay in optimal forever, nor should we. And I think that comes down to the muscular/skeletal system in running. The training load (Stravistix) is very good at approximating training load via heart rate. But one of the key fallbacks to using this tool as a sole method of evaluating training load in my opinion (I wasn't able to find anything to back this up) is that I think it misses the mark on muscular/skeletal recovery. There's good research to show that bone remodeling happens every 28 days. Important for runners, but much less important for cyclists. The data suggests that having a cutback week every 4 weeks is a vital component to avoiding bone injuries because that "recovery week" allows the muscles/bones to rebuild and recover. But if someone stayed in a constant state of "optimal" and a steady form value it may (or may not) suggest that they may be lacking in cutback recovery weeks. So I think it's important to see some ebb and flow in the form value. Sometimes in the -20 range and sometimes in the -10 range. If things are moving consistently but with cutbacks, then you should see the value rise and fall. I think the one place where you might not see some ebb and flow is when someone is returning to fitness from an injury. When returning to a prior training load previously achieved, I could see the argument for a consistently increasing training load without the need for cutback weeks.

How To Analyze Runners' Training Load In WKO4 Using The Performance Manager Chart

Here's how mine looks:

View attachment 343755

Dec - Jan = Dopey Challenge
Jan - Feb = Stress Fracture
Feb - March = Biking
March - Mid-April = Recovery Running
Mid-April - Now = Training for October Marathon

There have been a few bumps in the road along the way (stung by wasp in mid-April, HM in June, missed 1/2 run 2 weeks ago). I did intentionally cutback this past week's mileage from what was scheduled because I didn't want an aggressive increase in training load (from 48 miles to 70 miles was too aggressive, so I went from 48 to 60). Thus, I have stagnated my training a bit here the last few weeks. You can see my ebb and flow with the sole purpose of reducing training load to attempt to stave off a bone injury though through most of the training from March to now.

View attachment 343765

This training on the other hand did lead to a stress fracture. This was post marathon October 2017 to Dopey 2018. Not much ebb and flow. Stayed right on the line of optimal for most of the training. Ended up with a stress fracture with the first run back in mid-January.

I guess we'll see if the change pays off.

Thanks - you have explored my concern exactly. My current training plan does have a down week built into each month, but it does not drop long run mileage as much as my typical plans have. I think that I am going to modify the plan to meet my concerns and allow more recovery on my recovery weeks.

 

[kbenson13]

For the first time, I did a run (6 miles easy) that actually decreased my fatigue and improved my form. My fitness went up by .2 so at least it wasn't an entirely backwards day. But I'm at the point where taking any days off causes a significant drop in fatigue, so I really seem to need the easy days just to maintain. Well...I guess it depends on where you are in the training cycle whether you want to continue loading fatigue. FWIW I'm about at the peak of my cycle. I have two weeks until my max long run before a 2-week taper into a 10-K race.

I'm going to try to attach my chart but I'm not sure if it will work...

 

[DopeyBadger]

For the first time, I did a run (6 miles easy) that actually decreased my fatigue and improved my form. My fitness went up by .2 so at least it wasn't an entirely backwards day. But I'm at the point where taking any days off causes a significant drop in fatigue, so I really seem to need the easy days just to maintain. Well...I guess it depends on where you are in the training cycle whether you want to continue loading fatigue. FWIW I'm about at the peak of my cycle. I have two weeks until my max long run before a 2-week taper into a 10-K race.

I'm going to try to attach my chart but I'm not sure if it will work...

Sounds like you're at the perfect point in your training plan to me. 4 weeks out and just starting to peak in terms of the easy runs. This is the point where the hard runs start to push the envelope just a little further until the taper, which hopefully gets you into the "fresh" zone.

 

[opusone]

For the first time, I did a run (6 miles easy) that actually decreased my fatigue and improved my form. My fitness went up by .2 so at least it wasn't an entirely backwards day. But I'm at the point where taking any days off causes a significant drop in fatigue, so I really seem to need the easy days just to maintain. Well...I guess it depends on where you are in the training cycle whether you want to continue loading fatigue. FWIW I'm about at the peak of my cycle. I have two weeks until my max long run before a 2-week taper into a 10-K race.

I'm going to try to attach my chart but I'm not sure if it will work...

Very interesting, and cool... I wasn't aware that you could run and decrease fatigue. I will be looking to see if that happens at my cycle peak as well.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Very interesting, and cool... I wasn't aware that you could run and decrease fatigue. I will be looking to see if that happens at my cycle peak as well.

On days that I do easy paced runs my fatigue score drops. My fitness score moves up, but the fatigue score drops.

 

[opusone]

On days that I do easy paced runs my fatigue score drops. My fitness score moves up, but the fatigue score drops.

Now that you mention it, I just looked, and I do have a couple days in the last three months where my fatigue dropped slightly on easy run days. Odd though, for most of my easy runs, I still see fatigue increasing.

 

[DopeyBadger]

Mathematically, if fitness is a 6 week average and fatigue a 1 week average, then the easy run HRSS (or Trimp) would need to be between the two and replace a value that was less from 6 weeks ago. Am I getting that right? That would cause fatigue to drop and fitness to go up. For me, my easy runs are less HRSS and Trimp than my fitness or fatigue. So easy days cause both of mine to drop.

 

[opusone]

Mathematically, if fitness is a 6 week average and fatigue a 1 week average, then the easy run HRSS (or Trimp) would need to be between the two and replace a value that was less from 6 weeks ago. Am I getting that right? That would cause fatigue to drop and fitness to go up. For me, my easy runs are less HRSS and Trimp than my fitness or fatigue. So easy days cause both of mine to drop.

Actually, after looking at the formulas, I think it is simply the fact that the StressScore is lower than the Fatigue score.

ETA: that is, a StressScore above your overall Fatigue level will increase overall Fatigue, and a StressScore below your overall Fatigue level will decrease overall Fatigue.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

This was already going to be a tough week, and I made it tougher out of necessity by running my 14 mile long run this morning, just 4 days after my 12 mile long run. I have the next 2 days off from running as I am traveling, and I am going to need it to recover. My Form score is -45.4, and I feel like it.

 

[opusone]

This was already going to be a tough week, and I made it tougher out of necessity by running my 14 mile long run this morning, just 4 days after my 12 mile long run. I have the next 2 days off from running as I am traveling, and I am going to need it to recover. My Form score is -45.4, and I feel like it.

Wow!! I just looked back over the past few years, and my max (or min I guess) was -28.5 (even with some months over 200 miles). Obviously you know this, but just be careful not to over-train.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Wow!! I just looked back over the past few years, and my max (or min I guess) was -28.5 (even with some months over 200 miles). Obviously you know this, but just be careful not to over-train.

Yeah, my max up to this point was -31, so I get it. I knew that I was pushing it when I decided to run the 14 miler today. Not only was I running it with Form scores already in the -20s, but it was really hot and humid today. Even running more slowly didn't help - I was just too fatigued to perform well today. The reality, this run probably hurt me rather than helping me (other than helping with mental toughness). But I am hopeful that the 2 days off will help me bounce back.

 

[kleph]

apologies for resurrecting a zombie thread but my ambitious training goals have me wallowing around the deep end of the running statistics pool once again. i just passed the six-week mark in training and that means Stravistix is back on the table so, of course, i've got questions only @DopeyBadger can answer.

while reviewing this thread got me back up to speed on most of the particulars, it seems there is a new variable at play: Functional Thresholds or FTP. the info page just says these are "your best 20 min thresholds" for running pace as measured in seconds. i am assuming this means i should do a mile time trial and then input that result in order to get the proper number.

question one: is that interpretation correct?

question two: what the heck is FTP and what is it measuring?

question three: what difference does this metric make in my overall training strategy?

 

[DopeyBadger]

while reviewing this thread got me back up to speed on most of the particulars, it seems there is a new variable at play: Functional Thresholds or FTP. the info page just says these are "your best 20 min thresholds" for running pace as measured in seconds. i am assuming this means i should do a mile time trial and then input that result in order to get the proper number.

question one: is that interpretation correct?

question two: what the heck is FTP and what is it measuring?

question three: what difference does this metric make in my overall training strategy?

Here's a link from Training Peaks by Andrew Coggan discussing Functional Threshold Power. In general terms, it is a proxy for lactate threshold.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/learn/articles/what-is-threshold-power/

Here's a link from Training Peaks by Stephen McGregor discussing how to determine FTP for running.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/learn/articles/determining-functional-threshold-pace-ftp/

I think there's relevance for the value. Although I think the FTP value has more importance in cycling than it does in running as it's one convenient way in cycling to determine relative effort levels. Cycling is different than running because of mechanical assistance, so having a value generated by power generated at the foot pedal instead of pace/speed is a better surrogate for effort. In running, we don't have that same mechanical assistance. The value of power data in running is similar to value calculations on normalized grade pace (or grade adjusted pacing) that some devices can provide.

In my opinion, using paces from recent races still remains the gold standard for determining pacing schemes for training. With the caveat that there are reasons you adjust the pace scheme (like weather, elevation changes for instance). I subscribe to an effort based pace scheme philosophy. So the run FTP value may be useful for inputting into a computer program to help you learn more about yourself, but for running I still think GAP w/ temp adjustments is king. Although one could definitely argue that a device that measures power at the shoe is determining that very effort based pace scheme in a different way. Stryd is the device that comes to mind. My memory tells me @MissLiss279 and @FFigawi might have used it before.

 

[FFigawi]

Your memory serves you right. I use a Stryd pod for nearly all of my run training. Much how FTP works on the bike, Stryd gives a Critical Power number which is used as the basis for different training zones. I find using power to work really well in training. I haven’t raced a race using only power as a guide, but its prediction based on CP is quite accurate. It gave me a range for a half of 1:58 to 2:03, and I hit 1:58 at Disney including several photo stops.