Target strain is right now mostly based on recovery (and previous attained strain in relation to recovery, right)? Bevel also includes TSB exertion, but right now does not do anything with it. I know that TSB and the recovery score should in theory converge, yet they often don't quite, at least for me. At the same time, when I'm having a good run and feel good, Bevel will often push me to extremely high strains, even though TSB would advise to slow down. And I personally feel like Bevel sometimes wants to push me to intensely, where I would actually need a rest day.

So I wonder if you it maybe would be good to just display the target strain in its current form and what the TSB model would recommend side by side, so that it is possible to choose which guidance feels right each day? Not sure if this is a good solution either, but in essence I would like the TSB model to be more prominent.

Also, why using TSB when Banister is experimentally better validated or Busso which accounts for training monotony?

I btw agree with your reasoning that exertion should be unlimited... but I do think it is confusing to speak of percent in that case. So maybe just a score? Or change to an exponential asymptotic function instead of what it is now (a log?).

I also think one problem with Strain is it is doing two things. It's a target but each activity also includes a score.

Here's a screenshot of two parts of Superset right after I finished morning workouts a few days ago. I reached 58% and my target was 60%-70% (I think based on the hash area). Now one might think the four activities add up to that 58%, but they don't directly: 10+8+7+27+12 = 64

The way I've been interpreted this is there's what I'll call "Strain Score Points (SSP)" which is different from my "Strain Percentage". In this case, it took 64 SSP to get to 58% (I started my activities shortly after coffee and don't think I had registered any strain prior).

The way things are now, I can make some sense of my workouts -- the rowing contributed more than Kickboxing, for example, and I was just outside the target (but as the day went on, ambient activity got me into range).

However, I have no idea what "100% strain" means. I also know the unlike Sleep and Recovery, where I did fine but could have done better -- 100% on these two is the goal, right? But 100% is almost never the goal for Strain.

Also the coaching texts should include those factors

Possibly its own topic, but one thing I've noticed with "whoop style" systems is that the usage of rings/circles differs from how the Apple Watch uses it for move, exercise, and stand. The idea of "closing your rings" is one the watch encourages. Apple does have awards for getting 200%, 300% and 400% of one's move goal, making it so one can have a system of doing 100% on a recovery day, and maybe 400% on a marathon day or the equivalent.

In comparison, one might not even want to close rings in the Strain area of Superset. With the Sleep category in Superset, closing to 100% is the ideal. I don't think the concept of 105% sleep is possible? Likewise with Recovery; one might rarely get to 100%, but it's always the goal, and mimics the watch's own rings.

It's be nice to have an idea of what "100% strain" actually means, and if Superset is recommending less than that (would it ever recommend more?), what the recommendation means in relation to the 100%. I think there's a natural idea to want to close the rings, or exceed that, so perhaps it's better to have "100%" mean "100% of today's recommendation, and a different number to represent the "absolute strain" -- is there a unit for strain? In cycling, I might have a kilojoule target I want for a session.

In this screenshot, I went beyond my recommended strain. Oops. I'd say the 57% isn't as important as being, what, 110%-120% over the day's target? If the lower part of today's target was "100%" (the goal to meet), and the upper limit "110%" (what's allowed at the higher end of the target range), then right now I have weird incentives; one can easily think they still have "43% to go" just to "close rings".