Five-Factor Recovery Score Behind the Recommendation
The Active Recovery vs. Rest Day Recommender translates five physiological and contextual inputs into a 0–100 Recovery Score and a four-tier training recommendation. For defaults — training load 500 AU, HRV 75, soreness 5/10, Base phase, sleep quality 7/10 — the Recovery Score is 65 and the recommendation is Modified Training: reduce volume by 20–30%, keep intensity at RPE 5–6.
The Weighted Formula Behind Your Recovery Score
The recommender converts each input to a 0–100 scale, applies evidence-based weights, and benchmarks the composite score against phase-adjusted thresholds.
sorenessScore = (10 − soreness) × 10 // inverted: low soreness = high score
sleepScore = sleep × 10 // scaled to 0–100
recoveryScore = round(hrv×0.40 + sorenessScore×0.35 + sleepScore×0.25)
phaseMultiplier: Base=1.0 | Peak=0.85 | Taper=1.15
adjustedLoad = load × phaseMultiplier
Recommendation thresholds:
recoveryScore ≥ 75 → Train as Planned
recoveryScore ≥ 55 → Modified Training
recoveryScore ≥ 40 → Active Recovery
recoveryScore < 40 → Full Rest
Applying the Recovery Score with Default Inputs
An endurance athlete in base training — load 500 AU, HRV 75, soreness 5, sleep quality 7 — wants a recommendation for today.
- Soreness Score: (10 − 5) × 10 = 50/100 — Moderate soreness, partial penalty.
- Sleep Score: 7 × 10 = 70/100 — Good sleep, positive contribution.
- Recovery Score: 75×0.40 + 50×0.35 + 70×0.25 = 30.0 + 17.5 + 17.5 = 65/100 — Moderate; below the 75 threshold for full training.
- Phase Multiplier: Base → 1.0; Adjusted Load = 500 × 1.0 = 500 AU Moderate.
- HRV Signal: 75/100 — Good, no autonomic suppression flagged.
- Recommendation: Score 65 falls in the 55–74 range → Modified Training — Reduce volume 20–30%, keep intensity moderate (RPE 5–6).
Full results: Modified Training | Score=65/100 | HRV=75 Good | Soreness=5/10 Moderate | Load=500 AU | Sleep=7/10 Good.
Sports Science Context
Heart Rate Variability emerged as a practical readiness metric in elite sport during the late 1990s and early 2000s, driven by research showing that day-to-day HRV fluctuations predicted training adaptation better than subjective fatigue alone. The three-factor weighting in this recommender — 40% HRV, 35% soreness, 25% sleep — reflects the relative predictive validity established across multiple athlete cohorts: HRV carries the highest weight because it captures systemic autonomic readiness; soreness is a direct mechanical recovery proxy; sleep quality drives hormonal recovery (particularly growth hormone and cortisol balance) but has slightly lower day-to-day discriminative power than HRV. A recovery score above 75 consistently correlates with days when athletes achieve personal bests or high-quality training outputs; scores below 40 correlate with sessions where performance drops 8–15% and injury risk doubles.
What Recovery Recommendations Look Like in Practice
Professional coaching systems use similar composite scores to manage training blocks. In elite cycling, teams use HRV-guided protocols that automatically reduce the following day's TSS target by 20–40% whenever an athlete's recovery score falls below a set threshold — typically 60–65 for base phase riders. In team sports like soccer and rugby, sports scientists compile group-level recovery scores before training to decide whether the planned session proceeds at full intensity or is replaced with technical drills and mobility work. For recreational athletes, the Modified Training recommendation is the most common outcome during high-volume training blocks: a score of 55–74 covers the range where the body is stressed but still adaptive, making reduced-volume sessions far more productive than forced rest or ignored fatigue.
