Background: Achieving a consensus on methods for exercise quantification appears to be a challenging endeavor in sport science. Quantification of exercise enables the description of training in unit doses by coaches and scientists, facilitating subsequent analysis of responses to training. Purpose: The present manuscript seeks to provide an overview of the merits and limitations of exercise quantification methods based on the product of exercise intensity × duration and those based on maximum tolerable volume. Results: Intensity × duration methods use parameters to express intensity that are only effective for endurance exercises and could be affected by the possible intermittent format of exercises. In addition, the intensity-duration relationship is not efficiently addressed by these methods, resulting in the overvaluation of prolonged exercises compared with shorter ones. Such limitations do not appear in methods based on maximum volume, which is regarded as an indicator of the maximal dose for a given exercise and can, thus, be used as a reference to quantify the dose of similar exercises. Conclusion: Because intensity × duration methods inadequately consider the relationship between the variables that constitute the exercise, their use should be restricted to programs that exhibit minimal variation in exercise intensity and type. Conversely, exercise quantification based on maximal duration takes into account the influence of all exercise variables. This way of quantification can be efficient across a wide range of exercise intensities and types; however, it requires knowledge of exercise maxima, which can be challenging to ascertain in a training context.
© Copyright 2026 International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. All rights reserved.