Purpose: Without appropriate standardization of exercise doses, comparing high- (HI) and low-intensity (LI) training outcomes might become a matter of speculation. In athletic preparation, proper quantification ensures an optimized stress-to-recovery ratio. This review aims to compare HI and LI doses by estimating theoretically the conversion ratio, 1:x, between HI and LI: How many minutes, x, of LI are equivalent to 1 minute of HI using various quantification methods? A scrutinized analysis on how the dose increases in relation to duration and intensity was also made. Analysis: An estimation was conducted across 4 categories encompassing 10 different approaches: (1) “arbitrary” methods, (2) physiological and perceptual measurements during exercise, (3) postexercise measurements, and comparison to (4a) acute and (4b) chronic intensity-related maximum dose. The first 2 categories provide the most conservative estimation for the HI:LI ratio (1:1.5–1:10), and the third, slightly higher (1:4–1:11). The category (4a) provides the highest estimation (1:52+) and (4b) suggests 1:10 to 1:20. The exercise dose in the majority of the approaches increase linearly in relation to duration and exponentially in relation to intensity. Conclusions: As dose estimations provide divergent evaluations of the HI:LI ratio, the choice of metric will have a large impact on the research designs, results, and interpretations. Therefore, researchers should familiarize themselves with the foundations and weaknesses of their metrics and justify their choice. Last, the linear relationship between duration and exercise dose is in many cases assumed rather than thoroughly tested, and its use should be subjected to closer scrutiny.
