Not really. If you tell me you rode 17 hrs in a week that says nothing about how hard you rode or what the stress on your system would be. That could be a weeks worth of Z1/2 easy base training or, as in your case, a higher percentage of Z3/4 efforts.

Have a look at your annual training stats. I suspect your avg speed doesn't vary much from year to year.

They are never written based on time only. Like I said, without intensity, time is equally useless as a measure of training stress.

Miles are both irrelevant and irreverent in cycling. The correct measure is kilometers.

The spin bikes at my gym keep track of miles. I have about 6000 in 3 years which they count as 1.6 Tour de France. But no I don't count them as riding.

Anyone who thinks trainer miles don't count hasn't done very many of them.

I don't play by the "Rules" so no.

I do some pretty serious trainer work on weekdays - am building for my first half ironman triathlon, which requires a fair amount of biking on the plan I"m on.

I've been using bike trainer distance. Some say that the only metric is "time spent in HR zone" but I'm finding that since the bulk of my training is aerobic longer-distance style riding since there's no drafting in triathlon, tracking distance is best for me. If I just go by time, I can be off by as much as 1.5 miles by the end of a 25 mile trainer ride depending on subjective effort. By tracking the distance, it's a pretty honest effort.

I will soon however be entering my 'speed' phase of training where I do dedicated speedwork interval workouts. On those workouts, the metric for me changes completely to my speed/HR during the interval, and not the overall average or total, since the hard effort is what counts, not the rest.

I agree with Merlin's view on the miles ridden not mattering for outdoor rides of varying terrain (I go from 20+ on flats to 14 on super hilly routes for same effort), but on a trainer where everything's stable, more miles = more total work. Doesn't mean the intensity is the same of course (intervals duh) but for total work performed on a trainer, more miles = more work done. Even if the work is done at an overall easier power rate.

Lol. Why not include the earth's rotational speed also?

Miles on the trainer count, but you have to measure them with a string and a ruler, not with a computer. (It'll come to zero.)

I probably only get to about 30km in a trainer session. The intensity is what I measure on a trainer.

My average speed (total annual miles divided by total annual time) is down about .4mph from last year. Why? A lot more riding January through March.

Then HTFU if you need to. Folks routinely do ironman training 5-6 hour training rides on an indoor trainer. (Surprisingly commonplace - hang out on the tri forums and see all the Midwest folks snowed in all winter but prepping for a March-Apr Ironman.)

Of course, if you reserve your long stuff for outdoors and intensity for trainer, it's all good.

If your purpose of riding is to race then aren't all non-racing miles "trainer miles" and shouldn't you only count the actual miles racing? Starts to sound ridiculous to me. Count what you want, the reason you count is to compare one season to another. If our winter is exceptionally long or summer is really rainy, I'll put on more miles indoors. If I don't count them then I'll feel like I dogged it that year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

I factor that into my average speed.