That’s it. I’m sick of waiting for AT!
I’m just going to get so fast on the normal TR plans that when I finally go get into AT it will break the programming causing AT to gain consciousness and begin to worship me as a god.
On a side note I really need to go to bed and it’s really exciting to see the beta rollout gaining steam. (Just don’t leave me out too long or you might trigger some Sci-fi apocalyptic scenario)
@Michael_Tate You can get the same effect manually you know. All the workouts have the levels on them for all users. So do a workout, decide how much of a jump you can manage next week (0.2 -0.5 is a good start) and then choose a workout of similar profile at the target progression. You be the AI! The only thing you are missing is levels, but this is easy to work out. What was the last workout you did in any given energy system - what ever level that is, is your level! Choose one a bit harder and you’re away.
What is the expected behaviour? I did a ramp test yesterday and my levels haven’t really changed much.
I love this. So good that the progression FINALLY takes our cravings away from this ONE number of FTP.
Some of us (I think most of us) do not plan to do these Threshold races and do something different with our fitness. Breaking down the cycling fitness in different sub-metrics is a game-changer, for me.
<3 T H A N K Y O U <3
As far as I know, Strava is also causing problems for outside rides. I have turned off Ride Sync with Strava in my TR account.
It would be nice if we could configure TR to upload rides to Strava but not download from Strava. I can’t see why someone would want to download these rides, but as a Garmin user, I’m sure there’s something I’m missing.
For a while I had a Wahoo head unit and a Fitbit for runs and hikes. Strava is where everything goes for me, and any other services I have (TR, Intervals.icu, etc.) pull from Strava.
Just been accepted into the AT beta group. Due to work-related fatigue (I have a physically demanding job), I was unable to finish today’s workout (Truchas +3) - my legs felt tired and wooden from yesterday’s shift right from the start and I knew today was not my day.
After ending the workout early, the AT survey asked me to select a reason. I was unsure which was the best reason:
Intensity? It was too high for my tired legs.
Training Fatigue? I’m always carrying residual fatigue in my legs from work, and they were just as fatigued from work as they would have been from a hard workout.
Stress/Motivation? Work-related physical stress impacted my motivation - I really didn’t feel in the mood for a workout today and had to force myself to get going.
Other? And enter something along the lines of “work related fatigue” in the text box.
Any tips or advice on which would have been the best option to select?
You just go with what you feel, and try to be consistent with your feelings so the next time you feel the same you record the same thing.
If you’re regularly doing TR workouts and your FTP didn’t change a whole lot I would expect little to change.
BUT if you haven’t been doing TR workouts for a while, the system “lowers” your fitness over time. Not doing TR workouts is essentially rest in the robot eyes of AT, so its lowering your fitness. Once you do a ramp test, and prove you are still fit as you left off your levels should renormalize.
Also is AT still only a part of plan builder for the time being or does it work with the regular plans too?
Using colors (for the most part) is a good indicator of what you should pick to most people…
I like this idea.
To me “Hard” is something like: “That was tough, give me more!”
“Very Hard” is “I think I could do another interval”
“All out” is “pass me the bucket, I think I’m going to be sick!”
I’ve just had another endurance workout with no indication that there’s such a thing as progression levels. I did a VO2max workout yesterday which modified my Vo2max and anaerobic levels. Same bike and kit. Currently it’s about 50:50 as to whether a workout is picked up by the system.
AT requires Plan Builder use at this time.
Arent they basically the same thing? Just 2 answers on intervals equate to a simpler 1 answer on TR.
I reckon 5 covers it plenty, it doesnt need to be quite so nuanced.
Ditto, TR is just trying to get a sense of the RPE associated with the effort. I previously used a simple 1, 2, or 3 point scale in my own notes, so the TR 5 point version already added to my options.
I see people having more issues with selecting from more options generally speaking. I think the 5 options are plenty and should give enough range to reasonably indicate to TR how you felt in the workout.
As long as AT isn’t going to start scaling future workouts down when I select hard because there is no other option. A lot of my rides fall in between these 5 choices so i still think having a 1-10 scale is better. I just don’t see a point in having 5 choices, 3 of which are variant of hard. Extrapolating this to a 1-10 scale would basically make 5/10 “hard” which doesn’t line up with any other RPE scale I’ve seen at least from intervals or strava. 5/10 is moderate/mild/medium in my eyes
To me the “all out” is barely ever used, only for ramp tests or maybe if someone did a race, so in my eyes 1/5 of that RPE section is pretty useless from a training perspective
How would TR handle the difference between a 6/7 on a 10 point scale? It seems like splitting hairs at some point.
We don’t know exactly how they are leveraging that info, but it is likely impacting the applied Progression Level change (or deliberately NOT changing in some cases). As such, you are asking for more gray area between steps, and I don’t know that it really helps them like you think it might. But that is my own speculation.
As to using “hard” in more than one option, there are only two in use, not three (Hard or Very Hard). Perhaps it’s worthwhile to offer suggestions of alternates of 4-Very Hard to get it more unique?
In reality, the terms are largely arbitrary, and I actually work off the number more in my own evaluations. I consider a 1 as something I could to with no consideration or effort. I consider a 5 as something that crushed me, and likely required me to use some “cheats” like back pedaling, pausing the workout, Intensity reduction or some combo. The other 3 fall between that in steps.
But as TR has mentioned on several occasions, it is most important that you just use them how you see them and be CONSISTENT with your ratings. The system apparently will learn your ratings and align them over time, with respect to assigning Progression Level changes. All that is to say, that the numbers and names only matter so much. What matters more is you using them the same way over time, however that is.
My take is that the workouts are meant to be hard and you shouldn’t be scaled down as long as you pass them. I do think that you should be scaled up if you find them too easy.
There just seems to be some overlap in those final 3. As an example when I did Mount Major I gave it a 6 on Intervals.icu which falls between Moderate and Hard, but there is no way to distinguish between those in the current AT system. It was harder than moderate, but easier than Hard because I did not struggle at any point but i was still working to a point where i noticed. Maybe based on my levels/power profile I feel like I don’t align
1 - (easy) Pettit, Bald Knob, etc.
2 - (moderate) Echo, Leavitt, etc.
3 - (hard) I’m not sure what to put here, because for me SS is harder than moderate but i would not call it hard, maybe some easier vo2 or threshold stuff? maybe its just the naming convention I don’t agree with
4 - (very hard) harder vo2 like Pierce or maybe Kaiser
5 - (all out) ramp test/race
