Could the description of “Occasionally outside workout outcomes don’t get correctly classified” in the Known Issues page be made a little more descriptive? For example, does this mean that we sometimes get the “Struggled survey” when we shouldn’t? Are there cases happening where the “Struggled survey” should appear but doesn’t?
Anyone else having issues with AT workouts not syncing to strava? Seems like my past few workouts have not been able to sync to Strava
Just got back from vacation and started using AT this week. I get that you have to use plan builder but I sure wish I could use it with something like Traditional Base plans. I really enjoy those but I guess I will just do a low volume sweet spot and then sub that plan in as well to get extra base and ride them outside.
is this the best solution?
Meh, I just started a new training plan (SSB LV) with AT this week and today I was offered 8 adaptations in the Android app which I were excited for. The first one recommended replacing my workout tomorrow with a ramp test, probably since I replaced the ramp test yesterday with a long Z2 ride, because I am happy with where my FTP is set right now. Thus I hit the “Don’t adapt” button in the bottom left corner, which frustratingly caused all 8 adaptions to be discarded with seemingly no way to bring them back. So one misclick because of a misleadingly labled button and 7 adaptations I would have loved to test out are down the drain?
- I would suggest changing the button on the app to something like “Discard all” or similar.
- Is it possible at all to only accept certain adaptations or do you have to accept/decline all?
- Also, will AT now recommend a ramp test for my next workout for the rest of my training plan until I do one? That would be annoying too.
It’s all or nothing currently re accepting adaptations.
If the ramp test that you didn’t do is still on your calendar, then delete it and that should trigger adaptations again
Wow, thanks! That worked and didn’t even recommend another ramp test, now.
Wonder what’s the logic behind that.
Just Adapted workouts not syncing? Reach out to firstname.lastname@example.org so they can take a look. Sorry for the trouble.
I don’t know the logic, but I expect that it is looking for a ramp test result before adapting as long as the Ramp Test remains on the calendar.
I’ve been on AT for a month or so now.
For this week it served me up
Mon Mon Williamson +4 Not Recommended • Anaerobic 6.8
Tues Matthes +4 Not Recommended • VO2 Max 6.9
Wed Lion Rock -1 Achievable • Threshold 1.6
Thur Juneau -1 Stretch • Sweet Spot 6.9
Fri Aniakchak Not Recommended • Sweet Spot 9.9
My PL’s were
Sweet Spot 4.5
VO2 Max 1.9
I spoke to support who amended the week’s sessions, but left in Williamson +4 Not Recommended • Anaerobic 6.8, which I did yesterday. This was brutal, I had to go lie-down in a dark room for about 4 hours after!
My anaerobic PL is now 6.8 and AT has me doing Cirque anaerobic 6.8 tomorrow.
It’s a physical impossibility that I can do another anaerobic 6.8 two days after the last. I only just manged Lion Rock -1 today, which was marked as achievable and should have been relatively easy.
I’ve pinged support an email and understand I can use alternatives, but am surprised to have had a 4.7 point jump in my anaerobic PL, based on one stupidly hard ride that I really shouldn’t have been served up in the first place.
I’m enjoying using AT and think I am learning a lot about my capabilities, much more so that just following the set plans, but I’m a little less sure that AT has correctly estimated my PL’s or is serving me up the best training plan.
I’m hoping it will improve with more data, but it has been a bit hit and miss so far.
Just signed up for the AT beta! Very excited to give it a try.
Did you put “all out” in the survey?
Best to pace yourself with the excitement. Plenty of us signed up immediately after the announcement in Feb and the excitement is long gone.
Why is that?
My experience is that a workout is marked up as “Stretch” if the PL is greater than 1.0 and less than 2.0 above your current PL for that target zone and “Not Recommended” if it’s greater than 2.0 above your current PL. “Achievable” is less than 1.0 above your current PL.
AT needs to know how you found the workout but importantly not how you think it should have been, don’t second guess what you think should be the right response, that’s AT’s job. I think most of us have got this wrong at some point. In the original podcast about AT, Nate mentions that there are certain classifications that don’t make sense - something like Pettit can never be “All out” for example. At the other extreme Disaster could never be classified as “Easy”! Ivy has posted what each response means, can’t remember if it’s in this thread or one of the other AT threads.
Basically AT is saying “This workout should be Hard”, if you classify it as “Hard” then AT thinks it’s offering you the right level of workout. If you respond “Very Hard” then AT should rein things in a bit and your next workout in that target zone should be more manageable. Similarly if you respond with “Moderate” or “Easy” then AT will push you with the next workout.
If you mark up a workout as “All out” then I believe that you should then be presented with the Struggle Survey where you can tell AT what the problem was. (I’ve yet to mark a workout as “All out” so can’t confirm)
What response did you give Williamson+4? I would have put “All Out” given the description of your post workout reaction.
Yes, marked it as an all out effort and then intensity on the next survey
5 months is a long time to stay excited!
I was excited for the first 3-4 weeks. Now I have completely forgotten that they have even introduced the AT. It was announced way too prematurely in my opinion…
So you are not happy with the product? Or waiting to get in? @Rosscopeco guess the same question for you.
I just wait for the AT inclusion email to arrive. All I know about it is this forum thread. I just keep training with my original plan builder workouts calendar and I have to say that I’m very happy with it!
There’s over 10k people in it now - a full release is probably not far round the corner.
As-is it works great as a sort of MVP (minimum viable product) for TR indoor training; my experience has been pretty good there. It definitely feels more complete than the previous offering - if nothing else, using the PLs makes it really easy to pick appropriate workouts compared to before, which was basically eyeballing the IF, TSS etc., which led me to end up doing a lot of the same workouts since I knew what I was getting into. But that’s not necessarily the best thing for progression.
Once they get the outdoor workouts working smoothly across platforms and the unstructured rides feeding in too, it’ll be really good.