Adaptive Training is now in Open Beta!

I selected “hard” and then get the struggle survey immediately after without the option of “ I didn’t struggle”. Most workouts I have been rating as moderate and thus rating 1 hard I’m assuming the system wants a reason why? I understand the challenge the survey presents because it’s individual in a way and have been rating workouts honestly.Hopefully I don’t sound like I’m complaining because I’ve been happy with AT regardless.

1 Like

Nice! Thats totally fine, and I think even just ‘hard’ workouts resulting in a struggle survey is meant to provide some room for athletes who arent as accustom to listening to their bodies. ‘Hard’ to some may very well mean they absolutely struggled at times to complete the workout, so best to provide them an opportunity to say that they did and why so that AT can adjust accordingly!

1 Like

@IvyAudrain I’m curious if you folks considered a more logarithmic scale (perhaps with a slider)? Similar to what Strava does or how the NPS is calculated. Most of the first half of the slider would be Easy, then Moderate for a smaller chunk that extends past the middle, then a shorter still Hard, short Very Hard almost towards the end, and All Out is the very end of the scale.

My thinking here is that human perception tends to be logarithmic and that’s maybe why having Hard in the middle of the scale is disorienting.


Love this recommendation! WIll pass along to the team right away for sure. :star:


Does anyone knows what actually triggers Adaptations?

I started a new plan on Thursday (I actually set it up on Wednesday night) but instead of doing yet another ramp test before a TT I substitute it for a short Anaerobic session that was only rated PL 3.1. After which my Anerobic PL increased to that. However no adaptations were triggered and that’s been the same all today (a rest day) until 5mins ago, circa 27hours after the Anaerobic workout. Did the anaerobic session trigger the adaptations or the new plan started 48h ago or today’s rest day :thinking:

If you haven’t done a work out that was actually scheduled in the plan. I don’t think you’ll get adaptation‘s for a future workouts in that plan phase, but once you start the scheduled “plan” workouts they will change depending on your current levels and what you rate the workout.

1 Like

Thats what I can’t work out, I would have thought similar, but bizarrely I got adaptations triggered 20 mins or so ago :thinking: :exploding_head:

1 Like

Hopefully the adaptions went in the right direction. I can say that so far the suggested workouts have been pretty spot on with what I can handle. I think we are all learning this new AI module together.

1 Like

Today I rated a work out “very hard” with no secondary survey afterwards. I will never understand the matrix but all good and happy with AT so far :call_me_hand:just thought I’d share with y’all.


Started back a few weeks ago from scratch, creating a new LV plan and pleasantly surprised at how well AT is picking different rides for me. FTP well down from where it was and feel that I have bounced back really well.


Same thing happened to me. It appears that the system will give you PL credit if you make it “pretty far” into a workout before failing.

Question, maybe for @IvyAudrain :

When doing a long outdoor weekend ride and associating it with a planned ride, should I pick a planned ride that’s similar to the ride I actually did?
Ex: Plan says a 2 hour endurance ride, and I end up doing a ~5hr ride ride outside, should I pick a similar TSS / shaped indoor ride to associate, or just associate the outdoor ride to the original? Does it matter?

1 Like

Good question, definitely wouldn’t hurt to pick something like Highland (a 5 hour Endurance workout) and associating that instead. While we are still in beta and marking those completed outside workouts as passes, AT won’t yet be able to see those extra few hours of Endurance you did and adjust your levels accordingly. Besides, it’s probably good practice to keep track of your weekly TSS/hours in general, so when you’re later looking back at what went right/wrong with your season, you can point to specific week workloads and how your body responded.

1 Like

@IvyAudrain Please help. Ok, I did a 25 mile Time Trial race on Sunday. .98 intensity for nearly 58 minutes. (It was a PB). I have made the mistake of associating that, as an outside ride, with the workout Sociedad (Threshold 8.0). The effect has been to raise my progression levels:

  • Primary Progression : from Threshold 3.8 to 8 (+ 4.2)
  • Secondary Progressions: Anaerobic 1.1 to 1.3 (+ 0.2)

Which is fine… EXCEPT trainnow is now offering me threshold sessions at 8.9 (eg Fourches). Effectively a similar race as a training session!!! IF 1.01

I was happy with progression levels up to now and using TR. So I am in a real dilemma. Should I not associate races with TR sessions at all. In doing so it is massively messing up my progression levels, even though I am clearly capable for a RACE. …or should I remove it and let TrainNow be happy with the earlier progression level.

Last week I did a 100m TT in 4h12 at an IF of .79 and associated that with Pendleton (PL 12.9!!!) on supports recommendation.

I have told the survey that the effort was all out and the cause was intensity.

Surely this is not an intended behaviour. Please advise. Am I confusing the system by doing all-out races, that it is not recognising, associating them as outside rides with TR sessions and then Tr/TN etc. simply getting confused.

(PS I am not able to use AT, because the sorts of races I am doing (121hr TT one weekend, 5 weeks later a 100mile TT and a three 25m TTs over three successive weekends to finish the season) does not seem to be handled by PlanBuilder, so I have stuck with choosing plans and trainNow.)

Good news! The team is working on a feature that would allow athletes to ignore workout records from Progression Logic, as you’re correct in that we don’t want to make future workouts as hard as a race!

That future ‘flow’ would be:

  1. An athlete completes race-type effort, and
  2. select to ‘ignore effort from Adaptive Training’, meaning it will not affect your level(s).

In the short term, un-associating the workout record should resolve the issue! If you need a hand with that or have in-associated and aren’t seeing updates yet, feel free to reach out to and they’ll take a look!


Ah ah, @IvyAudrain OK that makes sense. I will “Un-associate” right now :slight_smile: and cease race associating for the future :). (and filling in surveys for races as that seems to add further confusion).


1 Like

@IvyAudrain Even though I “un-associated” the rides on my PC in the browser, and then later gone to the TR App on my PC, the App version of TrainNow was still recommending the higher intensity sessions. It was only when I changed the duration, that TraainNow gave workouts more consistent with the corrected PLs.

I assume its a timing/synchronisation issue (I have refreshed the TR app)

Sorry for the trouble, I would check in with the support team. They’ll have pretty detailed insight to what’s going on!

1 Like

Just to add to this, I find the Android version usually needs force updating (by changing the duration) as the recommendations on opening are usually clearly not what’s supposed to be there (i.e., Productive Climbing the day after a hard ride etc.). Once the duration has been changed it seems to behave as expected - I guess it just needs to refresh to take into account most recent changes.

1 Like

Not sure if this is working as expected or a bug, but before I email support thought I’d ask.

The last 2 workouts have all been hard V02 sessions where are the 1st or 2nd blocks I’ve had to reduce by 5% to get through the whole workout. My post-ride survey has indicated I failed and selected intensity as the reason. But each one on my calendar shows it as a breakthrough or achievable which doesn’t sound correct, similarly, I’ve not seen any changes to the plan for some short V02 intervals to work up to longer ones.

Does AT take into account manual intensity changes? I seem to remember in the past it was unable to?