Adaptive Training - Tag as Easy or Increase intensity and tag as Moderate

I just recently started with the Adaptive Training and I was curious on if one training method was better than the other.
When doing a working that seems easy, should I:

  1. finish the workout and tag it as ‘Easy’ or
  2. should I increase the intensity a few percentage points and tag it as ‘Moderate’?

Does either ‘matter’ to the training algorithm or is one better than the other? Just looking for a bit of insight into this.

Thanks!

Keep in mind that ‘Easy’ Workouts have their place in the grand scheme of your training plan! Feeling fresh and feeling as though you could up the intensity and make in ‘Moderate’ doesnt necessarily mean you should, and could lead to more fatigue later on for those really key, actually hard workouts.

Stick with it as-is for the time being, trust the process, and get through some of those SUPER tough workouts before considering adding more volume, using Workout Alternates to swap for a longer workout, etc. Good luck!!!

2 Likes

I get what you are saying, but still think the OP question is worth answering.

Consider the following:

  1. A rider that just did a ramp test and got notable decrease in Progression Levels, notably VO2.

  2. Based upon the PL drop, and the PB plan on the calendar, AT suggests dropping the following workouts in that VO2 Level.

  3. This rider is doing the first VO2 workout (that was de-rated above) and knows within the first interval set that the workout is well below their ability.

  4. At that point, is there a functional difference in AT if the rider does either option below?

    • A. Completes the existing workout and eventually selects 1-Easy for the rating.

    • B. Bumps up the intensity of the workout and eventually selects 2-Moderate for the rating.

  • I think the question revolves around there possibly being a “better” option with respect to future Progression Level increase. I do admit that your comments touch on the training effect and load appropriately, but this seems to be looking from a different angle.

  • It’s possible that when the PL adjustments post FTP change are more “rational” and trustworthy, that this will be a non-issue and we will be best to follow the adaptations as prescribed with no Workout Intensity adjustment. But we are surely not in that confidence state now, and we may still run into instances like above that are worth knowing if a preference exists.

3 Likes

IMHO its a coaching question, even if the coach is a computer algorithm. Easy workouts have a place in a well designed plan.

Why re-frame the question around future progression level increases?

Thanks @mcneese.chad and @IvyAudrain
I was more wondering based on somewhat of was @mcneese.chad mentioned.
I had a drop in ftp my last ramp test and started this up and now feel like the first few workouts have been easy.
I thought I read somewhere on here that AT “doesn’t care if you overachieve” (increase intensity) so I was wondering if there was a preference that leaned towards marking a workout easy vs making it harder and then making it s as such.

  • Because there are current situations that potentially set up excessive lag or time to regain Progression Levels that are actually appropriate to a rider’s current abilities.
    • Most notably are the unpredictable and unreliable PL resets from FTP changes.
    • Then there is the fact that riders performing workouts or unstructured rides not counting are getting delayed or even reset PL’s since at least some of their work is unrecognized in AT.

At the very least, people may still want to maximize their training while in the beta and it lacks the proper function we hope it attains in the future. Essentially, asking about a workaround to minimize lost time in training.

I get your point, and as I already covered, will have more willingness to “FtFP” per Frank, but only when the system is fully and properly functioning.

4 Likes

Are you not using AT then or are you just using it with a grain of salt then?

It’s interesting as I went back and reviewed my my past workout from my Plan and past from Plan Builder prior to using AT and a few of them in my last block were labeled as “Not Recommended” even though those were actually the ones that were part of the plan from PB.
Here’s one for example.

Curious what that is all about and why that would be the case??

I am only loosely following AT right now. I have done outside workouts, rides and races that are currently ignored and not affecting my PL’s.

If I have done some recent inside workouts in a given Level, I tend to follow AT. Otherwise I just skip the suggested adaptations since they are always down despite the outside work I’m doing.

As to your other observation, I can only guess that you did a workout that was presumably well above what your PL would have been at that time.

1 Like