They do have data (a lot of it) on people who don’t follow TR plans. So it’s not like everyone in the database just does SS plans.
I think the bigger challenge is that its very hard to do. A lot more so than just tweaking intensity up or down.
The biggest issue in my view is the timescale over which to measure and optimize. For TID, you’re talking training blocks or even seasons. It’s not as simple as “easy pass on workout 1” = “make workout 2 harder”.
Edit: I don’t mean to imply that the AT algorithm is this simple, and I’m not diminishing TRs accomplishment with the AT program as it’s been described (I think it’s really cool, and deserves status as a BHAG), but optimizing TID is a much bigger challenge.
They also said last week that they would be introducing a polarised plan (more detail in today’s AACC) and LV+ and MV+ plans. All of these will start to produce useful data, as well as that from those following their own polarised plans using TR workouts.
TID is backwards facing, and shouldn’t really be forwards facing, IMO.
Trying to target TID is teaching to the test rather than focusing on physiological limiters.
Sequencing makes a huge different here; two identical riders can have the exact same TID with radically different sequencing and they’ll have wildly different results.
This is a lot of why the whole “train polarized” thing breaks down for most people.
I’m using TID as shorthand for macro training zones and sequencing/timing.
Point being, when AT can also recommend the right training plan and phases based on athlete profile and goals, that’s the holy grail.
Using a example.
let’s say I’m struggling with a threshold workout.
one answer is reduce the intensity and do an easier version
another answer is don’t do a threshold workout and do a long endurance ride instead
and extending this logic, make recommendations that change macro training intensities and sequencing, not just tweak workouts up or down.
Agree that in a “full” implementation of the AT concept to its maximum extent, this should be the case.
But the way most plans work (including TR) is that the TID of the plan is forward facing. Here’s the workouts you’ll be doing, and here’s the zones they fall into.
Won’t it exactly do that? I mean by analyzing ones progress they should be able to balance intensity and volume. As a result we should see all TIDs possible spread across the user base.
I’m not in the beta, and don’t have direct experience, so can only go based on my interpretation of the podcast and what I’ve read.
My understanding is that you pick a plan. And AT will adjust the intensity of the different workouts in that plan. But not make wholesale changes to the TID vs what’s already in the plan.
I’m open to being corrected if I’ve misinterpreted.
I don’t think you got it all wrong. Though I would assume that by either nailing or failing you should see some tweaks which move the TID. Obviously, that won’t make a THR TID a POL TID but it should allow for a shift to PYR. And vice versa for those on a POL plan. Hopefully, also the levels play a role in that shift in either direction.
Right. And the progression system will do a good job at first.
But we’ll have to look at the data. There might be people who fall so far out of that range that we’ll have to do custom % of ramp test result to get a better FTP.
Lola would be a good test for 30 min TT/FTP power. It’s a 5.8 and is a “stretch” workout for most people after their ramp test. So not impossible, but a tough workout.
Forgive me if this has been asked, but what specifically is ML optimizing for? Is it explicitly looking to improve the specific training zones being targeted?
All this data gets fed into the database from thousands of rides and riders and ML attempts to solve for the best and fastest way to improve those training zones? Or is it trying to maximize pass rate while sitting just below failure? Or something else
I don’t know why this idea got into the minds of so many people.
We have 100 plan blocks. Only 2 of them are only sweet spot training.
We have 100+ million rides. Sweet spot is a tiny portion of those.
Once you get out of the first block of sweet spot training, you’re doing a lot more in your base/build/speciality block.
Less than 50% of athletes use our plans.
Athletes sync entire training histories that include rides before TR and during suspension periods.
Here’s one of our most popular speciality plan blocks (Rolling Road Race - Mid volume). I don’t understand how people get 90% of our rides are sweet spot from this. Sunday rides also have alternative long aerobic rides.
Sweet spot base high volume is the plan with lots of sweet spot in it. That plan is for about 7% of our athletes. These are people where they need further stimulus but can’t ride 20ish hours per week.
