I recently came off a coached custom 12 week training plan where I did a 13 minute critical power test and my well qualified and experienced coach gave me a FTP of 218 and multiple workouts were completed with no issues.
Another test 12 weeks later and I was given a new FTP of 221.
Due to work commitments I decided that I could not justify paying for another coached 12 week plan and was intrigued with the the new improved TrainerRoad platform.
On sign-up, TrainerRoad AI gave me a new FTP of 204. So I did not accept this and did a workout with my original FTP of 221 instead and that felt great.
So I do agree with the majority here that the new AI FTP detection is skewed and this surely cannot be the right way to continue, with your customers being so divided and some even very angry.
It’s working great for me. Had my first “hard” workouts with it the past 2 days and although I didn’t think I’d be able to complete them (had an FTP bump with AIFTP) I rated both hard just like AI said they would. Ironically enough I have one that looks easier on Monday that’s ranked “very hard” by AI so am now nervous about that.
Really wish TR would rename this AIFTP something that’s not FTP as it’s being used differently. I’d say 1 workout isn’t really enough to judge this here on your end so keep up, ideally with the AIFTP, and see how it goes.
My point is that a well qualified and respected coach calculated my FTP over a 12 week period and 3 days later AI calculated it so much lower. And yes the majority of the posts I read are not liking the AI FTP detection.
Glad to hear it’s working for you and unless I’m struggling to complete the workout I will continue with the coached version and of course I’m open to accepting the new AI FTP if any workouts result in failure. Thank you for the positive response.
Nope. The coach estimated your FTP. TR’s AI gave you a number to use as a basis for giving you productive workouts.
The mistake you’re making, understandably given the nomenclature, is that the two numbers are equivalent. They’re really not.
The new system gave me a 31w (14%) increase based on what it had given me just 16 days earlier. Obviously, that’s not credible if the two numbers are both meant to represent my actual FTP. They don’t.
We need to separate our TR FTPs from our actual FTPs, and separate both of those from our self-worth!
Ok, I can accept it’s maybe the wrong language terminology that’s being used, but TrainerRoad chose it.
I have no ego with my FTP number I can assure you of that, all I want is the correct intensity from my prescribed workouts for the correct adaptation and progression.
There is no right answer to the question of what FTP is, which is why the arguments are always hilarious to observe. TR have developed their own unique definition and it’s really not helping.
Just call it something unique and then you’ve got a nice bit of copyright too.
The stubbornness with people on their perceived FTP is mind blowing. It’s just a number……knuckle down, do the work and get faster. That’s all I’m seeing with the update. I’ll ride the wave while it’s there.
The workout would have “felt great” regardless of the FTP setting - that’s the beauty of the current system - it can give you a great workout no matter what FTP you input within reason by adjusting the workout difficulty instead.
The FTP setting doesn’t change the difficulty of the workouts.
The system just works best with the new AI detected number (according to TR) and it’s the method that is comparable with the AI predicted number.
Feel free to use your “correct” number though
If you want to check if your FTP is realistic then load up a level 4 threshold workout and see how you get on.
