What type of training do I normally do? Can you tell?
Granted I did 112 miles on 12/23 and then 63 on 1/1, so it does tilt the scales.
Watch out Jasper Philipsen
Yes, there are many limitations to PLs. They work okayish but they arenât perfect.
The fundamental issue is that they are combining several metrics into a single one.
I think sweet spot workouts are where this is the largest problem. I can do a 2-3h long level 9 SS workout where the intervals are all 10-20min at 80-90% like 2-3x a week without any problems.
That doesnât mean I can do the 1h long level 9 SS workouts that are basically an hour at FTP. And it doesnât mean I need an FTP boost which TR always tries to give me after completing them.
When you combine power, duration, and repeatability for a given interval into a single metric, you are losing a lot of information. It may work the majority of the time, or within some degree of tolerance, but it is not perfect.
The other issue is that threshold and lower zones should have a larger impact on zones below them. If I can do a 3h long âlevel 9â SS workout with an IF if 0.8, I can obviously ride 3h at least at 0.65 if not higher, and the PLs for z2 and tempo should reflect this.
I wouldnât argue, that adaptation is only caused by volume or that you get (exactly) the same adaptation at 60% as at 75%. All other things being equal: A higher intensity will cause a higher stimulus.
But that is not taking into account recovery and fatigue. When we look at that, I would argue (following the opinion of most coaches I come across) that adding more volume at a lower intensity has a better stimulus to fatigue ratio.
I donât have TR anymore to look, but how much time in zone is a 3 hour level 9 sweet spot workout usually?
Whiteside+1 is 6x20 Sweet Spot repeats at 88% FTP. PL is 9.1 and Workout Duration 2:45.
Nice. I didnât know they went up to 120 min of SS. Good gravel workout.
the 347 platinum plan goes to 120min SS lol
How high does the Ultra Platinum go?
we havenât attempted to go that far lol but maybe we should!
The problem is that the definition of âan endurance rideâ is an ephemeral thing that is ever changing.
Is it a zone 2 ride? or is it focused more on âenduringâ whatever route you have set out for the day. When you are racing half the time you have a 3.5h race that is averaging z2 power but with plenty of surges and spikes where you reach a point where itâs just about âenduringâ. Some rides are focused on the mental aspect of enduring the route, others are focused on developing excellent aerobic ability in the steady state.
I see your issue though with endurance on trainerroad for sure, personally I donât use the progression levels at all for endurance because TR will never give the volume that I want anyways.
So I just end up grabbing whatever duration of ride I like a copy pasting it a bunch. Like Slatna and Ptarmigan, and then sometimes I throw in Bays or one of the other ones containing sprints or form sprints.
Endurance Ride: RPE of btwn 2 and 5, overwhelmingly below LT1.
A race with stretches of Z2 - however prolonged - is not an endurance ride. Same goes for that group ride where you end up doing 5wkg on a dozen 2 minute climbs.
I think this is a big problem in our sport. Weâre so numbers driven that weâve convinced ourselves we need to define âeasyâ. We ask questions like âhow hard can I go and have it still be easy?â Or âIf my coach tells me to do an easy ride, how do I know if itâs TOO easyâ. Easy means easy. We all intuitively know the definition, we just think someone else must know better, and it leads many of us to doing hard easy rides and easy hard rides.
There is a problem with evaluating opinions based on popularity.
Great for politics.
âŚTerrible for objectivity, science and reality.
Particularly with the advent of social media.
Iâve copied everyone else and set up my TV so the screen faces the room, not the wall.
Following the herd seems to have been a good option so far.
I think thatâs a great post @Pbase
But it would be remiss to think that athletes do easy when prescribed easy, when objective analysis of training logs shows that even this apparently simple concept is not adhered to quite frequently.
Often we hear this is because athletes are âalphaâ personalities (a description which has no grounding in science btw), but I think and what my own experience leads me to believe, is that there are some ideas about self-awareness that are entirely alien to some people even though they are no-brainer for others.
I hear you. I just think itâs simpler. I think a lot of people think âEasy rides are good, but wouldnât they be even better if I just went a little harder?â 
According to you, which is the point Iâm trying to make.
As the saying goes âit is that easyâŚ.and it is that hard.â 
But your point is 100% correct - easy is easy. No need to overthink it or stress out that you may have gone over Z2 briefly in order to get over a short hill.
Regarding power/rpe we can just go to the source:
And keep in mind that they are descriptive training levels not prescriptive training zones.