Boarstone Vs Amadeo

Hi all,

Can anyone tell me what the justification might be for these two to be almost a whole PL different when there’s marginal actual difference if comparing the effort profile. There’s 1TSS difference and the IF is .70 and .69 respectively.

Seems odd. Anomaly? Worth flagging to TR team?


Yeah, they are slightly different but certainly doesn’t seem like it needs a full progression point different. @IvyAudrain ?

1 Like

Cadence drills in the workout with higher PL could be an explanation, since they can be quite taxing, especially in a 2h-workout.
Other than that I see no explanation. Might be worth checking if this is the case.


It’s kinda like trying to decide on how many angels can dance on a pinhead :grin:


Only one these days, social distancing etc… :wink:

1 Like

I did Boarstone today. I forget how these can load up the legs pretty good. I’ll try Amadeo in the week and see what that’s like.

Aren’t these progression levels just assigned by the AI? Maybe it’s as simple as a greater percentage of people completed one than completed the other.

Good point, maybe users cut Boarstone short and AI has picked that up? Not sure that’s how it works but maybe it is.

Hi! Looks like Boarstone has more time at 70% and above than Amadeo, and doesn’t drop below that like Amadeo does. Cheers!

1 Like

Thanks for looking at it

1 Like

0.9 points seems excessive for that small a variance.

1 Like

You need to choose wisely if you plan on doing one of those outdoors though. They’ll have you ride for 1h45’ (main set) between 203-242W and 209-242W respectively. So, if you want to progress faster for the same effort, you need to replace Amadeo with Boarstone unless you spend a significant amount of time between 203W and 209W.

I have a follow-up question / observation on this one:

Last Sunday, I did Boarstone as an outdoor workout and AT raised my Endurance Progression to 6.2 (+1.2). This, however, did not result in any adaptations in my training plan. Could that be because I am currently doing a Traditional Base Mid Volume plan and did not use Plan Builder? I know that the Traditional Base Mid Volume plan is not recommended, but is it also excluded from AT? @Jonathan said in a recent podcast that only very old plans do not respond to AT iirc. Did something go wrong with the recording of the outdoor workout (Garmin Edge 1000) maybe?

Since I picked traditional base because I wanted easier workouts, I’m not overly concerned. There is always Alternates if I feel like doing more. Still the question remains: Is something not working properly here?

Also, I did Amadeo as a regular indoor ride today (replacing an 1h Endurance 3.1 workout). After the workout, the app showed that my Primary Progression was changed from Endurance 6.2 to 5.3. This is not reflected in my Career overview though. Yet again, this being a regular indoor workout, shouldn’t there have been any suggested adaptations? Especially since there still would be an 0.3 increase compared to my pre-Boarstone Progression level.

Can anyone help me understand this? @IvyAudrain?

Thanks all! :smiley:

For sure check in with so they can confirm you’re getting credit for those outside workouts, and that your plan is up to date and working through Adaptive Training. They’re quick to respond and will be happy to help!

1 Like

Thanks @IvyAudrain, you’re great :smiley: :+1:

1 Like

Just in case someone stumbles over this: Evan from customer support looked into this and the “problem” simply was that I am currently in the middle of a recovery week and those don’t adapt. AT should be back to normal after next Tuesday when I will have to do a ramp test and start a new training phase.

I’d like to give a shout out to Evan and the other support staff - you are great!

1 Like