Long-time TR user here, following my plan closely and accepting AI recommendations. My FTP has never been higher, but I keep hitting the same wall in long races.
Despite conservative pacing in the first half, I fall apart late in long events. At BWR CA, I was putting out 50W less than TR’s race pacing suggested I should be capable of. It feels physiological: very high RPE, and pushing through brings on cramping. Fueling is dialed (nutritionist, ~120g carbs/hour, sodium and fluid managed), so I feel confident those aren’t limiters.
All the evidence points to neuromuscular durability. My body (or mind?) simply isn’t conditioned to sustain power deep into long events. Despite enabling Dynamic Endurance, my recommended rides almost never exceed 1.5 hours, and the longer workout alternates TR recommends are at way easier pacing than I’d ride in a race. The system explicitly tells me not to do rides that approach the IF I would need to sustain in these longer races.
At 4.3 W/kg I should be capable of a sub-9 hour Leadville finish, but not if I can’t hold power in the back half.
What I’m wrestling with:
Strong FTP but underperforming late in long events. Anyone else?
Can structured training fully address durability, or do big rides fill a gap it can’t?
For Leadville vets on TR: did you supplement with longer rides, and did it help?
Is there a smart way to add volume without compromising structured work?
Would love to hear how others have navigated this.
Despite what TR will say it’s almost definitely a good idea to do big rides to prep for big events, doubly so if you are finding that it’s a weakness across multiple events.
There was a good interview recently here:
Not to say you should replicate any of their workouts but it might be worth doing your own versions and seeing what happens.
We have similar w/kg and I went sub 9 the two years I did LT100. I used TR as a guide with another plan for LT100 but I feel you have to add in the longer zone 2 rides to improve the durability to what TR recommends. It takes a long time to build the durability of being consistent with the long rides. I also almost always added 30-45 minutes to my TR workouts of zone 2 and never did rides/workouts under 1.5 hours despite what TR recommended. Once a week I would do a 3-5 hour zone 2 ride and made sure 90% of the ride was in zone 2 with no stops or coasting, unless refueling bottles. I averaged around 11-13 hours a week with it progressively ramping up starting 4-6 week out. My durability in year 2 was also much higher than the first year (after 2 yrs of long zone 2 rides) and actually went sub 8.
To test my durability I also did a long 5 hour ride both years about 3-4 weeks prior to LT100 that was zone 2 with a 10 minute threshold effort every hour and was able to still hold the same threshold power at hour 5. This was a good test to know that my durability was in check.
Yes, longer rides are the key IMHO. I have learned that I need longer that what TR recommends for sure. I end up with 2 (sometimes 3) rest days then to also get my interval work in. But at the end of the day there is nothing like smart volume with proper rest.
To me - this is a problem, I’d reach out to support to see if you have something configured wrong, but you want to be working up to being able to do a 6+ hour training ride for Leadville IMO.
Especially this time of year, you’ve got maybe 5-6 weekends left before taper so if this is for Leadville this year, I would dial back to two intensity days per week and start prioritizing volume right now. Goal is no longer increasing FTP, it’s durability, volume, and time on the bike.
You can’t just kill yourself and go straight to that much time on the bike though but I’d ramp up starting now.
My Leadville Benchmark workouts are 4.5 hours at ~80% IF on a Saturday, followed by 6.5 hours at ~70-72% IF on a Sunday at the end of a training block, then a couple more easier workouts before heading into Taper.
Sounds like there’s quite a few of us on the TrainerRoad plus program. Myself I’m a fan of truckloads of back to back Sweet Spot days. Especially during base phase(s).
Yeah, I think something is wrong with the dynamic endurance on your plan too. Mine varies between 3 and about 4.5 hours so if yours never goes above 1.5 that seems weird.
My only point of disagreement is the fasted riding - I’ve done it myself and found no benefit over the long term. I’ve since committed to “training the gut” and fueling anything over 45 minutes with carbs ranging from 45grams per hour up to 100. Otherwise your approach is valid IMO.
Edit to add a response to the OP. I had a great spring following TR’s plan year. Similar to you I had an issue late in a race where I cramped. Not exactly the same as losing 50 watts, but I think I didn’t have the proper durability. My new approach was to fully fuel all my rides with an emphasis on working up to 100 grams per hour on my long weekend ride. I also combined that with an effort late into the ride or I’d even spread out my second hard workout intervals throughout the ride.
I think this is a missing piece of the puzzle with TR in that the longer rides prescribed aren’t long enough, and they certainly don’t include any efforts that train durability or mimic and train the body for the 3-4 hour plus efforts that many of us are doing. Despite TR’s dynamic endurance feature I plan my own endurance session with a sensible volume ramp.
In my experience some fasted rides can help with the metabolic flexibility, reducing the need of high carb fueling and the power fading in the last phase of long mtb races. I’ve completed rides up to 2-3 hours without problems at endurance pace without fueling. This is only a personal experience and, as a disclaimer, in the scientific literature it’s not clear if fasted rides are useful in improving durability.
I used to fade late in races, even in local ~3 hour gravel races. After years of high volume training, durability is now a big strength of mine. Maybe there is a way to build that durability on low volume training, but the volume increase over an extended time is what did it for me. At 57, my FTP has been flat for years (a win at my age), but I’m still setting power PR’s for long durations.
Structured training and “big rides” are not mutually exclusive. It’s not as simple as just adding big rides into your training program, it’s more about adding volume in the right way IMO (bigger rides are often just part of that). I think people can get into trouble when they jump into big rides while training at a low volume. There was a good podcast recently where the data showed negative effects when someone throws in big rides that represent more than 50% of their typical training load (based on TSS). Which makes perfect sense. If your weekly TSS is only ~450, jumping right into weekend rides of 250+ tss is likely going to leave you wrecked and affect the quality of future training. That 50% rule probably varies a bit by individual and their training history, but I think it’s a good guideline.
I am an advocate for big rides if you are training for long events, but I do think caution is needed if they result in a big ramp of TSS. Training stress should always be ramped up gradually, whether that’s from adding a big ride or more intensity sessions. If you are talking about Leadville for this year, trying to build significant durability (or fitness of any kind) between now and then is risky IMO. I’d still probably throw in some longer rides in (for the sake of testing fueling, bike fit, etc.), but nothing too crazy. Assuming you have a couple rest weeks between now and Leadville, the perfect time to throw in a bigger ride is the last day before a rest week (much better chance of making that day productive without affecting future workouts).
Gradually. If you use a tool like intervals.icu, it will show you your ramp rate and stress balance. TR can provide similar feedback via the red/yellow days. And more important than what any tool shows you, listen to how your body is feeling as you are ramping up.
There was a good podcast recently where the data showed negative effects when someone throws in big rides that represent more than 50% of their typical training load (based on TSS).
The negative effect in question was that people were more likely to miss the next hard workout if they did that. This is a surrogate outcome for increasing FTP though.
In the context of someone struggling to improve durability (or whatever we’re calling it now) rather than increase FTP, I don’t think this is as relevant.
I’d personally agree to still be cautious about going too long as it also risks impacting next weeks volume and consistency, which are problems if your metric you’re trying to improve is durability.
But the situation OP is in is one of the few where I think it can make sense to break that 50% “rule.” You just need to be smart and careful about how you do it.
I’ve been following the volume recommendations from TR, which has had me at ~5.5 hours a week on the bike over 4-5 rides per week. My longest rides have been roughly 2 hours (all structured). That said, once I started deviating from my plan and doing longer-than-recommended rides, my plan has adapted and recently bumped my recommended volume to 6.5-7 hours a week.
I am a bit confused, perhaps misunderstanding. TR allows users to turn their long endurance rides into 5 hours with the Dynamic option. You can have two of those/week. Are you looking to add more volume than that regularly?
I am preping for LOTOJA, which will be 9-10 hours and would love to prepare properly. I have leaning heavily on TR’s suggestions.
The problem some people have is that TR’s fatigue management system is very conservative and may not ever prescribe a workout longer than an hour or two. I’ve experienced this myself and have heard the same from others. I have a friend that doesn’t tell TR about strength workouts because it tends to trigger RLGL and reductions in workout intensity that aren’t needed.
