Try This (note this only works if your FTP has not been updated since the workout)
Note down the day you did the workout and the workout name. Find the workout in “Browse workouts”, select it, then scroll down to the power record and create a custom filter for the day you did the workout.
Here is an example of mine, this is a VO2 max workout done on the trainer using the TR software in erg mode (i.e. not zwift)
You can see that ive exceeded the “perfect” workout (in NP) for the entire workout by 2~3w which is about 1%
Try this analysis for our workout and see how close you really got and post the screenshot.
The Ai is looking at what you did. So did you really get close to a perfect workout or did you undershoot the power by a reasonably percentage?
There must be a threshold to cutting the rest out (usually just a minute or two), I have never noticed a negative grading for cutting back on intervals. Usually when I see recoveries over 5min I just incrase the warmup and scrub some of the midworkout rest. (Unless it is a gnarly workout (vo2 or on/offs), where i am thankful for it LOL)
As far as I understand it, the AI is looking at the power duration curve of the actual work done in the workout. Note that this would be average power not NP because the AI doesn’t use FTP.
So having lower power in the rest intervals means lower power of any duration that is longer than the work intervals and this includes time from the rest intervals.
So yeah, the power during rest intervals matters, at least for the AI. Same with pausing the workout, because it has the same effect since the power duration curve is counting your power during the pause as zero.
Now, you can argue that rest interval watts do not matter from a physiological standpoint. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t. But from a mathematical standpoint they absolutely do. And AI and anything done on computers is all math under the hood.
I don’t think recovery power matters if its a true recovery target, but the OPs look like Z2 or 3 target step downs. I think you can tell in the app what ones matter and those that don’t, the ones that matter have a actual average circle displayed in the player above or below the target.
This was back in my running days… so a different sport… but I was lucky enough to train with (well, some workout at the same time anyways ) as some very fast world class runners. It is event specific but for most longer distance events (5k and up) recovery between reps was generally very fast and very short.
I do agree that the difference between 100 & 150 is inconsequential but recovery duration and intensity most certainly matters in training.
Are you sure you are being punished? What does the actual grid showing the AL show? It feels like you are really angry about something that might not have occurred. The last person who posted enraged about the same issue then realized they weren’t dinged at all by the system. I’ve gotten the cut short survey but the levels were all at or higher than what was expected from the workout.
I was responding to your comment about you being punished for your recoveries. Were you? What rating were you expecting and what did you get?
Regarding the level progression, how do they look when you look at the workouts power curve? Does it raise you up in an area? Not sure if you’ve done the 5.6, but if not does it raise an area of the PDC curve? Or is it your second Workout of the week? I’ve seen my Thursday workout be slightly easier to allow for better Saturday workouts.
There needs to be some sort of progressive overload in training to gain fitness though. Progressing backwards from a harder to an easier workout does not make sense.
If there is some reason for it, it would be helpful to know but I don’t think there is a way for us to ask the ai why it is doing what it is doing.
But they were at a 5.0…. so even though they manually did a ‘hero workout’ to get to 6.2… the recommended 5.6 is smart for long term success… then maybe next time 5.8 or 6.
However they are not really using that system anymore, its more of a carry over and to show relative efforts in systems.
Mine however… due to too much running/weights throwing off TSS i assume, does regress… almost week over week… intervals are getting shorter… not longer. Seems to mellowed out with a demanding approach and editting a response on RPE (from VH to H)
What would be helpful would be to know what these three workouts are actually made up of, so we can try to assess the delta between them in terms of watts and minutes rather than the abstract 5.0, 5.6 and 6.2.
The PL system is definitely still a thing though, it’s shown in every workout and is still tied to the workouts difficulty.
The ai might not use it to pick workouts but it would not make sense to have, for example, a 5 be easier than a 4 and I highly doubt that to be the case.
“Your post was flagged as inappropriate : the community feels it is offensive, abusive, to be hateful conduct or a violation of our community guidelines.”
What you’re doing here is certainly an edge-case scenario, and I don’t know if we’d recommend doing workouts this way. If you’re ready for a much harder workout than what’s prescribed, we’d recommend finding one via Workout Alternates or somewhere else.
Chopping workouts up like this likely (and clearly) won’t bring as good results.
I understand that, from your perspective, you overachieved and were awarded a higher level than what the workout originally offered, and that should be taken into account. I can look into that, but something tells me that the amount that you’ve changed in the original workout is causing an issue with how we’re processing it.
Could you send me your TR username so that I can dig in a bit deeper?
I’ve been wondering if TrainerRoad AI could (should?) go through all workouts to reassess/update the Workout Levels. It does feel counterintuitive to be given workouts with a lower WL than previously achieved, and if the reason/explanation is that WL’s aren’t fit for purpose anymore, then surely it makes sense to update them?
I think the WLs are fit for purpose…. but mainly because their purpose isn’t really important.
WL are a useful tool to quickly compare workouts and to roughly guage where your recent training is at.
But the AI predicted RPE and the new NP distribution charts are far more powerful tools.
That said, most of the time where athletes are not seeing their workouts progressing to higher WLs it’s because the AI thinks they are tired…. not because of the deficiencies of the WL system.
And let’s also remember WLs are the same for the whole population, regardless of what you in particular have been doing lately, whereas the predicted RPE is specific to you and thus a much better guide.
I can easily find a Hard Start threshold workout with a lower WL than a similar length O/U, that the predicted RPE tells me I will find a lot harder - because I’ve been doing a bunch of O/U stuff lately and haven’t done any Hard Starts in well over a year.
) as some very fast world class runners. It is event specific but for most longer distance events (5k and up) recovery between reps was generally very fast and very short.