I’m Finding myself fast forwarding after the first 15min. Then, as much as interesting as the topic may be, I loose interest. Am I alone? As the short spam culture that we live in ruined me?
I’m the opposite. I listen mainly for the deep dives, and I get disappointed when they have to cut them short to keep the show running. Although, I completely understand why.
I love the podcast mainly because they go so deep into the issues. And I love the duration, because I can listen to it in my longer training sessions on the trainer. So no, I don’t fast forward. Sometimes when the topic really interests me, I even listen to it twice.
I usually enjoy/prefer the deep dives. Rarely, it will be on a topic that just doesn’t hold my attention, and I’ll fast forward or tune out.
One of the biggest reasons that AACC is my preferred cycling podcast is Chad’s skill in parsing research, and, much more importantly, his willingness to make a full 180 on his previous stance if the evidence bears it out. It’s human nature to take stances on what we believe is ‘true,’ and it’s not difficult to frame a supposedly comprehensive research effort on a topic to confirm our known truth. Chad demonstrates a great ability to go beyond that, and also try to put it all together for comprehension of folks without a physiology background. I don’t mean to leave others on the podcast panel out, but I’ve heard Chad do this so many times that his contribution jumps out at me.
And Amber too.
For sure, Amber, as well. Chad’s been around for longer and has a lengthy history of these deep dives, which is why I call him out. Amber takes the same approach, often around the arguably tougher to pin down psychological topics, which I think is even more tricky.
As a general rule, if experts with the experience of Chad, Amber, etc, note that they were surprised by the research, I think it’s a good sign that they’re actively avoiding bringing a confirmation or experience bias into a presentation. Good stuff.
Good stuff indeed, love the podcast.
I’m with the others who stated that’s exactly WHY we love these podcasts. I have found the ones without Chad and Nate really morph into mundane foe me. The combo of actual science and the fall guy intrigue me and add so much to the entertainment value. Numerous podcasts post opinion, experience and innuendos, but the blend on TrainerRoad is magical and captures me all the time. Keep the magical mix of personalities as it’s always fresh, informative, educational and funny! You guys have a GREAT thing going that matches the awesome program we love…
I live for the deep dives. I’ve heard plenty of surface overviews and really like getting the more detailed nuanced views of what’s really going on for a better understanding of physiology and training adaptation!
I like the deep dives too, but sometimes they go waaay long. Today’s mental section was over 1h long not leaving time for anything else at the end.
And I agree about when Nate or Chad are not in
For me, the Deep Dives are like Audio Books. I am never going to sit down and read research papers. I love cycling and I love the idea that I can get faster. I’m not going to dedicate a portion of my time to searching the internet for credible VO2 studies and the like.
The fact that Coach Chad does this for me, and then translates the findings into plain English, for me this is absolutely invaluable.
I am on both sides, kinda I love the deep dives. Thd podcast has bedn my companion on many riad trips, long aerobic rides, you nane it. So much so that I have listened to every episode at least twice, and keep finding new nugget every time. Some concepts / topics take a while to sink in or start resonating.
On the other hand I zone out a few times during deep dives. And I find myself rewinding and listening again most of the time😊
Keep it up TR crew!
The deep dives are one of the reasons I listen to the podcast - I some time fine my self not agreeing - but I fined them super interesting
I love all aspects of the podcast
Deep dives are love. Deep dives are life.
There is so much fabulous content in the podcast, and it’s one of the highest-quality casts of which I’m aware. There’s a great balance and chemistry with the presenters, and I love that. And it’s just fun to listen to.
And, like others have said, the willingness of Coach Chad (and others, like Amber) to willingly pivot their perspective as more research and information comes through is fabulous. It’s like an old quote from Terry Warner who said that there’s one personal characteristic that’s central to development: the “consistent readiness to yield to the truth in all circumstances, no matter what the apparent cost.”
We need as much of that as we can get when it comes to training, and I’m always curious to see how it will play into TrainerRoad development in the future (the Things, for example).
Our sport is COVERED in pamphlet-level material. I just sat through a couple of days of USAC webinars, most of which could have been summarized in a pamphlet or bullet list (or just an ad). And the Internet is full of click-bait lists and suggestions without any intellectual foundation.
I CONSISTENTLY tell coaching friends that the TrainerRoad Ask a Cycling Coach podcast is the best source of information out there. Chad is KILLING IT, providing information and sources that no one else provides. The minute TR stops doing this is when I stop listening.
Keep up the great work!
Personally, I’m a strong believer in “Least Effective Dose.” For me, long deep dives seriously violate that principle but I can see why others might like them.
Opposite. I rewind and re-listen often.
I love when Chad or Amber does a deep dive but I could care less about the 10-15 minutes of extra chit chat is added on top of it. I don’t really need everybody else two cents and anecdotal data point.
This week I was interested in the cadence topic but I fast forwarded through the choking deep dive. Really the answer to the question asker was to just go do some low level races and get used to it. Everybody has that initial nervousness when starting racing.
Chad’s deep dives are amazing. I listened to some really old podcasts not so long ago and it’s cool to see & hear how much progress there has been since the early days of the podcast. Chad’s organization & presentation of a topic are very very well done.
There are times that I tune out when the topic gets so deep that I feel like I need reference material next to me in order to follow along - BUT at that same moment there’s probably a nutritionist or a physiology expert who’s also listening that is totally engaged & nerding out on the subject.
At times the deep dive feels like it should be over, and gets dragged out a bit, almost like the original question got lost - nature of a live stream and could be edited in post production if they wanted - but that’s some serious nitpicking.