Do deep dives in the podcast find you fast forwarding?

There are deep dives, and then there is beating a dead horse for an hour.

2 Likes

Like @AJS914 I was interested in the cadence topic but not with the choking one.

I suppose in the case of the latter it’s a psychological topic not a physiological one so is, in the context of TR podcasts, a fresh subject - go back through the podcasts and there’s probably three or four deep dives on sweet spot work or what happens in VO2max intervals. Interesting to see over time how the science (may have) changed or not, but having a deep dive on those subjects every three months is going to lead to a stale podcast.

I listen to the majority of the deep dives, it’s only the ones I have zero interest in which I’ll fast forward through. But it doesn’t bother me as that’s what the fast forward button is for :slight_smile:

1 Like

Some topics I don’t mind, others I find there’s some superfluous (for me) information. I can see why some people love all the details though.

Same, I certainly am not going to ask them to change it as plenty of people enjoy that content - the podcast isn’t made exclusively for me.

Episode 285

Amber: I’m going to need a snorkel for this deep dive on cadence

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

2 Likes

Yep. I’m there for the life, training, and race updates, and the questions about how to train and how to best use the software and the tools. The deep dives lose me almost every time.

Just the ones I have no interest in listening to, otherwise I’ll listen to the whole dive.

I fast forward a lot, if it’s a lecture and not a conversation. Ugh, 284 with Nate going on forever with verbal descriptions of mtb skills could have just pointed me to Lee McCormack’s website and been done with it. The worst is when I just recommended the podcast to someone new and then the one they listen to first is something like that. Gives me a bad rap! :rofl: Then again I’m biased. I think @Jonathan should talk the entire time. :heart_eyes: :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

I think of Nate as the plucky comic relief.

1 Like

Yes, far too much like a lecture for my liking.

Like others who have commented here I value the deep dives and in particular the commentary from Chad and Amber, with their research and data-driven focus. Where I lose patience and interest is in the 20 minutes or more of discussion about Cape Epic, latest injuries, latest FTP test, etc. A bit of this is a nice touch, the podcast team is a likeable group but it’s just not nearly as interesting or useful to me as the deep dives into some aspect of training, performance, etc.