A large number of the V02 workouts have the interval intensities set exclusively in the what TR defines as the anaerobic zone. Why not just run these workouts through the PL algorithm for both training zones and populate our PL bars with both results?
Yes, I know the V02 workouts are designed to achieve maximum oxygen uptake, which is not necessarily what the anaerobic workouts are after, but for many of these workouts, it can’t be THAT much different.
This would help to eliminate the issue that for someone who is clearly strong anaerobically is recommended by AT to start a training block with their anaerobic PL at 1.0.
Also, I would be extremely curious to see the results of running a workout that has longer intervals at 94% or 95% of FTP through BOTH the sweet spot and threshold PL algorithms. I would love to know how a workout that is 7.0 for sweet spot for example rates on the threshold scale. Maybe someone at TR could just run Venado and tell me, lol.
I think you raise a good point. Right now TR’s treatment seems inconsistent: there are a few workouts which raise “secondary PLs”, but I cannot see any rhyme or reason which do trigger improvements in secondary PLs and which don’t.
For the most part, workouts only raise the PL that they have been classified as. Like you, I think it makes no sense that just because I am currently not prescribed any sweet spot workouts (instead, I am doing threshold, VO2max and endurance workouts) that my sweet spot PL continues to drop. I would expect that doing threshold intervals would stop the decay at the least.
There are also some other issues. E. g. I tack on 30-minute endurance workouts quite regularly. But these don’t raise my endurance PL. I would expect that they have a cumulative effect and raise my endurance over time.
I have good news for you: what you are looking for is already built into Adaptive Training!
Individual workouts can (and often do) impact more that one Progression Level, where the reach and degree of that effect varies depending upon the type of workout and scope of the work assigned.
For example, when you completed Pisgah +4 on Friday (nice work on that one BTW!), it resulted in Progression Level increases for you in Anaerobic, VO2max.
It also had an effect on your Threshold zone where AT will consider that work when suggesting Threshold workouts in the future.
Workout levels address a single “target zone” in the workout’s design, such as VO2max in your example. However, as many workouts affect your abilities in multiple aspects of fitness, Adaptive Training makes sure to give you credit for that work when its merited and update multiple Progression Levels accordingly.
If you ever want to confirm if a workout increases more than one Progression Level, you can find that in the ‘Ride Details’ page for each workout:
The relationship between secondary PL changes across multiple zones exists for most workouts, where the severity of that impact varies based upon your pre-existing level and the zone in question. The ‘strength’ of that impact is individual for each zone, and is considered carefully by AT.
In your example of Venado (Sweetspot 7.0), your Threshold level would also be impacted, but it ultimately depends upon where your threshold level is at the time. The effect that Sweetspot has on Threshold is weak, but it’s there!
Just a point of clarification, though: PLs in neighboring energy levels are not taken into account when determining e. g. PL decay.
Let’s say I am in the build phase and I am being prescribed threshold and VO2max workouts. I am replacing the Sunday sweet spot workout with an outdoor endurance ride. My Sweet Spot PL is 3.3 and falling, even though my Threshold PL 4.8 is rising.
The annoying this is that next time I am prescribed Sweet Spot again, I have to override TR’s Sweet Spot workout by something it would consider a stretch or breakthrough workout to give me something suitable. Put another way, I would expect that improvements in threshold capabilities should signal that I am still capable of doing Sweet Spot work. And that should be built into the logic.
I have noticed the secondary progressions, but I believe there is a lot of room for further fine tuning of AT. On Monday, I completed Vale a level 7.8 for V02 max. Vale has a non-trivial amount of anaerobic bursts. My anaerobic level is currently 1.2. I think that this would make any reasonable observer question whether or not that makes sense. Hopefully logic and/or further ML analysis of the huge data set can help improve how fast and how far PLs fall and how they are influenced by neighboring zones.
To give another example, I am looking at starting base in a couple of weeks. AT will have me starting the Sweet Spot workouts at a 4.4 (probably less by then). I could complete a level 10 SS without trouble. If I decide to do that 10 SS workout this week (I might), it will dramatically change the nature of the subsequent base block of work. In that case, you would have the same rider (me), with two very different blocks of work recommended for Base 1, all depending on whether or not I decide to do a challenging SS workout leading into it. Yes, I know AT will eventually even them out, but not until after at least two weeks of very different work.
My favorite TR feature is the workout levels (followed closely by AT FTP detection). I have enough TR experience by now to know how PLs adjust with changing FTP and how workout levels relate from zone to zone. I’m sure that AT will have some future fine tuning. In the meantime, it would be very helpful if the training plans indicated that the intention of a scheduled workout is to be easy, moderate, hard, very hard, or all-out. This way I could ignore the current PL if it happens to currently be inaccurate and set AT straight from day one.
Thanks again for being so responsive and helpful. I am a huge TR fan. I am at 856 TR workouts, and I remain a very loyal user.
Secondary PL changes are definitely taken into account when determining Progression Level decay, and are also taken into account by Adaptive Training behind the scenes when it adjusts your upcoming workouts!
For the example in the OP’s scenario, we confirmed that their Threshold decay rate was affected from the workout that resulted in PL change in both VO2max and Anaerobic zones. This is what we’re referring to when we advise that the workout “also had an effect on your Threshold zone where AT will consider that work when suggesting Threshold workouts in the future.”
This feature exists within Adaptive Training as well, where that ‘Productive’ ‘Achievable’ ‘Stretch’ label that appears on each workout reflect what we intend it to be: relative to your current Progression Levels.
Addressing your concern though; keep in mind that Adaptive Training is specifically designed for you not to need this sort of hands-on adjustment or to be ‘set straight’. I know it can be easy to want to do this, but AT’s logic does all of this for you in a way that ensures you’re on the right path when that goal-post can (and does) move as your fitness changes dynamically.
We recommend you simply train and answer your post-workout surveys honestly, and your workouts will adapt to your needs. If they’re a little easier or harder than you’d like early on, it shouldn’t take more than a few days for AT to catch up to your abilities, and trust that it’s all still useful training time spent getting faster.
