I’m really looking forward to the new podcast episode. In the mean time, I think I’ve found a new way to beat this dead horse!
Something that bothered me, but I didn’t see mentioned (I might have missed it in the 2500+ comments) was that one of the snippets from the paper that was used in the video said “In summary, the polarized training model has a small but promising body of literature reporting its efficacy.” My point here isn’t to defend polarized or SS/high intensity plans, but more to defend science. Any paper that says the body of evidence is “small but promising” is not saying that the science is settled, it just means that there might be something there and we should study it more.
Anyway, looking forward to hearing from the TR crew about this…and most things, really.
Yah that’s exactly what I don’t really get about this “debate”. It’s unlikely to be really big difference in either direction, so just do whatever suits your lifestyle at any given point in time
TrainerRoad have addressed this topic exactly as I hoped. Earlier in the thread I said they should either address the science or provide a polarized plan. In fact, they have done (or are doing) both.
What’s more bizarre is the number of people on this thread who were arguing:
there was no need for anymore plans
there was no need to address the topic at all
Hopefully these same people now realise that some constructive criticism (to a receptive organisation) is useful, not an attack on your sacred cows.
I bet the reaction would be different for this video which IMO was WAY more critical:
Probably more along the lines of “yea zwift plans suck” and “who needs a stupid virtual world anyway” but when someone criticizes our product everyone blindly loses their minds, even though he was advocating for a plan that people here have asked for, for years
My reaction wouldn’t be any different. I think it’s poor taste to talk down on your competitors. Especially when you fail to communicate your conflicting interests.
I for my part don’t want to engage with such a person. Nor do I accept such behavior from my employees.
I don’t really see how TR and Zwift are his competitors, they are in totally different leagues when it comes to scale. That’s like if I started welding together 10 bike frames a year in my basement to “steal business” from TREK.
It’s a good job TrainerRoad didn’t take such a regressive attitude - now we have a podcast on the science and a new plan coming. Win-win for the customers.
DJ is selling his cookie-cutter plans off TrainingPeaks. He offers his training services via his homepage. Plus he advertises his affiliate services on his YouTube channel.
So yes, I think there is a large overlap in his customer base with Zwift, Sufferfest, or TrainerRoad. With his videos he is addressing them. (Or why else would somebody watch a video on Zwift or TR training otherwise.) The style of his videos is certainly tailored to attract people. I mean just look at the thumbnail.
Anyway, let’s not repeat ourselves. We have had this conversation a coupledom times by now. Happy to disagree.
Sure, it’s been the video and not the 3-4 years of discussion on the forum that have made them do that. Also the countless questions via the podcast had nothing to do with it. Ditto for the study on pol they have supported last year. All credit to DJ.
Might want to check out the video of Alex from fastcycling and his critics of TR. Same same but different…
You are probably right. Despite the fact that the CEO is on this thread saying they will respond, that the podcast episode references both POL and also the issue of too much intensity, and the fact that the podcast was released two weeks after, I am sure the DJ video had absolutely NOTHING to do with it
Meh, you wouldn’t know as you seem to have registered for this thread. Though perhaps you want to use the search function and type in polarized. It’s big since years.
Perhaps you can even participate in the study on POL TR was supporting at the end of last year/beginning of this year.
