I have no issue with sweet spot. I like it and use it because I can train at a high intensity and recover better than same time at threshold or VO2 max.
What I mean by appropriate intensity is: I just canāt do sweet spot all the time without burning out! If all I wanted was to ride 3 hrs/week I could do sweet spot low volume. However, I want to ride 8-10 hrs/week and there are only a couple plans to choose from. The polarized plans and something like traditional base 2 mid volume.
You are right that polarized can be hard and I actually think sweet spot is more appropriate for base building than threshold or VO2. However, the polarized plans have 2 (or more) endurance workouts each week and limit hard days to 2/week. This makes them much easier than a sweet spot plan of the same number of hours.
Letās zoom out, because as far as I can tell we agree about the big stuff. In my mind consistency is the biggest factor for long-term success, and if choosing e. g. polarized over sweet spot base makes you more consistent, you should use the former. I use both, but e. g. I want other accommodations (I want the Sunday endurance ride back). And I incorporate polarized blocks into my training, although at different times and for different reasons than you.
So we want more flexibility when generating plans to our specifications (e. g. give custom workout duration limits, specify the number of hard days, etc.). TR is definitely working on that, although you and I would probably prefer if they got there quicker
I like these discussions for they help us understand the plethora of athletes with different needs, abilities and preferences. Plus, it allows us to flesh out the problem and brainstorm about possible solutions. Cheers, mate!
This is a great point and one that obviously doesnāt get raised on the podcast. There is a difference between a) using TrainerRoad as a full training environment by following plans and workouts, and leveraging features such as adaptive training and AI FTP, and b) using TrainerRoad as a software platform. Theyāve mentioned on the podcast that Mathieu van der Poel has been seen using TrainerRoad. Iām sure he has, but heās a category B guy, as are Swenson et al.
Totally agree that there are some genuine success stories on the Successful Athletes podcast and people should head there if theyāre looking for inspiration. I was always struck by how many are doing low volume with extra on top - a lesson for us all!
I ride 8-10hrs a week, follow TR low volume (3 key workouts 3.5 hrs) and usually try to keep the non-TR stuff controlled with the intensity (or use TrainNow sometimes). Think this is a pretty common approachā¦
If I do a harder ride (e.g., Zwift racing in the ZRL on a Tuesday as last night) I often sub out the TR workout for it, as OreoCookie says it can be a bit much work otherwise.
Also as OreoCookie says I think consistency is key so if I make sure I can hit the 3 TR prescribed workouts then anything else is a bonus - I have experimented with MV in the past and for me personally as soon as I start missing workouts things start to unravel (obviously, this is personality dependent!). So having 3 key workouts and topping up works better for me than having 5 or 6 prescribed workouts and having to skip one or two.
44.00 per month is a also covers multiple members of the same household. " āAll-Access Membership .ā An All-Access Membership provides you and members of your household at one residential address (up to 20 user profiles)"
Yes, Iām aware of that. But how many people are going to share their subscription amongst more than 1 other person (i. e. their spouse)? My guess is that this number is small.
$44 was at the time of writing the most expensive tier, and the others had various strings attached to them. I just checked, and this is still the price for their highest tier.
I donāt know whether the lower tiers have changed, but the other two tiers are $12.99/month and $24/month; subscribers of the two higher tiers donāt seem to be eligible to the 1/6 ā 17 % discount if you pay yearly. Even the middle tier is significantly more expensive than TR. Plus, a lot of Peloton members have purchased a Peloton bike in addition to the monthly subscription, so even with the cheapest subscription option, they are paying a lot more. Which is fine.
My point was only that TRās pricing isnāt as unusual or outrageous if you look at the fitness landscape more broadly.
So 44.00 is required if you have the bike, or treadmill. This gets you access to the all classes. Only way to use the leaderboard features and such. the 12.99 is for the app. which gets you access to the cycling classes and other classed. Just no power meter data and no leaderboards. To the point of multiple users. How many of us that use TR would let another member of our household use the account. More thinking like Spotify family plan. Charge a bit more to allow say up to 4 users. My sister in-law has a Peloton as well and there are 4 in her home on their account. I would bet there are many TR users that have multiple users in the same household. In my case my wife would never use TR not her style. I know a few friends that use Zwift and share an account right or wrong. Maybe other services should look into a multi-user plan at slight discount.
Family plan would be nice. Would not benefit me. Peloton is just very different. I use the yoga classes, some strength workouts. Meditations as well.
For me I donāt think I would pay more than I am now. I pay the 189.00 annual so 15.75 a month. For me the thinking is the days when the trails are wet or schedule is busy, too cold cause I am a wimp when it comes to cold weather. So riding the Peloton as needed helps me stay in better shape for MTBing for the season.
I know many couples that both ride. I bet it is higher than one might guess. Think of all your friends that ride seriously or race, and of those how many those are in relationships. Is it 25% no, but I would be closer to 10% than we think.
Yup. I wouldnāt be surprised if the most common combo would be one parent and one child who share a passion for cycling.
TR and Peloton are aimed at quite different audiences. Structured training is a very particular thing, and I donāt know how many couples are into that.
E. g. my wife goes to the gym 2ā3 times a week. She loves the camaraderie of gym classes, the relaxation of certain mellow yoga classes and how her body feels after hard yoga classes. But I donāt think she is very competitive. If my wife were into cycling, sheād definitely be a Peloton person, not a TR user.
The Polarized Plans are being used by a lot of athletes to great success. The current iteration of the plans tests just one possible iteration of Polarized, and there are a lot of different alterations we could test.
Weāve been collecting data on their usage all along, but itās been quite tricky to form reliable conclusions from it due to sample sizes and compliance rates that introduce too many variables.
That said, we do plan on updating the plans and will use data and athlete feedback in that process, just as we will continually update all of our training as we gain new insight.
I want to make it clear we arenāt beholden to any specific training approach. We want to find the best ways to make people faster, regardless of what that is.
When i first saw it pop up I thought that it was an overly snarky pot shot at TR that was purely to restoke the flames of one of his hottest topics.
Heās in a privileged position, and for someone that claims to be so heavily motivated by research he and the crew he works with seem to often miss some of the facts.
I enjoy Bonk Bros and the Matchbox, and a lot of his videos, but sometimes the stuff he says is hard to listen to.
(or use TrainNow sometimes). Think this is a pretty common approachā¦
