No, actually just one person who appears to just argue with everyone on here, it takes a lot to make my block list. There’s debating and just being difficult, and occasionally there are people who just like to be difficult
12 Likes
The old adage holds true — you get what you pay for.
1 Like
And this differs from the TR business model how? 
28 Likes
To quote Bane (Batman), when I see Sustained Power Build - Mid Volume: ‘Now is not the time for fear. That comes later.’
As the self-proclaimed least-science based TR user, I find myself playing this out in my mind slightly differently.
How many TR users are there? How many have contacted Dylan directly to discuss their TR burnout? How many of those contacts have gone on to be coached by Dylan?
Or, for my really simple brain. I have £200 per month to spend on coaching (I don’t!). I hire Dylan. I explain to Dylan (or any other 1-2-1 coach, to keep this from being a personal attack), that I’m burnt out. Dylan reduces my workload. I roll up to my event. Shock horror, I DON’T WIN!!! I spent £200 a month on your crappy coaching! You’re a crap coach! I could have won if I’d done X, Y, or Z. I’m going to every cycling forum and I’m going to let everyone know that you’re a rubbish coach.
Easy there. Maybe, just maybe, you’re not quite where you thought you were. Maybe there were other contributing factors that the coach, or training platform, can’t account for.
So, with this in mind, if I were coached by Dylan and I didn’t achieve my goals or got burnt out, could I, or should I, as a reasonable person, round on him? Do I also have a part to play?
For quite sometime now, the TR Team have been hammering the home the need for rest, recovery and nutrition. How many people have seen significant improvements in their performance since tweaking those things.
I’d also like to get Dylans’ opinion on the +/- Intensity button. I have a feeling that if you hire Dylan, or any other coach and they ask you to do 95%FTP for 20 minutes, they’re going to want to know why you felt the need to ‘bump’ the intensity to 98%, just because you were feeling ‘fresh’. Don’t start whining in three weeks time, when your legs feel like wood.
Just the rambling of a non-science cyclist.
35 Likes
I love nate and the crew. I love tr. I’ve also bumped up from low volume to mid volume and have had my first unsuccessful workout yesterday. I’m 52 and probably too much for me. As well for my work I walk around 24 km of 15 miles a day 5 days a week carrying 30 pounds. My garmin keeps saying I am too active and it’s hurting my recovery.
Simple fix so I will go back to low volume and will add endurance/recovery rides.
I would like tr to add masters plans or weight loss plans. We all want to get faster… but many of us are not 25 and there are many ways to get faster. Not just the one way the tr is designed around. But I am sticking with Tr.
Tr has been very successful but there really has been little progress with training plans for the last few years.
I would also like to see some lifting plans added. No reason there isn’t with the resources and knowledge available. Can only improve the app so much without needing a change or some new features.
Tr keep up good work! I’m not going anywhere.
24 Likes
DJ has videos on how to get fast on 6, 10 and 15 hours a week, or something like that. I don’t think the volume difference are as much as you mention.
6 Likes
They don’t use screenshots of others training plans or troll a well established market leader to promote their own product?
12 Likes
I think the plan builder is one step they wanted to make first, to really kick of improvements down the line in terms of training plans. At least to me it seems that it’s supposed to be the platform for a more specific/individualized approach. So I’m pretty curious to see what they’ll come up with over the next few years.
3 Likes
It doesn’t. What’s different is their approach to marketing. Long ASCC sessions of science followed by, “just use plan builder” is a rough sell. DJ calls this out.
Forgive me @MI-XC i changed my mind about defending Dylan. 
Your point about his lack of experience isn’t fair, based on his age. I want to be honest in that I know Dylan personally so I have bias. That said I’m financially invested in TR, not DJ coaching.
Stepping away from the drama surrounding the click bait title (agreed to that point), this is my take on TR:
100%
To DJs point, they market plan builder which is often times at odds with some of the science. I do find that frustrating.
10 Likes
I agree. I’ve managed to step up to the MV, but as a masters rider I’ve amended the workouts to be easier on Sunday.
But I still believe in the TR Sweet Spot over Polarised.
I agree that there needs to be more variety and customisation in the plans - and you’d imagine with their data they can build a good picture of what this could look like.
1 Like
Portraying him as just another YouTuber minimizes the research and training knowledge he’s accumulated over the admittedly short time on the scene. I’d tune in for a discussion between the TR guys and Dylan.
24 Likes
I’m a fan of TR and also a fan of Dylan. Yes, there is a little click bait angle going on here, but not at a slimy or nasty level in my opinion. There were some things in the video that were fair and some things I’d question. I’m not going to dig into the studies he referenced, but there was a lot of talk of “threshold training” compared to polarized. I wouldn’t consider TR sweet spot training the same as threshold work. Some of the arguments probably hold true regardless, but SS vs Threshold training is not apples to apples.
I’m a fairly high volume guy and in my 50’s. I did a double peak last year and carrier 700 - 800 average weekly TSS last year. My core approach is to use the tues/thurs TR workouts for my structured intensity and then fill in the balance with Z2, junk-ish miles, and almost always a long group ride on Saturday. I’m not sure if that makes me a TR proponent or in the Dylan camp, but there is no way I could just follow all the TR structured workouts every week. Even if the full TR plan was the best approach to build fitness and I could handle the intensity (I probably couldn’t), I’d get mental burnout and quit long before seeing the results.
I’d also really question the polarized approach for someone training 5-7 hours a week. Again, I’m too lazy to check DJ’s studies, but I really find it hard to believe that polarized is the most effective at those volumes. Maybe the studies back it up, but it doesn’t smell right to me.
So, I really like TR’s workout library and tools (and the podcast and forum), but I agree with DJ about too much intensity if you are following the plans exactly. I honestly question how many folks actually follow the TR plans to the letter for an extended period of time. I’d guess it’s less than 20%, maybe much less. That’s probably indicative of a problem since TR positions themselves as being able to build an effective plan for those who can’t build it themselves. I’ve turned several of my teammates on to TR and some have seen decent results. None of them created a plan and stuck with it. You could see that as both success and failure. Getting faster, but not as fast as if they had used a different approach. I think that was Dylan primary point in the video and I think it’s fair.
23 Likes
I always thought, this comes with the Sufferfest subscription package 
9 Likes
That’s an interesting theory - that the people on TR and therefore the data that TR sees/uses to support their claims. This would certainly help to explain the steadfastness of the face of the Co (Nate, chad and Jon) when it comes to backing the approach. “SST works, and we have the data to prove it”
1 Like
Blockquote
Yes plan builder is great. But all it did was take plans already in place and organize them for a program.
More intuitive but did not add anything to the plans.
4 Likes
To me that is a key point. When people start using TR do they view it as the ‘coach’ and try to execute the plan as proscribed? Do they view it as a self-coaching tool and customize / modify / adjust plans to fit their particular needs? Do people become burned out because they view it as a coach and don’t listen to their bodies and adjust the plan as needed?
I always viewed it as a tool that facilitated my self-coaching. The longer term issue I had was at some point I’m either just repeating the same plans over and over with the same adjustments or essentially going fully custom due to the amount of modifications I’m making.
13 Likes
The second I see a YouTube video entitled “Best way to raise FTP” I think clickbait!
Don’t forget that two of the cast members during this podcast went on to poo-poo polarised training on the basis of one man. Like a red flag to a bull.
6 Likes
My hot take (because everyone needs a rando posting opinions)
-both are right-
In other words, no generalized plan is spot-on for everyone. You need an (expensive) coach for that. Plans, along with podcasts (not just TR) are there to help you make informed decisions and most importantly LISTEN TO YOUR BODY.
I have been dedicated to TR for more than a year now and went from piddling about with an adequate FTP to being able to ride at 300 for four hours, which for me is more than a 40 watts gain for that duration in a single year.
I do HV (road race and TT) plans.
But I have been riding for more than a decade and have learned enough about my body and how I respond to training stress enough to understand when tweaks are needed. And that’s just it-thesebare generalized plans that are made to be tweaked to your individual needs, and I have done so with amazing results.
This should not be a right/wrong discussion, but one aimed to help riders understand how to adapt a generalized plan to their individual needs and goals.
What do you all think in regards to that approach?
Between TR plans and podcasts combined with other resources like DJ, you can take a plan and tailor it to your needs without paying for individualized coaching. It just takes work. But then again, if we are willing to train we should be willing to work on personalizing our plans too!
22 Likes
Oh yes. that’s totally true. So far it seems to have some sort of hierarchical approach to add/remove weeks from the existing plans to squeeze in whatever time frame you specified.
It’s just I think (hope) that they will add more tools in the future, to individualize the plan easier.
1 Like
You’re right. They just use their podcast and well-established pro cyclist friends to smear and discredit training modalities which are not in-line with their own product.
And to consider TR a ‘market leader’ is like calling McDonald’s a Michelin Star eatery.
14 Likes