That’s too simplistic, because the workouts in each of the three phases are qualitatively different. E. g. specialty phase workouts are not designed to raise your FTP, but to simulate power demands that are relevant for your race type or riding style.
3 Likes
This thread clearly shows, that we TR peeps have too much time, since our training plans are so time efficient.
Maybe we better should hop on the bike and get some endurance miles done!
9 Likes
Arguing on the internet while doing a tempo ride goes along quite well. 
2 Likes
Remco couldn’t do it either…although I agree that he is “supremely” talented. Increased volume means increased hemoglobin mass (Hb) and increased red blood cells. You will not be a champion cyclist on 4 hrs/wk, although I do agree that less maintenance is required if you have previously done years of high volume cycling. You’ve done the prerequisite years of hard aerobic work and can fall back on it…unlike a rider who hasn’t done years of said work.
All of the “serious” riders I follow on Strava are over 350W ftp and all of them are doing 17 - 20 - 25hr wks. Some are doing less than that…NONE of them are doing just 4 hrs/wk.
3 Likes
My opinion on the matter is probably somewhere up there in the preceeding 1483 replies.
7 Likes
Nah, I am good. Lots to learn and make out here. But you can mute the thread if it is not of interest for you.
I have been mulling this paper over and going around in a few circles - in particular whether it should really have used the “Polarised” at all. For many the definition of a polarised plan is based on an 80/20 training session distribution (from Seiler), yet the “polarised” training intervention used in this study doesn’t seem to fall within this particular definition. For others the definition might be any training plan that comprises only low intensity and high intensity sessions (zones 1 and 3 in the three zone model) regardless of overall intensity distribution - in which case the term “Polarised” may be considered appropriately used in this paper.
For my part I can’t help but think that a suitable alternative title for this particular paper might have been: “Comparing the effect of a 6wk VO2max training block to a 6wk threshold training block on 12 well trained cyclists” or something similar (and with corresponding changes to the terminology used in the text of course). Had that been the case I wonder if Dylan would have cited it in his video at all let alone put so much weight on it? Such speculation of course has no bearing on what the paper does and does not actually teach us - but strip out the ‘polarised’ terminology and that does seem to open the question as to what this paper does bring to the table in the context of the debate central to this thread.
4 Likes
Looking forward to that podcast. While obviously you need to tell your side of the story, and surely there are things to disagree with in Dylan’s video, I hope some of the constructive feedback in this thread does not get discarded, even if you don’t want to agree with it publicly. I can only wish your team the best and hope further changes are forthcoming so that I become a subscriber again some day 
16 Likes
I think the opposite is true - we are almost all capable of being in the top 1% through training and consistency etc. It’s once you get into the top 1% where genetics kicks in and makes the difference.
1 Like
I like to be informed, and that’s why i’ve read the article and also saw DJ video. The majority of us are not experts (not even close of course - me included) on these complex topics, so, the more we read and see the more we can learn. Of course we must take into account that there is no absolute truths about this and many other related topics.
I like TR (the app, the plans, the huge workout library, the podcast, the persons, …) very much and i plan to use it for a long time. But, we can’t say that all the TR auto-generated plans and all the TR info is correct and works for everybody just out of the box. They are supported with science, but science is always evolving, so, what is true today, tomorrow can be a very different thing (and on TR they recognize that). With TR, i think with time, we listen to our bodies and try to adjust the plans to our own physiology and goals. And that’s what TR recommends… fiddle with the plans to make it work for you.
Cheers
2 Likes
Point very well made 
Most, if not all, training offering are a commercial venture. It used to be books, now we have online platforms.
3 Likes
For vo2, it’s usually something like 20 to 30 minutes at that power…the whole wo is longer tho…
Well I feel indebted to the Trainerroad crew for all the knowledge they’ve given me over the years for free plus this forum for free. I’m interested in all different styles of training and all have their pros and cons.
I think it’s rude to make personal attacks on Nate in this forum and I applaud his reserve in replying.
13 Likes
My take on this whole post is that there was “an elephant in the room” with regards to the SST, the ramp test protocol and burnout (which the later was my case and the reason that I stopped using TR’s plan)
Having said that, I truly don’t understand the angry users claiming and insulting TR’s team. No one is forcing you to use TR’s approach, there are thousands of alternatives out there.
9 Likes
Sorry to hear you ended up feeling/ being burnt out. I think this can happen to many people in a range of contexts.
I had a coach who was pro and very knowledgeable. I think it was due to his time pressure that he did not fully analyse the sessions he sent me. I messaged him to say I had not had a recovery week in 7 weeks and I was feeling borderline ill. He sent me a neuromuscular power session. I chose to walk away.
One of the things I like about TR is that I have no pressure and no one to answer to. No me really cares whether I follow the plan except me. So I get to be honest with myself. (I love training so it works for me)
My philosophy is:
Whatever the plan/whoever my coach is, always be in touch with my own needs and limitations
6 Likes
Wow, pretty surprising to find someone just happy to learn something. Really respect that. Also, not smarter, probably just older. And you got me beat on the wiser part given your response.
What is understood, doesn’t need to be discussed.
1 Like
A Backwards-Hat-Chad rebuttal video would break the internet.
16 Likes
If anyone is interested in diving more into the pyramidal distribution that DJ talks about without all the nonsense that comes with this thread, I invite you to this discussion:
3 Likes