Fixed it for you
4 Likes
But see your own logic and bias laid out here is the same thing, by adding an agist comment to this youâve devalued the point youâre making just like Dylan has done with his choice of thumbnail. Beyond his hook, whatâs wrong with his position? Is it because he has a strong point to make that folks feel the need to continually play the age card? The idea that TR shouldnât be criticized by another professional, it only highlights our own bias and emotional attachment to their training plans, after all Dylanâs only crime as I see it is making an obvious negative hook (thumbnail and title). Effective as it may be.
That said, I donât think TR will respond, or it will be minimal and not address it directly. I respect that, as it communicates their position in the best possible way, âweâre focusing on making TR better, no need to respond to our criticsâ - to your point about age, I do expect a more mature response from TR.
If Dylan were to be on the podcast I think it would come from him reaching out, not the other way, nor should it.
I want to again, temper my criticism with TR with a whole lot of appreciation; the new science podcast is going to be an absolute gift, the first one was amazing! TRs response to this
might be best to just keep doing what theyâre doing, actions having a greater effect than words. Cheers and carry on!
8 Likes
There goes your argument
15 Likes
I genuinely had no idea who Dylan Johnson was before seeing this thread - I donât think many people outside the US will have a clue about him. The US gravel scene is not something that has much reach outside of the US - just like if I was to start talking about top British domestic / non-world tour riders no one in the US would have a clue who I was talking about.
That doesnât make what he is saying of less value though.
From reading through the thread (what a rabbit hole!), one of the key themes is burnout with too much intensity, especially for âmastersâ athletes. So many of these posts go something like - I did mid volume plans and dug myself into a hole. I think part of the problem here is ego. Mid volume is quite a lot of intensity - a perfectly fine amount for many, but probably too much for the majority. The majority would be far better doing a low volume plan and adding in endurance rides. Only if the individual has done that and still has capacity to do more should they move up to a mid-volume plan. People need to understand their own capabilities and limitations better. This is exactly what trainerroad have advised before on the podcast and in part in various blog posts.
The problem though is that I donât think this concept is baked into the plans well at all. If you have 5 days to train, you will naturally gravitate towards mid volume. I think that there needs to be a more explicit plan structure that has the current low volume plan, the low volume plan with extra endurance rides, and then the mid volume. I would really like it to be very explicit that the first step in increasing volume should be to add endurance rides rather than intensity.
As a 37 year old, well trained, bloke, I can comfortably cope with the mid volume plans, and usually amend them to add in more work. I can imagine that as my body changes over the next five years my ability to cope with that workload will reduce. I will need to swallow my ego and adapt to what my capabilities and limitations become. I might still have the same amount of time to train, but the training I need will have changed. Currently the very simplified trainerroad plan model doesnât give a clear option to cover that, or push people in the right direction.
The trainerroad plans arenât perfect - I donât think that they would argue that they are. They provide a base position that is super easy to flex to personal circumstances and experience levels. If youâve been training with TR for a while there is a good chance that you donât follow the plans exactly - you will adapt them to suit your needs, limitations and capabilities.
I think that TR would benefit from greater signposting as to the real suitability of each plan type (i.e. pushing more people to a âlow volume plusâ model). Essentially, something to idiot proof the plans and provide clearer guidance. It would be great to see something baked into the system to make the plans more adaptive as well - adjusting the upcoming workouts based upon how a rider has done with the previous workouts.
It will be interesting to see how TR respond to this video in the podcast. Part of the problem though is that there is so much good knowledge baked into the podcasts that needs to find its way somehow into the structure of the software. The fact that they have advised so many times on the podcast that people should start with the low volume plans and then add endurance before considering mid and high volume plans is undermined by the way the software pushes towards mid volume plans if you have a certain amount of time to train
11 Likes
This is a thread about Dylanâs TR video and Polarised vs SS, not about TR staff with no evidence.
11 Likes
Slightly off-topic: If you enjoy DJâs race recap videos, youâll probably get a kick out of the in-race commentary videos that the Old Man of mid-Atlantic ultra-enduranceâJeremiah Bishopâhas up on his YT channel. Pretty rare you see someone capable of providing their own color commentary:
Obligatory Dylan Johnson content at 1:18-1:40:
4 Likes
Sure you have your opinion and I have mine.
People are allowed to be different.
Feeling yuge, still canât catch up to your valuable amount of contributions to the topic though 
Thatâs too bad. Maybe cutdown on some intervals and see if that helps.
I worry about this too. Thereâs an entertainment factor and show of the podcast but Iâm also in a position of power and that can be abused.
To try to combat this we have an anonymous feedback system called TinyPulse. We do biweekly anonymous surveys about employ happiness, organization and other feedback
Our employee NPS and happiness is far above industry averages. Our employees regularly type in things that they donât like that I/we are doing and I address them all via CEO videos.
So I do get constant anonymous feedback of what we do well and what we do poorly.
No one has mentioned any of the banter on the podcast before. But that doesnât mean I shouldnât be hyper aware.
Anyways, I think your criticism is valid and something all people in power should watch out for.
83 Likes
And he makes good YouTube video content, based on scientific research (which he is scrupulous about citing), which I find useful as well as entertaining.
1 Like
I love the banter, thereâs a reason the podcast is so popular. (Almost) everyone loves the podcast and itâs a great product. Personally, I just wish there was a masters program option.
10 Likes
As long as you donât abuse that power to make staff sing happy birthday for you 
Happy birthday.
Now where is that masters plan for old farts?
4 Likes
Only speaking for myself here, but Iâm sure Iâm not alone, any criticism of the banter I have, isnât that you do it, but rather itâs for things Iâm not interested in. But I wouldnât request that you change because Iâm only one person and what I want more of may not apply to others.
I donât think anything that is said or done on the podcast should be confabulated to office âanticsâ. It is a show and I think most people recognize this. Itâs not like you are on a reality TV show following you around the office as you tell your devâs you could of coded something in 5 lines or less! (although that might make a funny April fools video) 
1 Like
I like the banter - and I really like all the cape epic stuff.
10 Likes
Thanks for responding constructively Nate. For what itâs worth I get value from Dylanâs videos as well as from the TR podcasts: itâs not about black and white, or âIâm right, youâre wrong!â, but about helping as many folk as possible to get the most from their training so they can improve. Justindoestriathlon makes a good point in his video on this debate about TR introducing more customisation. It would be really great if you had an update on the much talked about and even more eagerly anticipated plans to cater better for older (e.g. over 50) tR users, such as myself (soon to be over 60 ⌠). Cheers.
1 Like
Thatâs a really good system to have in place and I strongly feel that more companies should do the same.
5 Likes
To me, everyone seems to be enjoying the banter.
They mostly try not to be too hard on you Nate
2 Likes
I could be wrong but I think that bio may not have been continuously updated. Iâm fairly sure I remember him having coaching experience before TR so I think that may have been 10 years of experience prior to TR.
I usually skip past the podcast banter, anecdotes and bro talk. Iâm sure others like it. Me, Iâd rather have Chad or Amber (when applicable) do deep dives on the training science. I also like the quick answers to the rapid fire questions. For me, it goes off the rails when a 10 minute Chad deep dive turns into a 25 minute segment because of all the back and forth n=1 anecdotes.
But I realize that that is what I like so itâs not a criticism. From other meta topics we know that some people love the banter and chit chat. And some people love it when the podcast is 2h+. 
6 Likes