I think the cause of a lot of this confusion is that TR suggests endurance rides are “easy” which I would say runs counter to the general consensus on what “easy” means in relation to an endurance ride. If you just gave the general cyliing population -who also do structured training- a poll, I think you’d have a huge percentage putting endurance in the moderate bucket.
Rather than rating them moderate as the exception, seems that rating them easy or hard would be the exception.
My work currently has a couple of days remaining in a move competition so to get my virtual time up (like most here I can be competitive) I’ve added 30 or 45 min Z2 this week on days I should have workouts so my rest days are still restful.
When I put today/tomorrow into the calendar rather unexpectedly I get a prediction increase of a couple of watts.
Think I might look at adding an additional couple of 30 mins Z2 regularly.
up until 2 days ago i have rated all endurance rides as easy. even the 4hr15min 193TSS 0.67IF Excelsior +2. They have been easy though. Yesterday i rode Sucia Island; a 2hr45min 146tss 0.73IF. The day before id done a threshold 4x11mins at 98-99%. It included 2x10minute tempo intervals @ 80% with 2-3min ramps either side. This is the first time ive been scheduled such a demanding endurance ride after such a hard threshold just 24hrs prior. I definitely felt it in my legs and i felt fatigued all day yesterday because of it. I rated Sucia Island as moderate even though it predicted it would be easy. strangely enough, and for the first time in my case, my ftp prediction increased by 1watt after i rated it moderate . looks like it increased the level of a future threshold ride and thats what would have prompted the increase and cancelled out the higher assessment rating. Anyhow, im about to do a 4x5 vo2 session, ‘Haw’. hopefully im recovered