I said it affects a small number of people, but I think the majority of the people that think that are affected by it are actually seeing the proof that outdoor workouts aren’t as efficient as indoor workouts.
Actually Garmin considers anything from 67% and up to be “Good.” I’m not sure how that translates into TR, just wanted @eddie to have that reference on how well (or not well) I completed the workout.
It affects everyone doing outdoor rides…
How does your theory explain the fact that one of the most obvious signs of the bug is that the initial prediction is way too optimistic?
What should I make of the following?
I’m on a rest week, with my Detection on Thursday. I did an endurance today and my prediction went down 2 watts. My next workout is on Thursday (4 workouts this week), but if I move it to tomorrow, my prediction goes back up by 4w.
I train outdoors and haven’t been affected
I’m just speculating of course, like we all are, but my guess is because it assumes you will do every workout exactly as prescribed, but that’s not even close to possible as soon as you do the workouts outside so when it analyzes the outdoor workout and sees the power drop at corners, or complete stops at stop lights, or even the 30 watt power fluctuations when trying to hold power targets it thinks you were a total failure and couldn’t handle the work load so it makes the next workouts easier. Perhaps the AI is starting to figure out that it can’t be so optimistic when it comes to outdoor workouts because we have the earlier post from someone that only was able to execute the workout at 86% but the prediction only dropped 2 watts. I would hope that the AI will learn the specifics of each rider and realize when it prescribes X but the rider can only do 86% of X that it needs to prescribe 114% of X next time to get closer to the actual intended stimulus
I didn’t block your post, but maybe it should be blocked because you completely misrepresented what I said. I didn’t say it doesn’t affect anyone else, I said it affects a small number of people and I certainly didn’t say they suck, I said they suck at doing outdoor workouts. Everyone sucks at doing outdoor workouts, some just suck more than others.
Except you’re in the official post where TR admits this is an issue with TR and trying to blame the problem “most people” have on their own performance. Again…in a thread based on the fact TR admits this is a TR problem. Youre victim blaming.
But why is the prediction much higher than what you get when only training inside?
Most of my experience with this issue has been the commute to the workout has stop lights but the main workout blocks are well executed. I don’t know what is then causing a drop, especially those in the last 4-5 days of a detection period.
Perhaps if this bug isn’t impacting you, you could see yourself out of this thread. I’m sure other threads need your high quality contributions.
That your aware of 
but I am sure your workouts are competent that TR does not even kno me they are done outside.
I think that’s intended behavior, or at least I’m not sure that’s a bug. Even when I’ve had a net increase, it’s dropped more in the last 4-5 days.
Outside groupride today at thresholdish. Prediction change from 263w to 270w. Have TR fixed it? 
Given that this thread has been running for a significant amount of time, I would hope (expect) that if they had ‘fixed it’ they would want to announce it rather than have paying customers having to guess.
I think this is exactly the issue. People dont follow the targets of the workouts and then are shocked when their training goes poorly.
So you’re saying the way outdoor workouts work is that you need to only start a ride file that matches the workout. The files specifically have a lap that lets you press when you’re ready to move to the next set.
I’m going to try to explain this again because there’s either a fair bit of misrepresentation here, or at the very least, misunderstanding. The 86% I mentioned is a GARMIN Execution score. That means it really has nothing to do with TR, or AIFTP. It is simply a reference point(for @eddie) for how well I stayed within the 20 Watt windows on that workout. So, to clarify, that score decreases every time your power goes outside the target range, whether low OR HIGH. Beyond that, again, Garmin considers anything from 67% and upward as “Good.” There is no higher category for the Garmin Execution Score than “Good.” 86% is not a poor score, therefore. In fact, it is a fairly well-executed workout, and is above the mid-point in the “Good” range. As you suggested, terrain, stoplights, traffic, wind, etc., all can impact a rider’s ability to hold within that narrow 20 Watt window. Those are no indication that the rider performed poorly on the workout. They’re just facts of life for riding outside. Please stop misrepresenting what I posted about my workout, as though it’s such a poor effort I should be ashamed of it, and happy my prediction only went down by 2 Watts. And just to illustrate how invalid that is, on Monday I completed the AI prescribed workout, again outside, with a Garmin Execution Score of 81%, meaning I spent 5% less time within the prescribed zone than I had on the other one. Afterward, my AIFTP prediction went UP 3 watts. Go figure. And for today’s workout that score was 93%, but the AIFTP prediction went DOWN again by 2 Watts. So there is no demonstrable correlation between TR AIFTP and Garmin Execution Score, and it certainly is not an indicator that TR considers that workout to be sub-par.
No, I’m not sure about that. What I’m saying is that I’ve always seen my prediction drop more in the last week than the preceding weeks.
But trainerroad have acknowledged that it’s a bug … I don’t know what else there is to say after that. It’s something they need to fix. The onus is on TR to provide a solution.