I think all of this gets to the key question: for the vast majority of us who aren’t near our theoretical potential, what matters way more:
Consistency & increasing load over time
Doing the “right” workout in the “right” sequence
I would argue the benefits of 1 vastly outweigh the benefits from 2. But we (and I would put myself somewhat in this camp) get may too caught up in trying to optimize 2 at the expense of 1. AT appears to be an attempt to optimize 1, but the TR library is a massive exercise in 2. I’m pretty sure if TR had to rebuild its workout library from scratch to just work with AT, it could eliminate at least half of the workouts. For example: if you search on 3x15 + Sweet Spot (Zone selection), you get 25 workouts. With AT, do we really need 25 variations of 3x15 minute sweet spot workout?
I’d much rather have 1 - 10 scale to rate workouts by. I very rarely rate anything at the extreme ends of a scale so a 1-5 functions more like a 1-3 scale (Exception for lyft rides and such where rating a person has a direct effect on their livelihood). I realize that’s my own quirk though.
AT itself is interesting to watch though I find it mildly demoralizing. I may turn it off; I like having a general idea of the type of workout coming and just adjust the intensity instead of the interval / rest interval changing due to a substitution. PLs were a nice addition though.
I think that it is great. I was skeptical at first and really didn’t think that I would us it. I then started giving it a try and doubted most of the suggestions, even emailing customer support about them and they patiently explained the results to me. Even then I doubted them until the suggestions proved to be correct while I was wrong. It is probably not perfect all of the time, but I think that it is a really good tool and a big improvement. I have no doubt that if I had it two years ago I would be faster today.
I find myself debating between these two as well. Ask me in the last minute of the last interval and I might say hard. Ask me midway through the interval or after a 5m cool down and I’ll probably say moderate.
Generally it seems like if you answer moderate, it’ll increase your PL quite a bit…so sometimes better to use caution or it’ll ramp up pretty quick.
Funny how two people think about one and the same thing entirely differently.
I‘m happy that AT doesn’t give me stretch workouts that burnt me out 2 seasons before.
I mean, I COULD do a stretch workout x times a week. But SHOULD I?
I for one am happy that AT seems to look after me in terms of not wanting too much too fast (I have to admit that I bump sometimes workouts ever so slightly by about .3 though)
I find my pondering between hard and very hard very often.
By my definition:
Moderate: can repeat workout 100%. Not the slightest doubt.
Hard: can for sure take one or two sets more. Maybe even the whole workout again but that would wreck me.
Very hard: definitely can’t repeat the workout. Maybe, just maybe one set more
That leaves me with the question: Is a workout where I think „yeah, after 5mins I probably (but maybe not) can do another set of intervals“ hard or very hard?
Oh and this relates to my above post.
Since AT I had not a single workout that left me crushed.
Finding AT very good personally. If I’ve not trained for a bit or been doing non TR work and hence feel my PL are too low I just do one ride at each of the training zones I’m interested in at a level I think I’m at either (ideally) the week before starting a training plan or (worst case) first week of a plan (usually my using alternatives for each of the first week’s workouts to a level I think I’m at if PL too low) to ‘set’ the PL at a reasonable level then after that just answer the surveys honestly and let AT do its thing…been excellent. I especially like a couple of times I’ve been tired due to excessive training or life, answered that in survey and it makes next 1-2 workouts a bit easier.
It helps that 99% of my riding is done indoors on TR though. Pretty much only ride outdoors for races.
So far I’m happy. It’s been quite a switch moving from Zwift to TR - admittedly I did this bc repeatedly I was blowing up in Zwift programs in the last 2-3 w of a program as volumes and intensity really seemed to accelerate in a way good for a 24 yo but not a 58 yo
Now that work is shut down again for a couple of months (gah) I’ve moved from low to mid volume as I’ve been worried that 3.5 h a week of structured training isn’t enough. Although I was using ride now on nonscheduled days that felt more like bike riding than training. Hopefully I won’t regret this
I wish the interrogation at the end of workouts was a bit more thorough. The scale doesn’t seem really to investigate adequately - I know it asks more questions if you are all out or fail but it seems that a couple more questions to distinguish characteristics. If a 90 minute ss workout is moderate intensity for 65 min and 25 min are hard - how do you answer? If 1 interval in a VO2 workout is impossible - but I managed the rest - again same question
I’ve tried to answer the query on an overall rather than specifics. 80% of the workouts are hard or less. Probably as it should be. I also have started taking the adaptations suggested and it seems more are upgraded than downgraded
I think @mcneese.chad has mentioned somewhere earlier in this thread (or on one of the other AT threads) that you rate the workout on an overall basis prior to the final cool down, so could you do another interval/set/workout etc. as per his diagram.
Borderline workouts, i.e those I might think are too hard for “moderate” but too easy for “hard” I’ll answer in a way that tries to second guess AT (I know you shouldn’t) so I’ll answer “moderate” if I think I can handle a higher ramp rate, “hard” if I think I can’t. Hope that makes sense.
Something I’ve noticed since starting AT is that I’m getting much fewer cramps than before. I don’t believe my diet and sleeping/rest habits have changed significantly since last year so not sure what to put it down to. My training load is very similar, the only significant change is being on AT.
Cons: I’ve been on HV since I joined TR a few years back, and with AT for the first time during SSB2 I need to take a recovery week before the usual 5 week period. The progression stalled at PL10 after week 3 and this week (4) it has been a real struggle and should have recovered instead of trying stubbornly to complete the intervals.
Pros: workout levels allowed me to push and complete workouts I perhaps wouldn’t have considered otherwise.
Summary: AT works for those who know themselves as it requires constant adjustments to make it work. I actually think this goes in the opposite direction of what it was intended for namely getting rid of coaches.
Edit: my TSS last year during SSB was much higher and was completing all the standard prescribed workouts. Probably the difference is that those workouts were more accomplishable and I was able to go through the 5 week interval block as the plan prescribed.
Looking at the failures from the AT managed period, the biggie failure was Leconte but something was definitely wrong as I struggled on West Vidette immediately afterwards, that kind of workout is bread and butter to me.
I think I’ve swapped out a couple of workouts using alternates, usually on the scheduled day, other than that I’ve stuck to the plan.
Yup, you should rate based upon the “whole workout”.
Do take note that TR ignores the warm up and cool down, even if you alter them. So the main body of the workout is what the AT survey aims to evaluate.
I think once you reach a certain PL say above 8.5-9 the proposed plan becomes too taxing even though you generally could complete those workouts given sufficient rest.
In the case of SSB the workouts I’m generally asked to complete are Leavitt +3 or Phoenix +2 (this is PL 11.3!!) on Tuesday whilst Deception or Deception -1 is the Thursday workout.
Weekends I’m served with three fools (PL10) on Sat or wright peak -1 and with other easier variants (PL 9 or so) on Sunday.
I get the progression makes sort of sense and perhaps the limiter is doing these workouts indoors. Hence I would need to tone down a bit the weekly workouts and modify the weekend structure a bit even though in the past years I was able to complete the prescribed HV plans.
The problem also is that I hit level 10 during week 3. It’s kind of hard to progress from there given time constraints (too cold to ride outside) and without increasing intensity (I did not feel my FTP increased significantly during the period).
I am not sure how to get in touch with the team, but I would definitely be interested in getting their feedback on this (perhaps there should be a dedicated thread on SSB progression with AT?).
The easiest way to start is an email to support@trainerroad.com for now. I think either copy/paste your existing info from above or capture a link to your forum posts would be a fine launching point for them.
I’m curious how this happens. It hasn’t happened to me yet as I’m just newly using Adaptive. Is it that once your FTP has reached the point where you’re no longer getting big gains with each ramp test but your PL’s are high, then even after a ramp test (say a 1% improvement in FTP), your PL’s aren’t dropping that much? So then your PL’s stay at a relatively high level starting in the next block?
Yep, that’s exactly the case and what happened with me.
Another part of the story though is that I am using AT for the first time hence my starting workout level for ssb1 was 4 or 5 as for everyone.
However, going back to the point of knowing yourself, I brought the level up to what was the level of the standard plan last year given that I was able to complete those workouts.
What this means now is that the training plan plateaus for the final couple of weeks given there’s no more room to go either in intensity or duration that would also be realistically sustainable.
If I didn’t increase the level at the beginning perhaps I would still be progressing but workouts on the other hand would not provide enough stimulus.
