🎉 🎉 🎉 Introducing Adaptive Training! 🎉 🎉 🎉

61 Likes

Clearly I underthought that response.

41 Likes

Does AT apply to a customized plan? Say for example I add a recovery week to SSB1, right after the 3rd week. Will I still get adaptation from AT?

Unfortunately - no. As of now it only works on plans that are put on your calendar by plan builder. So if you add a TR plan to the calendar manually or build your own plan it will not make any adaptations.

This is ‘in progress’ but not yet released.

I’m currently in the AT beta and doing a TR polarized plan - which can’t be added by plan builder so I get progression level updates but it doesn’t adjust my workouts

2 Likes

2 things. Does anyone know if you ‘push’ a week in your calendar when you are on a planbuilder plan does that break AT’s ability to modify workouts in future weeks?

#2, byoungxprt I am not sure the system will ever see that thing as endurance. It will see it as a some threshold with some sort of sweetspot intervals. I think what it means by endurance in this context is z2. That said, they have stated AT + custom workouts is work in progress so results are not well defined right now.

Great question. I’m likely to move a workout from next week into the weekend as I have nothing scheduled from plan builder. If I manually add a few workouts instead it sounds like they will not count towards any adaptation. Maybe I’ll just do some easy recovery sessions instead.

I disagree. Anything over 2 hours probably has some impact on endurance depending on where you are in your progression. This particular ride was 60% z2, 25% z1, and 15% z3+. Similar TSS workouts in the 2.5 hour range are rated around an Endurance 5 so it makes no sense that this workout would be an Endurance 0. But yes the reason I posted this is because I understand custom workouts are still being worked on and I think this type of thing should probably be looked at. I personally don’t do much endurance work on TR. That’s mostly done outside or in Zwift.

1 Like

I get what you are saying, and dont disagree. I am more saying I dont think the computer will ever agree with you. If I were trying to design a workout that was endurance-ish that an algorithm would think was anything but, this is the sort of thing I would design. I also dont know a damn thing, just an opinion.

That helped. I had to refresh the page multiple times waiting for response to appear and it finally did. This took several minutes. Hopefully this will be fixed in future as otherwise it is not obvious when it is safe to close the app.
As for Android app, I fixed that too. What I did is I had a fresh start by clearing cache and data of the app. Now it works as intended and does not freeze at the end. I am also happy to see that fresh install does not require to wait like 20 minutes anymore until the whole career is synchronized with the app.

Is there really value to our subjective feelings? To me rides are pass or fail. There is no inbetween.

Yet someone else may have a list of how they answer and say use a different range of success or failure.

This just feels like noise when the actual ride can be quantified by time in the various zones.

They should do I think. My over under rides over the last couple of weeks ridden outside weren’t seen as successful by AT which was reflected by no changes to the VO2 max progression over those two weeks despite hitting the power targets.

A bit of bad weather this week so this I rode indoors and selected a different workout, not one in either the original plan or any suggested adaptions, based on the progression levels as a productive workout which did result in level changes.

1 Like

It uses both the raw data as well as the survey to provide a more personalized progression. A good coach would also be asking about how you feel to make sure the workouts are correctly tailored to you, and AT is aiming to do just that. Below is the portion of the original podcast about how workouts are classified as super passes, passes, struggle passes, cut short and failure as well as the workout surveys and why they exist.

2 Likes

There’s a huge value to it! Imagine you finish a workout that should be relatively easy based on your FTP, but feels like an all-out effort. If your coach asks you how you felt, and you respond that the workout was extremely hard, they’re not going to give you another super hard workout the next day, and neither is Adaptive Training. Likewise, if workouts that should be super challenging consistently feel easier, your coach will identify that as a sign of progress and likely up the intensity of your future workouts a bit, and so will AT. It’s a natural way of tailoring your progression to what you’re ready for from day to day.

8 Likes

I can see this, but I don’t have any more faith in my ability to do this consistently than I do other “five star” systems.

Thing is that you can’t be wrong when answering it if you’re honest. All it cares about is recognizing patterns and adapting your training from them. Even if you are trying to break it, ML is quite good at identifying false patterns and disregarding them from what it’s actually trying to do. I would suspect the TR ML has ways for addressing this as well.

In short, I think you’ll be surprised how easy it is to answer each ride. If it’s difficult, you’re thinking about it too hard imo.

1 Like

I refer you to this post:

I guess I dont see the value in using perceived output when you have the actual numbers.

To pick an analogy, do we trust the subjective feelings of consuming say Beet Juice(or whatever) or do we rely on seeing a scientific study to quantify what it does.

If we have the numbers and you continue to do workouts as per the TR set schedule…then the rate of increasing the difficulty of the workouts should increase. ie find out when I fail and tweak again.

If I think everything is easy and always say easy…AT will have to learn my easy could be someone elses it was fine, neither hard nor easy. It is this subjectivity that I think just creates noise in the data.

So, do you believe there is no value in a coach asking how a workout felt? If that were true there would be absolutely no value in a coach. Everyone could just follow the same random plan.

We don’t have sensors for perceived effort (not output), and power numbers don’t provide enough context for a model that’s supposed to give you “the right workout every time”.

Unfortunately, most of us don’t train in a lab, so we can’t measure the biological/neurological markers that determine how we feel during a workout.

There is no “set schedule” on AT. There’s a loose framework that AT fills in with sessions based on your performance and perceived effort.

AT tries to prevent you from failing workouts.

Someone else’s responses are not relevant to your progression. AT isn’t comparing your perceived effort to other perceived efforts and deciding on an objectively correct effort measurement. If you think everything is easy and always say easy, AT will give you progressively harder workouts.

Subjectivity is not noise. How you feel during a workout is relevant to your progression and your training goals.

6 Likes

Overreach is one thing (required) but taking that step further can lead to overtraining. So say you did Disaster successfully 3 days running you’re likely going to feel pretty bad, I’d imagine this system would actually never recommend that session in any circumstances.

It’s a way of preventing you from pushing yourself that step too far.

Edit - confirm that Disaster and Rockhouse don’t have AT ratings :grinning::grinning: