Another vlog, week 21! CX specialty plan, so weāre nearing the end of this first adaptive training journey. I kind of manipulated levels today by doing a 4.4 anaerobic workout instead of the ramp test, felt like 1.0 workouts, while consistent with my progression level, would be too easy and not super productive.
Soooo, doesnāt this whole Adaptive Training thing make FTP tests way less important? I mean if I skip a ramp test and underestimate my FTP (or overestimate it) wouldnāt Adaptive training, you know, like, adapt?
In case it wasnāt obvious, I have a ramp test scheduled for tomorrow that I really want to skip.
Yes, it will potentially adjust your workouts in a new block if you donāt test. It will also adjust your PLs if you manually tweak your FTP as if you had done a test. I havenāt done a ramp test in a long time and had both of these happen.
My view is that if:
- You know that your new FTP (if you tested) would only be modestly/moderately different to your old (current) FTP
& - None of your PLs are in very high single digits (ie. close to running out of āheadroomā to nudge up further)
ā¦then skipping a test is unlikely to cause problems.
My FTP doesnāt really change that much, and hence I rarely bother testing. NB If instead I knew Iād suffered a meaningful setback in fitness (eg. after a decent layoff), or if I was making major advances in fitness (eg. following a block of training after a prior layoff) then I would be testing more frequently, as thereād be some material change to pick up on.
Yes. But AT can only adjust up or down so far. You really want to be riding at the correct intensity as best as possible, if youāve improved then you might start getting high level threshold workouts thrown at you, except youāre doing Sweet Spot (for example) and whilst still great training. Itās not the same thing as thinking youāre nailing a long threshold session.
Or it might give you shorter and shorter threshold intervals but since youāre way Supra-Threshold youāre still not hitting the plan as intended.
Obviously it wonāt always work like that, and small differences will be less significant. Iād want to still have a pretty good idea where FTP is (and have it set close as possible).
Iām much the same. Havenāt seen double digit moves in FTP since I got it dialled late last year (up and down with getting back on the bike and equipment changes up to then).
Iām getting fitter though so am happy to monitor my FTP via benchmark workouts and a better understanding of the sensations.
Iāve really enjoyed AT and havenāt had any hiccoughs at all. Only one FTP change since joining Iām sure helps. The fitness progression and AT adaptation have been seamless and almost perfect.
A good point! You still can tell it no. But I think for a lot of folks, if theyāre choosing to reject the adaptations more often than they accept them, they wonder what the point of AT is at all. The value proposition is dead for them, and the adaptations are seen as an annoyance.
All in all, a little more clarity and transparency wouldnāt hurt. Iād love for AT to indicate which zones it is currently trying to progress, for instance. Down the line, allowing people choose the zones they want to progress in Plan Builder would be amazing as well, but thatās much further down the development pipeline than we currently are, I would imagine.
I am absolutely loving AT. Every time I try to pick a workout at a different intensity level than AT suggests, I realize that the AI was right all along. I have a few questions:
Would the team consider labeling the workouts in the training plans as Productive and Achievable? It would be helpful to see which ones are intended to be a bit harder or easier.
It looks like I all of the intensity days are either productive or achievable. Aside from the ramp test, is it TRās belief that we are really never supposed to dig deep and do āstretchā workouts?
The TR progression level algorithm logically assigns a higher progression level to a workout with a similar intensity but longer duration. I have found that this ātime effectā is smaller for me than the algorithm assumes, and longer workouts end up being easier for me than shorter workouts with the same progression level. Is TR looking at potentially personalizing this ātime effect?ā
Thanks again for all that you are doing!
After completing my PB built plan with some outdoor rides, some missed rides and a new FTP test that went not so well (oh and a new power meter), Iāve decided that itās still working well for me. I find that missed PL progressions seem to autocorrect in the future, based on both survey responses, followed by harder workouts and a few workouts I subbed for harder ones because I felt so good on previous similar workout. Iām only n=1, but so far so good. Also, Iāve found that TR Support is amazing at responding to questions and helping out.
I havenāt seen them announce any SuperPass functionality yet. Iām not sure itās in place. I may be wrong, but I would hazard a guess itād come when the machine can analyse any ride.
It was definitely in a while ago (search to find my posts WAY above related to my issues with it). No idea if itās still live or not though?
In my experience, I get stretch workouts in the last week of a training block if I get them at all. In the other weeks, it is as you described where Iām getting achievable for all but one or two workouts that are productive instead.
Does AT create the same adaptations in a plan if I manually delete my upcoming weekend ride compared to scheduling future time off over the weekend?
I am wondering if manually deleting my Saturday ride will change my workouts for the rest of this week compared to just scheduling Time Off in the calendar.
Good questions, Patrick!
Iāll definitely suggest to the team that we incorporate those productive/achievable icons from the calendar view as well! The cards may end up getting a bit cluttered, but maybe even a super small icon would help.
This will depend largely upon where you are in your plan. IE in base phase, you probably wouldnāt want to do a Breakthrough workout under normal circumstances, not only to align with your progressions but also for the longevity of your āwell-beingā for lack of a better word haha. Dont let the āAchievableā label make you think the workout isnāt difficult, it just means that per your current fitness and progressions, its hard but within reach to successfully complete it.
This got me thinking. Labeling some workouts as āproductiveā would suggest all the other are ānot productiveā. Wouldnāt āprogressiveā be a better term than āproductiveā?
But arenāt we intending to always be progressing. A workout isnāt progressive etc to everyone.
Maybe the new āweekly notesā could be indicating the most important session/toughest workout for the week and the one to expect to be easier?
As far as I see it AT is looking to manage progression to be sustainable and continuous by serving you workouts that provide a challenge, yet donāt set you back or knock your confidence.
Thatās a good suggestion! I think the logic to apply that would be tricky and could potentially take a good amount of resources while each week is potentially changing and adapting, and what would have been your most difficult workout of the week could no longer be after an adaptation. Would be tricky.
Yup, leads to this:
I clicked āKeep Planā, then get this:
I clicked āUpgrade Planā and then:
I clicked āLetās Do Thisā and finally land on my Career page, which has Adaptations Pending.
Checking the suggestions, I see TR had āresetā my previously adapted plan back to default, then is offering the same adaptations that I had gotten previously. So itās a bit of a return to the same state for me, with a few steps along the way. I accepted them and seem to back to where I was before the trip 