This is very much the case. I personally am fine trusting the machine, but many others need more information before they can put trust in it. A good portion of the nearly 4,500 posts in this thread are on just this, and there are a handful of other long threads on the forum about it as well.
Ultimately, my thoughts are that AT may not be for everyone because of the current requirement to surrender to machine learning. For riders with years and years of training experience, letting go of finite control makes little sense because they know their body and training in and out. I on the other hand am still rather new (only a two full seasons with TR) and couldnāt care less about that control. I use TR for the convenience of not needing to do anything but complete the workout it tells me to. For me AT has simply been a wonderful enhancement to that convenience.
But for many others that have posted here, AT leaves them scratching their heads more than they would like. And in their case, more transparency and clarity of ATās goals for them is needed before they can totally buy into it.
Thatās an interesting one ā a surrogate, and perhaps a good one ā if one isnāt taking the TR mission of āmaking you a faster cyclistā and inferring it to be āmaking you the fastest cyclist possible.ā I think thatās where the question āis what Iām getting optimalā come in ,based on the expectations people bring to what AT should be.
And excellent commentary, @BCrossen. Exactly how Iām thinking about situation ā while Iād like to trust the machine Iām still wondering whether what AT gives me is ābetterā than what PB alone gives me. I can easily overthink and second guess just about any training concept based on what Iāve read or viewed most recently
Just one thought. You donāt āalwaysā have to surrender to the machine. Itās still up to you and what you think. Itās actually much easier to ignore the adaptations than to accept them. So I would say, itās just there to give you some suggestions, itās not there to take away your control over your own program. Itās very easy to have a hybrid of the two approaches.
Weird behavior yesterday on post-ride surveys, has anyone else seen this behavior (email also sent to TR support):
I completed an endurance ride, and stopped a couple of times to deal with switching entertainment
At the end of the ride, I received the normal āHow did this ride feelā survey. I replied āModerateā (the power was āeasyā, but I did it as a heat acclimatization ride, so no fans, which made it feel more moderate)
I then got the āHuh, that looked harder than usual, whyā survey - to which I replied āOtherā
Iāve never gotten the āthat looked harder than usualā survey for a completed workout as prescribed when I responded āModerateā to the effort level.
This seems weird, so interested in if anyone else has seen this.
Interestingly (well to me at least). Since I was accepted to AT Iāve done: Endurance session (Lazy Mountain with PM), a club TT (with PM), a short (no power data recovery ride) and an open TT (with PM) and after each its come up with no adaptations required. I then done a 45miles gravel ride Sunday (no power data just hr) and that has I think triggered adaptions (either that or the Monday rest day) tonight has been shifted up 0.1 of a level
Usefully the original workout was set to outdoors and the Adapted workout is set to outdoors too Although its turned gloomy and windy so I will probably do it indoors so I donāt have to worry about the light Edit: the adapted outside work out does seem to being sent to Garmin Connect, Iāll probably have to push it if I decide to do the wo outside.
This is why. As long as you select that you didnāt struggle and select āotherā or āmechanicalā for example, it will be understood that the reason for those breaks was not that you were struggling through the workout and needed to rest.
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.
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
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.
How do you know if you have a super pass and what happens when you do get it. I went with the adaptations recommended by AT. The 1st set of 30/30ās were a joke. 2nd set was up 5% and still too easy. 3rd set up 10%. My progression went from 1 to 1.6 just as if I had done the workout at 100%.
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.
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.
Although its turned gloomy and windy so I will probably do it indoors so I donāt have to worry about the light 
Edit: the adapted outside work out does seem to being sent to Garmin Connect, Iāll probably have to push it if I decide to do the wo outside.
