It would be very cool for you to share your experiences. I’m extremely curious how “visible” this feature really is for most riders.
From what I’ve heard on the podcast and such, my suspicion is that it will probably be pretty invisible if you run plan builder and then hit your workouts at 100% without failing out/dropping difficulty/skipping or ramping up difficulty (assuming erg mode … if you’re not on erg mode and can blow past watt suggestions, that’s different).
However, I’d be very curious as you continue to use it, whether you find that it is actually “visible” pretty regularly.
If you get your Sweet Spot Progression Level above 10, you’ll start seeing these beauties. (These are Not Recommended for me because my Sweet Spot Progression Level is 6 right now)
Nate has stated previously that price structure would remain for those that have been loyal to TR over the years. It was this comment that contributed to the fact that many of us continued to pay for a subscription even when the service wasn’t being fully utilized AND we knew that TR was a passionate group making huge strides forward in training.
If you’re a paying subscriber you’re on the path to becoming a loyal member of the TR group… They’re only going to continue to make this product better.
After years of being here I have my excuses prepared for each training block! I like your approach much better. I don’t have to take any accountability for failing.
One question if you know the answer Chad. If I were to plan and mark off a run as completed using a Tri plan, will it take the running TSS into account when prescribing the bike workout?
Indeed @Skeptic, it is not only enough to be able to classify workouts into 4 or 5 categories (from achievable to breakthroughs etc) but also if I should be training at all today or if it is better that I rest.
But, you know, we are human beings evolution has made our brains such that we try to put some purpose behind everything in order to understand it. ML, and more precisely neural networks are notorious for their inability to explain what they are doing (unless explaining a gradient descent is an explanation). So, to wrap it up, I think that at some point AT might need to put some words into why they prescribe a specific workout (or rest day) and what the impact of doing this or that workout (or no workout today) will be in the near or not so near future. If the explanation is not in natural language at least it should be in terms of the fitness graph (or FTP prediction) that they have.
In any case I think that @Nate_Pearson and the whole team are in the right direction but in some years from now I am sure that people will be (mentally if not also physically) fatigued from following blind suggestions from a machine without getting the big picture in terms that they can understand as human beings.
AFAIK, the new AT tools are only looking at cycling activities. But Amber said that the cycling parts of your plan ARE included.
It just doesn’t look at ANYTHING else right now (strength training, running, swimming, etc.). From comments by Nate, I think that is all planned, but will come over time, as they figure out each new piece of the puzzle.
No word on frequency at this time. All we know is that “select, you know who you are” people were invited yesterday. Those who signed up for the closed beta will be added over time, but there’s no indication of when that will be.
The intention don’t matter for the effect of the effort. If I do 4x20@220W it has the same effect on my fitness regardless of if it was performed in the context of a TR structured workout or not. It is easier for the model to guess at the effect of the effort when it is tied to that workout because they are able to look at the outcomes for everyone else that did that same workout. Bridging that gap between ‘bag of efforts’ and ‘this specific set of efforts’ is the hard part.
One thing I haven’t seen discussed at all is whether this will recommend a rest or easy day. There’s been a lot said about how it will use ML and incorporate that into its algorithm, but does it use that to recommend additional rest days? Everything I’ve seen is about how it suggests WHAT intensity to do, not WHEN to do it.
One curiosity I have about my recent ssb2 hv is whether too many achievable workouts mean there’s not enough stress to grow. Would be interesting to learn more about how many productive workouts one should be doing vs simply achievable
