🎉 🎉 🎉 Introducing Adaptive Training! 🎉 🎉 🎉

[BCrossen]

I got accepted as well. All the following screenshots are from the Android Beta app. I’m using a Google Pixel 2 XL. I do all my workouts on the mobile app as it frees up my TV for watching shows (mirroring PC is a major hassle and a barrier to getting on the bike).

OK. So… Below is my progression chart on the new career page. I’ve said before on the forum that my bread and butter workouts are sweetspot and over-unders, and boy does my chart prove that with that 9.4 progression level. While they say on the podcast you don’t really know the kind of rider you are until you try all of them, I’ve always known I’d be a good timetrialer/breakway/climb pacing specialist.

I pay for that high level in poor VO2 though. Similarly to others above, I’ve not done any sprints in my training yet this year, so I’m not sure where that actually falls for me. And I’m actually surprised by the anaerobic level. That’s not something I normally associate myself with being good at.

When I loaded it up, it immediately offered adaptations (sorry no screenshot for that). It changed Kaiser +4 tomorrow to South Twin +2. I skipped last week’s Thursday VO2 (Dade +4) because work was nuts and I knew I did not have it in me (even skipped playing D&D that night ). Based on my progression levels, I wouldn’t have completed it properly even if I was moderately fresh, and i was mentally toasted.

Anyway, it says South Twin +2 has a difficulty of stretch for me so I’m eager to see how it feels tomorrow. It also changed my weekend rides to raise them to meet my progression levels for threshold and sweetspot. Here is a calendar screenshot to show my next couple workouts.

As noted by another user above, I can’t see the achievable, productive, stretch and breakthrough difficulty markers on the calendar but if I tap the workouts, it does identify them on the workout page. I imagine the difficulties not showing on the calendar is a bug and have sent in a report.

Here is are the workout screens for my upcoming weekend rides so you can see their difficulty as they relate to my fitness.

To further this point, essentially the levels are the “objective workout difficulty” and the difficulty markers (achievable, productive, etc.) are how that progression level relates to the individual user. So while these may be achievable and productive for me, they may be stretches or breakthroughs for others.

The alternatives option noted in the posts above is a game changer for individuals helping themselves find better alternative workouts and will help us forum users help each other provide good alternatives as well. This is probably one of my favorite aspects from the manual control side of things.

Also, the Train Now feature has those difficulty markers and is already basing the workouts on my training history. This aspect will be really cool to use between plans later this year to keep up some fitness but do so without a macro structure.

Next time I get adaptations, I’ll update with some screenshots and give some more info into why I think it made the choices it made. So far, it appears the choices are good for me. Looking at the workouts to come, the difficulty does line up with what I would expect to feel for those workouts, so it would appear to me so far AT is doing a good job at sussing me out.

[John_Barclay]

I expect my progression level chart to look a lot like your’s!

Thanks for the detailed breakdown. I’m so excited to get the email! The fact that I’m on a recovery week makes the wait less excruciating.

[BCrossen]

Dumpling some more screenshots because I just looked at the plans pages and realized they have been updated with progression levels to show you more clearly what you are in for with each of the plans. You just look at the progression chart and know what’s in store.

Here is Sweetspot Base

Here is Short Power Build

Below are the Road Specialty plans

This is a very good use of progression levels to relay information. It tells you what you’re getting into, both visually and via the plan descriptor. A nice touch.

[Tris]

Forgive the very basic questions…

What is it that determines the scores on the progression chart? Does it measure performance and efficiency at each stage of intensity, and compare it to average of riders? In other words, a ‘10’ in sweet spot means you are super efficient at that intensity of FTP.

And would that also mean that more sprint/endurance based riders would have a lop-sided chart deliberately? Or do the scores adjust compared to your goals?

Or will it just make sense once I see the interface?

[BCrossen]

The progression levels for workouts were made by the ML pulling in hundreds of features, including human input. Nate mentioned this in the podcast episode that they kept feeding it ideas and testing what works and doesn’t work.

The progression chart scores for the user are based on the user’s performance for those zones. The ML uses a bunch of features to determine this like it did for scoring the workouts.

A 10.0 workout in any zone would be considered one of the hardest workouts for that particular energy system. There are some workouts with a score greater than 10 but they are rare and likely only recommended in the most extreme cases of outliers.

The progression levels for a user will change with each workout. Each energy system has a decay rate so they’ll decrease as you do not use them and they increase as you complete workouts at progression levels greater than your current level in that zone. So if you only did sprints and endurance, you’d likely see the other levels fall down while those grow.

With that said, the goal is not to get a 10 in everything. The goal is to progress the systems that matter for you and your goals. A track sprinter doesn’t need a good sweetspot score and an ultra racer doesn’t need a good anaerobic score, for example. AT will use the plan you selected as your goal and will progress your systems based on that.

[jazir1979]

@Tris

What is it that determines the scores on the progression chart?

I presume it aligns with the scores given to the corresponding workouts. So, based on the scores of threshold workouts that you’ve recently completed and your RPE survey responses, your progression level would be based on those scores. With decay over time if you don’t continue to do such workouts, etc.

[Penski]

That’s great thanks for posting @BCrossen @tnordberg @NickL!

The progression levels system looks fantastic, it seems like it will give me more information on my training and allow me to understand workout choices (whether self or AT suggested) based on categorisation by expert coaches.

Very much looking forward to having access.

[Penski]

@BCrossen

The progression levels for workouts were made by the ML pulling in hundreds of features, including human input. Nate mentioned this in the podcast episode that they kept feeding it ideas and testing what works and doesn’t work.

Are you sure about this? I believe the progression rate might be determined by ML/Surveys, but the progression levels for workouts have probably been assigned by the TR team/coach chad?

[AldridgePrior]

@mcneese.chad

End result is that I added a PB plan back dated to my original modified plan date, and when I did that after completing my last modded week, TR deliberately adds a Ramp Test via the PB process, because it needs that for AT use.

Does the AT functionality need a Ramp Test or just an up-to-date “TrainerRoad FTP number” (TR-FTP)?

I hardly ever do ramp tests, and am not very keen to start, but I do keep the TR-FTP set where I think it should be (at a number that’s more “useful” practically for me, currently, than an actual ramp test result).

If AT does indeed require an actual Ramp Test w/o to be completed, why is that? That’d imply that it’s making use of data within the w/o recording that’s not captured by the 75%-of-best-1-min-power calc. Like what?

[JonasP]

@Nate_Pearson

You can continue to use the FTP you have, ramp test is not required. It is recommended though

Only a few posts up

[hubcyclist]

For the progression, your level is essentially the hardest workout you’ve done recently. For example, I did Big Mountain on Saturday and that bumped my endurance score to 7.3, my VO2 is 5.5 and if I (hopefully) complete my planned workout today it’ll get to 6.4.

[tnordberg]

Serious, but odd question: In your usage so far have you ever wished you could manually adjust your progressions downward?

It’s early for me, but I assume the AI will always try to put me “at my limits” (roughly), so if I believe my FTP is overreaching and/or my levels are too high it’s going to hurt until I likely fail repeated workouts for it to adjust?

Example: My Threshold is supposedly 4.4 and I just did a 4.0, reducing intensity a few times (to 98% at halfway, then 96% at 3/4 or so). I answered the RPE as all-out. It rated as a success, didn’t bump my Threshold up or down, but wonder if I’m really at a 4.4.

Is there any way to hit the “reset” button? Maybe manually adjusting FTP (or re-testing)?

Perhaps I will manually edit my FTP and see what happens… In the name of science of course.

Nevermind… Before completing my post, I went to edit my FTP by 1% downwards and noticed the following pop-up:

[BCrossen]

My feeling is that the first workouts may put people at their limits but the longer you use AT, the more it will actually tailor them to your abilities. So while it does have historic objective data to have an idea of your performance right now, it doesn’t have as much subjective data from the post workout surveys. My assumption is that the more of those you complete, the better the workout selection will get.

For that workout, did it rate it as achievable, productive, stretch or breakthrough? It could be that it thinks you have a higher tolerance for threshold than you currently do, but I’d say dropping the percent like you did isn’t a total failure for the workout. You’re still spending most of your time in that threshold zone. If you had stopped in the middle of an interval to catch your breath for a few minutes, that would be a different story.

[tnordberg]

Thanks for the thoughts, I’m going to keep looking to see where it goes with future workouts.

It rated it Achievable. I think, maybe incorrectly, that the rating is merely a comparison between my level and the workout’s level. It was a Success in the end with +/- 0 on my level after (so the workout was 4.0, I was 4.4 and am still 4.4).

A side note, this workout is labelled as Threshold but much of the work is right at the bottom end of threshold, reducing it much at all seems to put the effort into SweetSpot. I get zones all flow together, but I still found the mental debate about it not helping/hurting my SweetSpot progression while spending nearly all time there with my adjustments I know we don’t want to say the zones have strict and firm boundaries, but the progressions and workout labels seem to make that assumption?

I agree the workout wasn’t a failure (or “Struggle” to be kind), but I would suspect a max level RPE (“all-out”) on a workout that is less than your ability may be implying a need to reduce your progression?

I will see where it goes though, honestly I do many workouts with varying fatigue (I run different amounts on off-bike days) and often ride with different levels of pre-fuel. This ride was 10 minutes after waking up, and I may have better ability midday.

I left my FTP and progressions where they were for now after seeing the warning, I’d rather see how it plays out for now.

[BCrossen]

@tnordberg

I will see where it goes though, honestly I do many workouts with varying fatigue (I run different amounts on off-bike days) and often ride with different levels of pre-fuel. This ride was 10 minutes after waking up, and I may have better ability midday.

I think that answers the RPE question then. Work like this has to be pretty well fueled in my experience. I would hate to do it first thing in the morning, and I would 100% be suffering and questioning life, as well.

As for the zones, threshold zone does dip down to as low as 91% and rises as high as 105% depending on the model. I think staying in that area means you did it right. Sweet spot zone is right on the line of the upper end of tempo and the lower end of threshold. It is a not a mutually exclusive zone, but rather one that lays over the top of those two other zones. So some threshold work may be sweet spot and some tempo work may also be in sweet spot from time to time.

It’s why on intervals.icu Sweet Spot is shown at the bottom outside the zone heirarchy. Below is a screenshot to show how sweet spot isn’t a distinct separate zone but rather a combo of tempo and threshold. Also note how my FTP is 251, but my threshold is as low as 221 and as high as 257.

[AldridgePrior]

@JonasP

Only a few posts up

Thanks for that . I only dip in from time-to-time.

[Mowag]

I was under the impression that you get a short questionaire after every workout?
What would happen, if you described this “achievable” “successful” workout as really challenging and “just so doable”?
Would AT recognize this and downscale the progression by itself and rating this exact workout as “productive” or even “stretch” from this point on?

[tnordberg]

I think the questions may change if it deems the workout a Struggle or otherwise weird (i.e. to better understand the Struggle)

In this case it deemed it a Success and merely asked one question about my Perceived Exertion. I answered the maximum (“all-out”). The only adaption that showed up shortly after the workout was a threshold workout a month out and it suggested taking a planned 4.4 up to a 4.6 - both of which seemed weird to me (so far in the future and only getting harder).

[Robhor]

For those who are interested in some more info about Machine Learning:

Machine learning

[roadbiketrevor]

Those of you who are posting screenshots and reporting on your experiences are true heroes. History will remember you as such.