TR can see the data and use it for any number of things (it goes into the Train Now recommendations for example; it’s not going to recommend a hard indoor workout if you’ve just had several hard days outside).
Just because they can’t currently assign PLs to outdoor rides this does not mean the data is invisible. There’s no reason why it couldn’t be included in their FTP estimation (I assume it is to some extent, as overall training volume would be extremely relevant, but don’t know).
I agree with everything you said.
I am grandfathered in at $129 and happy to pay that.
I only ride indoors for maximum 3 months a year when the weather is bad.
I use fascat plans which incorporate intervals to do outdoors / indoors and group rides. I am over 60 and their plans have much less intensity than TR but get great results.
I run the indoor workouts through trainer road because I like the layout but i could easily run it through my garmin.
I do t think I would pay more.
I might just revert to only paying for 3 months each year.
They cant assign PLs because they cant identify power, intervals, rest etc from the data. Can’t see how that will enable them to estimate my FTP if they can only see duration and TSS etc?
I think this is what he did say
My suggestion - just increase the grandfathered rate in line with a measure of inflation and possibly some additional % for new features.
I am sure that the T&Cs give TR the freedom to do this, and I am also sure that nobody would really begrudge an inflationary increase or slightly over - I have been paying the same amount since 2016 and overall UK inflation between Oct 2016 when I joined and Jan 2022 has been around 19% so it would be pretty hard to argue with, say, a 20% increase on the basis of inflation over the past 5.5 years!
This would give a balance between an easily justifiable and understandable increase to existing users while preserving the loyalty benefits for those users.
Editing just to say we mark up our software products for inflation every year for new users and renewals. Totally different market (B2B) but similar concept.
I’ve got legacy pricing and pay annually. I’d rather one price for everything to be honest rather than tier pricing. However would be fine with an inflationary increase each year (say 2-3% or whatever).
My thoughts exactly.
Sorry that’s not quite correct - they clearly can identify power from the data, I get a power curve and power PRs identified by TR for all my outdoor rides. This can be used for looking at MAP and FTP estimates in exactly the same way as e.g., Intervals.icu does it, it isn’t complicated.
The reason they can’t assign PLs is because of the way the PLs were assigned to the workout library (via ML assessment of the catalogue). You can see how the PLs generated in Workout Creator are different from those within TR’s library, even if you recreate the exact same workout.
So one reason it doesn’t work for unstructured outdoor rides is because the pass/fail criteria (and impact on PLs) is based on knowing how you performed against your target, which obviously you don’t have for an outdoor unstructured ride.
The other reason is that identifying PLs based on a power trace (which they’ve said they have an internal beta for, for some time) doesn’t produce PLs that are comparable with the PLs that have been assigned to the workout catalogue through ML (which as I understand was based on ML analysing people’s performances against them to identify how they stacked up against each other).
If they have all the data then why cant TR tell me when I have completed a planned structured outdoor workout using my Wahoo?
because wahoo doesn’t include the data in their file identifying the workout like Garmin does. It might be just as much a wahoo problem as a TR problem
Because of the way Wahoo hands the data back to TR.
When Garmin does it, Garmin hands back the workout with a workout identifier so that TR can match it up against the catalogue workout and determine whether you achieved it etc… Wahoo doesn’t handle it the same way (or didn’t last year, I am out of touch on the current status as I don’t use a Wahoo). I thought you automatically got PL credit when you matched the planned workout to the ride now anyway though.
Expanded my thoughts previously. . . The advancements in the platform continue to be amazing. The American dream is to create something and then sell that said something to prosper. Part of this model in our current capitalism is to market the product and make people want it even more. I am about to get on a work related team call with 9 of my 11 co-workers who sit there and talk about Peloton and their relentless use. No one has heard of TR unless I mention it and the one time I did, I got ‘Tucker Carlson baby looking at a balloon for the first time’ faces staring back to me across the Zoom screen. I applaud the mission for continued TR improvements, but instead of charging us more, do better marketing it to the entire world. The improvements can be paid for because you grow the business, not get more out of us.
exactly my point - they cant analyse the data from a Wahoo (hence automatic pass) so how can they use that data to estimate my FTP then?
They can still see your power trace - if you look into the workout on the browser you’ll see your power curve - all the dynamic FTP assessment tools do (like the one in Zwift or Intervals.icu) is assign your FTP based on performance vs duration at a point on the power curve (think Zwift uses 1 min, Intervals is user-selectable). They all basically just draw a power curve and pick a point along that curve to estimate FTP from.
This is totally different to comparing how you did against the planned workout, which they can’t do with the Wahoo data because Wahoo doesn’t tell them which workout it was supposed to be when they hand the data back.
You’re conflating two different things here.
I just re-upped for another year but feel exactly the same way as the Pickle.
In terms of value, TR for me is a workout player and a calendar. I also like the TR team and what they are trying to do.
For the TR team members who are reading, my feedback is this: I’ll stay on at the grandfathered price pretty much forever and will likely ride my entire life. So you can somewhat count on $99 x about 30 more years. But if that price were to double or triple, there isn’t enough value at present to keep me on board.
Faced with a substantial price increase for features that don’t work yet and which I don’t really need, I’d find an alternative workout player and go back to my old calendar. That’s just my use case and customer view.
What would get me to pay more? (1) Full incorporation of outdoor rides (road and mountain) (2) feeding an AT plus adaptive plan builder incorporating something besides time crunched intensity heavy building blocks, (3) which works for a variety of use cases and not just folks enjoying NOOB gains or folks rebuilding to a previous high FTP after detraining. (4) A decent analytics suite. Those are heavy lifts but seem aligned with the company objectives. If achieved would offer an ROI that would get my attention and open my wallet.
In the meantime, I think many of us are critical about the cost, but are also happy to help TR develop by contributing data, giving thoughtful feedback, being critical beta testers and providing other input including contributions to this forum which one thinks reflects well on TR and likely has value to them as well.
Many opinions in many threads but in the end it is up to TR to decide if keeping those folks around has value and at what cost to the company.
THIS. It really frustrates me that after so many years and so many people asking, we still dont have any plans that address this need. This must be the easiest win of all - how long does it really take to create a plan that fits into this. There is no tech development required at all!
Sad news. I’ve been a long time subscriber. I’ve supported TR and they have supported me. I have hardly used it the past year but literally just killed Zwift and switched back over to TR full time yesterday with plans to go back to it exclusively for trainer rides (using my own workouts primarily). The AT is useless to me as they don’t account for outdoor rides, runs and swims. The Calendar function and plans are also useless to me as I do my own training plans. TP basic is more seamless and better tracks my hours and fatigue across various platforms including TR.
I have been and continue to be very loyal to TR, however if they do backpedal on legacy pricing, they will simply be putting me in a position where I have to make a decision whereas now it’s a no brainer each year. I suppose I don’t fault them, but I will be very sad to go as my number of years on TR is sort of a badge of honor and since it was originally a b-day present, it’s sort of my annual gift to myself as it renews automatically on my birthday.
I need better run and swim plans for me to start paying more for TR.
I am at the minute using 80:20 plans for both because the TR ones just aren’t good enough.
No my understanding was that if you wanted the new features, you’d have to go to the new pricing plan, effectively as if you’d cancelled and come back. Or you’d be frozen at whatever point they changed the features available.
I’d be willing to pay more for newer features, but not double what I’m paying now.
yep - Nate says potentially ‘frozen’ with AT as it is now, but explicity says things like estimate and forecast FTP etc would be ‘extras’ that mean additional subs.