Losing faith with new TR plans

Historically , I’ve commonly replaced TR workouts when I didn’t think the scheduled one was best suited to me on any given day, and didn’t consider that a massive deal

Comments like this really put me off this forum. It might not be a big deal to you to switch a workout, but to someone new to structured training / cycling in general (like I was when I started using TR!) it’s a huge deal - I just wouldn’t have had any clue. Also, as someone who’s really time-pressured fitting stuff around work, a couple of extra minutes’ faff choosing a new workout could be the difference between me completing something and me not having the full hour :sweat_smile: The thing I liked about the old TR plans (not used the new ones yet) is that I could just unlock my phone and go.


We are getting it from the forum. It’s hard to follow everything in this forum without spending hours. We see something and we question it. I for ONE am unhappy that something that changes for AT affects us not on AT. I realize that statement may be incorrect but I don’t have 5 hours to wade through everything. I keep asking for a thread on AT that is just from trainerroad where it has updates and answers. I am not about to read 3500 messages to get answers.


Confused as to what that comment put you off the forum. :neutral_face: Anyways, you didn’t quote what I think is the more important part, which was the second para about how much easier that all is today:

Today (ie. ignoring AT adaptive plans), with the introduction of Workout Levels and the library now searchable (and sortable) by level, and the granularity of interval type within each zone, plus with TrainNow making suggestions automatically, this task of selecting alternative workouts has been has been made much easier and faster, without really requiring prior library knowledge. Looks a doddle to me.

Honestly, do you really not have a minute or two (maybe less!) - if necessary - in order to swap out a workout those times when you think that’s necessary? Baffling to me… :confused:

A TrainNow suggestion might take <30 seconds to pick! Just how time constrained is someone that they couldn’t spare those amounts of time to pick something on those occasions they wanted an alternative? It takes me longer that that to pick what Youtube or Netflix vid to watch on the trainer… :blush:

Best of luck with it anyway - I do think the tools for selecting w/o alternatives have just got a whole load better, easier and faster to use. And that’s all prior to AT’s eventually availability that should reduce that need further…


This. If I were new to TR and at my current level (which I am very proud of) I would be confused and if I followed the plans I would likely lose fitness. Also, I think the whole ‘time crunched’ thing is one of the metrics that TR always tried to optimize for. I mean, there are some bonkers workouts in the library that have 1 minute cool down after some pretty intense intervals. That honestly makes no sense, it’s pretty clear they were bending over backwards to make the workout 60 minutes when it really should have been 65 or 70.

Asking someone new and/or time crunched to see a workout in their plan, realize that it is wrong (why is it there in the first place?), go to the workout library, understand levels and TSS enough to pick a new one that is going to meet the specific needs of their training and goal event, and then do that workout seems like needless hassle. Yes, it’s easier with levels. But it’s not easier than not having to do it.


Remember, some people had to do just this with the old plans, because some of the progression rates were too ambitious. The new plans with gentler progression glide paths arguably just mean that the cohort of users who need to resort to replacing some of their workouts has changed. Opposite sides of the same coin.

I think I’m a clear beneficiary of thew new plans, requiring less tweaking from me compared to the old, so am happy about the change. Others who think they’ve been disadvantaged by the change will obviously not be so happy…

The consolation here is that:
(i) the tools for selecting workout replacements have just improved by an order of magnitude compared to the old tools making the task simpler & faster; short term issue, hopefully, because…
(ii) most importantly, AT will be along “shortly” delivering personalised, custom plans, avoiding once and for all (hopefully!) the inherent limitations of one-size-fits-all training plans, which will obviously always be a compromise and not ideal.


I have asked for a single thread that is locked, and only updated by staff. But, that was not opted for.

But, ignore the comments and read post #1 only. Post #1 is continually modified with status.


Directly from TR or other users thoughts? I have seen other users make posts that the plans were designed for AT, but nothing from TR saying that. I see official TR postings saying the plans are good without AT.

Not quite true. Many times updates are placed in post ×××× and never make it to post number 1. But realistically when they add 12 people to the closed beta who really cares.


Then tell ncomerford to update it. :slight_smile: if you’re reading the thread, then you’ve got updates. More than me, that’s for sure. I hardly read it, and just read post #1 most of the time.

I dont spend to much time here. Raining at the lake and I have nothing better to do. I try not to look.

The plans were not changed for AT. The plans were changed specifically for users not on AT because they felt they had the information needed to update them.


Regardless. My polarized plan got wiped from my calendar and I had to start over. Not pleased.

If a person is new to structured training, there really isn’t any reason to try changing things until they go through at least a base and build block and see how they progressed.

1 Like

Fair enough, I understand the sentiment behind that, but in the interest of balance they did add 305 punters (30% bump) to the beta this past week, so the pace isn’t quite that glacial.

1 Like

I actually wonder if the overreaction from the users cause more burnout rather than less because they didn’t realize that the prior plans already had some of this backpedalling already built in.

For example, SSBMV2 used to have Spencer (7.7), Lemarck (4.9), and Leconte (5.9) in the final week.

None of the threshhold workouts in General Build were higher than Lemarck throughout. It took until week 7 to get a VO2 Max workout as tough as Spencer.

Now that we see these scores, it seems like everyone wants to continually progress, which may lead to some issues.

I agree 100% this was not a good rollout of an update…maybe they have too many things going, or maybe this is how all the rollouts tend to go. I haven’t been on the forum long enough to gauge.

I failed “Whaleback” today, probably because of the 2min recoveries between intervals. The intervals themselves didn’t seem too hard, but by the time the third one rolled around, I just couldn’t turn the pedals anymore. I do wonder if AT is going to get the nuance between intervals being too hard vs. recoveries not being long enough for the particular rider.

Did you contact support@trainerroad.com about that issue?

Others had similar problems, and TR restored them very quickly after that email, from the cases I read.


It was Spencer +2!!!

I always though that was the toughest week in the TR system. Absolutely brutal. I completed it as written once and felt unstoppable.


I think they are inter-related. You’d need a real coach to chime in on that. From my experience, there are multiple ways to skin that cat.

Whaleback should be doable without any recoveries. That’s just a 20 minute FTP test. The rest intervals is part of a progression to build you up to that. So if you can’t do 20 min @ 105%, then you should be able to do 20 min @ 100%, or 4x5 with 2 min rest @ 100%, for example.