Great point @jchappers. My concern is, from a user point of view and for those not in AT Beta, does this workaround not seem a bit ridiculous to have to do? Also, you run the risk of working different energy systems than originally intended if you get the bump wrong.
I can understand the frustrations here … the new plans rolled out are much more suited to the users in AT Beta, thus leaving those not in the Beta group in a bit of a training conundrum.
Hmm, I see it this way: any static plan will suit a portion of users and not suit others. The people who are unhappy now were happy with the previous plans. On the previous plan, many others were unhappy and suffering from too much intensity.
This is a simple fact of static plans for a wide user base. If you’re unhappy now and grumbling about having to manually adjust, think of all the others who were doing the same thing on the old plans. No static plan will be perfect and we should all be prepared to manually adjust, since only we have full visibility into our own training. What TR have done is used data to change the plans to suit more people, but they can never suit everybody all the time. This is where AT could be revolutionary.
In the meantime, it’s the same situation as before - static plans that may or may not need adjusting - it’s just a different (and hopefully smaller) set of users that need to do this. But at least workout levels and the new filters make it easier to find suitable adjustments. And for every complaint coming now, hopefully there are more users who are now happier. Maybe it sucks to be one of those who are unhappy with these plans, but I’d argue that “too easy with the opportunity to find more challenging replacements as needed” is better overall than “too hard and causing burn-out”. It’s a balance. Static plans for a diverse user base always will be. Bring on AT!
But I’ll add… even if/when I get AT, I fully expect that I may override it’s adaptations and make adjustments outside of that. It will be a tool. But I’ll still be in charge.
And even then an FTP bump is going to be too much of a blunt tool. The workouts in the new plans are still tough (like Geiger, McAdie or Palisade +2 for example) so raising your FTP to make the plan just as hard as the old plans would actually just cause failure altogether.
Hopefully, AT is released to production soon so the new plans can be utilised to their fullest potential.
Or it was just easier to slam the new plans on everyone than to try and segment different plans between AT benefitors and the rest of the users.
You completely missed my point.
Yes I did. Good point.
Still doesn’t help that my plan went missing in the middle of it when they switched plans.
The plans look like they have got more basic.I am on a LV plan I have 1 x sweetspot, 1 x VO2 and 1 x Threshold every week for the next 6 months (apart from recovery weeks). I guess simple can be effective but the levels only go from around 4.5-6.5 and are not totally linear in progression. Hopefully the Adaptive training when it eventually happens will improve the plan.
What’s with all of the “sweet spot” workouts having 80% intervals? I always thought 80% of ftp was high endurance or low tempo, not sweet spot which according to TR is 88-94%. There seems to be a number of workouts like this. It even says “Tempo” in the description.
Because 80% is above endurance and there isn’t a tempo level - was discussed on the AT thread.
That just has to be an error. That is Tempo
According to the description of these workouts there is 
And what about Mount field -2 then?
difference btw wko categories and AT levels.
Searching for a wko you can choose tempo, but for AT levels purposes there is no tempo.
If you search the AT thread you duplicate posted on for ‘tempo’ you’ll see Chad (forum Chad!) raising this point.
I was aware that Tempo workouts are excluded from TrainNow, but wasn’t aware they are missing from Adaptive Training also. Are you sure of that?
How do we reconcile that omission with the start of the workout notes in most Tempo workouts written by Coach Chad.
" Tempo rides are the height of aerobic endurance"
I wasn’t saying they were missing / excluded from AT - I was saying they’ve been categorised as being sweetspot for levels purposes. Clearly the tempo workouts are still there but for progression level purposes they have been categorised as sweetspot.
I wonder why they have done that
As we say here in the UK it all seems to be a bit of a “pigs ear”.
Looks like a Tempo progression level to me
So the only reference to ‘sweetspot’ is in the wko level you can see in George’s screenshot - that’s the progression level for AT purposes. It’s level 1.3 because it’s, yes, tempo rather than sweetspot!
In old money the workout is tempo. It’s still a tempo workout. Nothing has changed to stop it being a tempo workout. But for progression level purposes TR have put these workouts in the sweetspot progression level.
Now I’m totally confused.
