Ready… wait for it… “it depends.” 
8 Likes
I wish you all would understand what @The_Cog is saying, and more importantly, what he’s not saying.
—gulp— 
He is a physiologist. He is answering/commenting like a physiologist. He wakes up every morning thinking about exercise physiology. He doesn’t get up every morning thinking about what is the best prescription for making an individual athlete fast over a 12-18 month cycle,
—gulp— —gulp— 
His concern is “response” (holy sh!t am I out over my skis on this lol) IOW, if you suggest that riding Z2 for a week will illicit a stronger physiological response (read: adaptation) than riding Vo2 for a full week, he will tell you you’re wrong. Hard work is > easy work from a physiological perspective given equal durations.
His concern is not, however, what is the best way to spend the next 52 weeks of training. Because you/me/we all know that doing nothing but vo2 work for 52 weeks will bury you, injure you and you won’t get as fast as if you had appropriately spent your glycogen budget to account for recovery and long term gains.
But make make no mistake … if you ride 10 hours for one week, and one person spends all 10 hours at vo2 and the other one spends all 10 hours in Z2, the vo2 subject will make greater gains, Does that mean we should spend all our time at vo2? I don’t even think @The_Cog would argue that.
He’s just saying, “hard works = gains … find the balance that works for you. Good luck”
I’m sure I’m totally wrong. I’m nervous. I may sign off for a few weeks. Lol.
Good luck to us all🤘
22 Likes
correct sir. furthermore, your V02 max gainz will plateau very quickly. you will hit a wall. this PLAN concept is long term. you simply cannot and should not ride with a focus on high intensity longer term. context is everything. even though a single 2 hours of high intensity is > than 2 hours low intensity for adaptations, it will not be, over a PLAN duration.
that’s me done. i mean no harm. good luck to us all in our pursuit of mediocrity 
1 Like
They know not what they do.
For masters, the difference between someone who was athletic through their teens, competitively athletic through their teens, and…sat around playing guitar and drinking beer through their teens…is something I think that plays out when you are formulating training for those folk now in their 30s, 40s and 50s.
At least, I like to excuse my performance this way 
3 Likes
You’re not. In fact, the only two things I might emphasize/add are:
-
There is no “one true way”, and anybody seeking it is on a fool’s errand. (Even more foolish is trying to foist it on others - “everyone should do X” - especially without knowing anything about them.)
-
Not only do I wake up thinking about exercise physiology, I go to bed thinking about it as well, and all too frequently think about it in between.
25 Likes
Sam Callan (whose UG degree was in exercise science) used to kick off every USA Cycling Coaching Education clinic by joking that he hated the fact that the exercise physiologists on the program always started their answers to questions that way.
6 Likes
But all those Zone 2 discussion ultimately aren’t really about Zone 2. I actively participate in those discussions.
They are about this ^^^^^ Or to put another way: sweet spot as a concept. And if you’re tired of trying to figure that out as individual, then you are not going to progress as an endurance athlete. That’s why those discussion crop up all the time and why they go on and on…and on…
Finding the mix/balance (whatever you want call it) is the essence of what you’re doing (whether you’re self-coached, receiving guidance/coaching, or filing out a post-workout survey for ML).
I don’t care if things turn into Zone 2 discussions or not. But I am almost always interested when the discussion turns to ways of finding the balance (mix/type of training), even within the tedious “Zone this zone that” foo. Sometimes that means exploring what your endurance riding looks like. Sometimes (to me, too often) it turns to the what and how of slamming intervals.
Maybe it’s just that folks really seek consensus. But you’re not going to get consensus. You can get some really good input (be it a plan, input from someone, or lurking) about what might work for you.
(*you = “you” isn’t you specifically, @JoeX I don’t like “one”…seems pretentious)
We can all agree on this: kudos on getting the plans out.
4 Likes
3-4hr endurance (or longer) would be better in combination with the rest of the plan.
As mentioned time and again, the SS was added in the past as riders weren’t doing the Endurance ride as it wasn’t as interesting, too monotonous, or whatever for indoor training. Now with people using TR as their overall coaching system as well as the indoor platform, there is a big push back to the long ride on the weekend.
If you can absorb the TSS, and are time limited on those days, the argument is still there that there is a greater stimulus from the SS assuming similar progression for both.
1 Like
They seek simplicity and duality. They want two options and they want only one option to be right. And often a hero to worship and lead their “right” option.
Those people are forever wrong, and about everything in their lives.
I’m glad we moved on from plans and zones.
There’s confusion because the argument was always that people weren’t going to do endurance workouts indoors. What changed? Are people all of a sudden more likely to do long workouts indoors? If not, why switch away from SS workouts?
3 Likes
Because more and more freaks like myself are coming to love the long 2-4hr indoor endurance rides
5 Likes
I think it’s a combination of more and more people are using TR both indoors and out, and the consistent push from people complaining about burning out because their weekend ride was too hard (or whatever).
I’m just pointing out that TR’s stance was always that an Endurance workout would be the better fit, and the limits were more to do with the indoor centric plans, and time limits of the userbase. In terms of plan efficacy and directly comparing a 90min SS workout and 120min Endurance workout, there’s two angles. Both covered above by others.
Ooof. I can do 2 hours inside and be okayish. After that it gets rough. Part of me can get motivated in Zwift just trying to ride routes I have never ridden.
2 Likes
Of course it’s true but standard training plans have been around for all sports to help us average joes just keep in decent shape. And it’s clearly what TrainerRoad is all about. And I’m pretty sure TR don’t state that this is the only way but give guidance to many as they work their way through what works for them.
2 Likes
So I’m going to put my money where my mouth is and give the Masters Plan a try, since these are a lot of changes I’ve been asking for myself, and the overall plan looks roughly about what I’d come up with in terms of availability.
One question I do have, though, is about the impact of volume: in terms of adaptations and gaining fitness, is total volume the key (e.g. is 12 hours a week at the same overall intensity roughly equal), or is there greater benefit if the volume is largely in weekend rides or something like that?
Basically, given two example weeks:
Week A
M - off
T - 2 hours
W - 2 hours
Th - 2 hours
F - 2 hours
Sa - 2 hours
Su - 2 hours
Week B
M - off
T - 1 hour
W - 1 hour
Th - 1 hour
F - 1 hour
Sa - 4 hours
Su - 4 hours
Is there an advantage to one over the other, assuming the same distribution of intensity? I know the long rides are important for sorting out pacing, nutrition, and such, but I’m thinking primarily in terms of winter training where I’ll be almost entirely indoors due to cold and weather.
3 Likes
I just changed my plans to the Masters variants because I have a pretty physically exhausting job. Love the addition of this choice.
I have to ask though, has anyone else noticed that when you change to the master plans it puts workouts in your calendar that are “Not Recommended?”
I am wondering if there is a bug, because I don’t see how some of these are possible or why they are being placed in my calendar based on my current progression levels. For example, my threshold level is currently 1.0, but its putting threshold workouts of over 8 on my calendar.
2 Likes
That seems like a bug. Are those not recommended workouts the next ones up for threshold? If not and you have productive/stretch up next, those not recommended ones may adapt.
Otherwise, I’d say reach out to support@trainerroad.com
1 Like
As you say, the training you do is much more effective than the training you don’t.
I think in an ideal world the Week B plan is better as the adaptations at hour 4 of the two long rides are very beneficial and don’t occur the same way in accumulation.
At least that’s my take away from Kolie on EC
2 Likes
Right, I actually listened to that Empirical Cycling podcast, but forgot about it. So probably benefits of volume but no specificity or something like that? My events are typically 4-5 hour gravel races, so the long rides will be important for training specificity during the season, and they’re rides I do happily anyway, when I can get the time in.
I suppose my question is probably unnecessary hair-splitting and fairly academic that early in the season anyway.
1 Like