Definitely something to pass along to support. 
Email sent! Wasn’t clear if you wanted me to send, so I did anyways and included a link to my post with details. Sorry if I just created more work for you!
All good! Thanks for helping us resolve those issues!
I can confirm that the Progression Levels Ramp Test hack is no more 
. Was worth a shot.
Also, TR is smarter than me. I tried to game the Ramp Test by doing ~414W for the second ramp minute. TR calculated a really low FTP .
3 Likes
Yeah… they specifically look at the preceding 5 minutes, just to catch “silly stuff” like that 
1 Like
The workouts incorrectly labelled is actually an issue I reported to support a couple of weeks ago, I have loads of them.
It seems to be related, for me, to workouts where I did a workout other than what was in my calendar then matched it to the planned workout. This seemed to be working fine, but now looking back through my ride history, it’s screwed up the relationship between what I did and what was on the plan. Not only that, but I can’t fix it by un-matching.
Here is an example from my history:
And look at July last year… of 12 rides shown, 6 have incorrect labels.
2 Likes
To be clear I was commenting about the podcast, and just realized this is the announcement thread. In this thread they did a great job spelling it out.
Congrats to the TR Team on this launch!
The training plan changes dominated the conversation, and overshadowed the real news in my opinion.
On yesterday’s podcast Nate was right to highlight that the new Workout Levels and Profiles are a first. Let that sink in for a minute.
Think about it, we still have our power metrics, we still have familiar Coggan classic power zones, and now we have a SIMPLE way to:
- put a number on fitness by power zone
- plan for fitness increases by zone, using the 0.3-0.7 weekly ramp rate rule-of-thumb
- easily locate zone workouts to support current fitness and desired progression rate
- monitor increases in fitness by zone
Workout Levels and Profiles allow the simple concept of ramping work to be applied to all power zones.
Unlike other platforms the system is not directly tied to physiology models. Instead it provides a simple system that on paper (I haven’t used it) appears to be a practical and effective way to measure and grow fitness by power zone. Just like adding plates to different machines in the gym, to paraphrase @Nate_Pearson
Kudos!
19 Likes
Or its just putting into a structured format from the various individual sweet spot progression/Threshold progression/VO2 max progression threads that a number of users have ended up using as it made more sense to work on an area in a structured way to improve it.
1 Like
I fully agree, this is exactly what I thought when I listened to the pod. Doesn’t matter if you never know TSS, IF.
look at volume and your ability in the different areas together with FTP, and you have a really balanced global idea of your fitness.
1 Like
This is something I’ve done in a loose fashion with basic intervals, like Nx3min, Nx4min, Nx8min, Nx10min, Nx20, Nx30, 20 or 30 Min TT, etc. I have a journal of how I’ve progressed on those types of workouts.
I assume many have also gotten to the point where they looked at the workout style, TSS, IF and duration to estimate difficulty. As was pointed out, this can definitely not line up with expectation.
Systematically quantizing the workouts is a nice step, and also critical for any automation. It also sounded like from the podcast they developed an algorithm for it rather than a data-driven model, which is also nice. My one concern would be if their model can robustly pick up differences within the lower range of ramp rates, say .3 in workout level. On that, it is important to sanity check the workout levels as we progress through. They’ll surely pick up on that over time though if there is an outlier workout that people have low compliance on now that things are more organized with progression of workouts.
What’s going on with the ramp tests? Seems to be a ton of posts on them the last few days but I don’t really have time to go through them all.
Are they working more in line with expectations now? I.E. Not reducing levels a crazy amount when your FTP change is within the margin of error.
People not in the beta were able to look at their previous ramp tests to see their progression levels so they could better pick workouts with the workout levels. It’s since been fixed so non-beta users do not have access to that information. There was also mention of the zones being out of order or in a weird order when displayed on those ramp tests.
1 Like
Having recently finished a plan, and doing a lot of outside rides, I followed TrainNow’s suggestion during the last two days. Two days ago TN recommended a moderate threshold (60 min, climbing) and yesterday it was a an endurance ride (90 minutes). Today I went for an outside ride - as I have no power meter I estimated the TSS to be 281 (117KM at 4 1/2 hours with 2300 climbing are mostly hard for me). Yet, when I open the TR app, the recommended workout for today is an attacking WO. This makes very little sense, I would expect TN to suggest a very mild recovery ride (or better still to tell me to rest…). Is this just an issue of time lag, or are outside rides not really taken into consideration by TR? Thanks!
For me trainnow always recommends an endurance ride. Never a different recommendation. The recommendation by itself doesn’t make sense. Maybe there needs to be some context. I have no real swings in TSS or intensity. My workouts are based off of TR plans but they tend to be Adjusted downward ie mid volume I drop one day as I want only 4 days of riding or low volume and I add in an extra day of endurance.
2 Likes
It’s a thing with outdoor workouts.
2 Likes
Hmm… thanks! Hopefully that will change soon because the way it is now, the suggestions have little relevance.
I would guess the latter, since I’m doing mostly outside unstructured riding, and it recommends me endurance workouts after hard days, and not when I’m fresh. But this is probably not calculated live, but in batches or maybe even just nightly.
No it’s not. It is for the recommended workout levels. Maybe also for the choice between climbing and attacking. But fatigue from just unstructured riding outside is taken into account for the recommendation between endurance, climbing, or attacking.
1 Like
I don‘t know, seems like outdoor workouts are taken into account now to me… I kept getting 1.9-2.0 Threshold workouts proposed to me, which is way, way lower than my other energy systems (all other proposals where in the 6.0 -8.0 range). I can‘t know for sure though since I‘m not in AT beta yet.
I wasn‘t too happy with that so I picked a threshold 4.0 workout to do inside. Halas, the sun came out to play unexpectedly, so I pivoted to outside workouts for the same workout and „superpassed“ it (sat above the high range most of the time).
So now TrainNow offers me 3.2-3.4 ish Threshold workouts. Clearly it has learned from the outdoor workout. I had to close and re-open the app for it though, before that it still offered me high 1‘s…
So at least for levels I am pretty sure outdoor workouts are accounted for… For recommendations, I always get Endurance as recommended so I wouldn‘t know 
Have you seen/heard anymore info on this than the post below?
That’s all I could find on the subject that relates directly to TN.
That’s only going to be as good as the info being fed into TN. And for now there seem to be plenty of situations where that information isn’t being interpreted correctly in an outdoor setting.
That’s my take on it anyway. A bit like my Garmin watch constantly telling me I have a low aerobic shortage and a VO2 max to die for.
No more info no. That’s basically what I said. It can use all your rides for choosing between the types of workouts (endurance, climbing, attacking). For adjusting workout levels it needs TN workouts, and your previous quote for outside workouts was about that (i.e. adjusting your progression levels).
1 Like