While I understand the analogy, bobw replied to me with a similar one in the Absolute Progression Level thread:
In my two years before and after TR can honestly say I’ve never experienced the need to change planned intervals after experiencing a welcome but unexpected bump in fitness. I just keep doing the work 
I am sure someone else gets it…but it isnt me.
My point remains if your FTP is out by a significant amount, as the miscalculated FTP was, which is what I was responding to, it is not as simple as to say "AT will fix it, just pick a higher difficulty ‘Stretch’, ‘Breakthrough’ because the workouts are anchored FTP setting and it would mean that a different PL would be adjusted not the one that was intended.
Yeah, if we are talking about a “wrong FTP” issue, that is a different beast than what I was trying to get at.
If I understand what you are saying, you do the same type of intervals, but increase the power as fitness increases?
Nothing wrong with this at all. But you need to be dialed into what your fitness is in terms of FTP (40-70 min power), and also what to set intensity at above that for VO2, etc. Knowing you and that you’re working with a coach, I understand that is definitely the case.
TR takes a different approach. Set the intensity, increase the duration at that intensity as fitness increases.
Work goes up in both cases, just a different approach. In the TR approach, you don’t need as tight a knowledge on the intensity setting in a classical sense. You build into that.
I used the CTS system in 2016-2017 and started with HR, then a power meter for the second season. Built more fitness purely with HR than with TR approach Never had to be dialed into fitness the way I see some claiming on the forum. Never had tight knowledge back then, and again with a coach. The only time I was regularly testing for ftp, to have tight knowledge of fitness and zone setting, was when using TR.
One certainly can train extremely effectively without a power meter. It was done for longer than it has with power meters. But if you are going to go out and pace a classic 2x20 effort evenly, then most are going to benefit from knowing their fitness quite well. You can get that from field testing or from doing the workouts a lot. Whether or not you knew a power number on your fitness, my point is I suspect you were (are) pretty dialed into pacing the efforts at a constant time duration. That’s not common.
Work is power x duration at that power. Improved fitness allows one to increase either one. Most workout plans are based on a set interval duration, with increasing output at that duration based on increasing intensity. A lot of TR workouts are based on a fix power target at increasing duration as fitness improves. At least with using PL. The latter allows for a wide variation on FTP input.
I like this concept. Seems the masses want FTP to grow and keep their current profession level
Hmm, haven’t seen that. And I own a handful of plans from three well known coaching companies 
Don’t know what to say. I’m clearly confused by what you were getting at.
What I see with things out of say Allen and Coggan; Skiba; Friel to name a few are do these interval durations in different zones. Reassess FTP/CP every 4-6 weeks. And one simply can’t do a Nx20 or an 10-15 min O/U workout unless paced properly. TR set plans up similarly, but ran into the problem with people using bad FTP estimates, and also having over-aggressive progression rates in plans. So here we are with AT - dial back the progression rates, and also the need for a good FTP estimate.
And I must be confusing something from previous conversations. I’ve recall debates with you regarding the importance of knowing FTP - me arguing it isn’t that important, my interpretation from you that it was important. Maybe I’m mixing you up with someone else.
Maybe I’m not following, just spent the entire day cleaning up the yard. I don’t see CTS/FasCat/Velocious workout plans using set interval duration and increasing output. Regarding ‘dialed in’ well all I can say is that using CTS and some Friel, I was able to come up with reliable and productive WindWarrior HR zones in mid 2016, then added power in late 2016. Was always amazed that TR discouraged HR zones, although I realize they are much more individualized than doing power based intervals above threshold.
I had great gains my first season using CTS HR-based plans as well (2014-15 that would have been), but that was also my first time doing any structured training - going no structure>structure is usually a good way to get big gains…
I still keep a pretty close eye on HR but more retrospective than actually in the workout. When I start to see supressed HR (over a few workouts not a one off) that’s normally a good sign I need a break.
Kinda hard on the CTS ones to increase output - since it’s HR-based so you don’t exactly know what the output is anyway and for O/Us you might be talking a variability of a handful of BPM which could be slightly different on any given day. My recollection is that the intervals got longer through the plan, but I would have to dig the book out to check as it is years since I looked.
The TR plans drive progression in several ways - increasing the %, increasing the interval duration and increasing the number of intervals in a set/number of sets (e.g., 10x 30/30s to 15x) - all of which are pretty normal… I don’t think it’s correct to say that most plans (from any provider) are based on fixed duration and increasing intensity in any case.
Indeed you have to base this setting on what you can finish comfortable as a workout. At the end it are numbers, FTP numbers in Zwift are always at the high side…
I don’t see how you can set up all your zones off a single FTP number in the first place. We don’t all have the same textbook power curve. I’ve come to set my interval targets more from the perceived effort. If I’m finding my intervals overly difficult or failing then I know I need to dial the targets back and vice-versa if they are too easy. I’ve been cycling long enough to have a pretty good idea what my FTP is anyway during the season. It doesn’t vary that much to make a great difference (let’s say +/- 10% seasonally) and it’s pretty obvious when it’s going up or down or having an off-day or whatever. Chasing FTP numbers is great motivation for someone starting out fresh from their couch over the first year or so, but after that it kind of loses its novelty. I usually do 1 proper FTP test (not a ramp test, at least 20 mins and preferably a 40-45 min TT) each season as a benchmark and that’s it for “FTP numbers”.
A post was merged into an existing topic: 
Introducing AI FTP Detection
No, they prescribe on Power, HR, and RPE. This is how I started in 2016:
https://www.strava.com/training-plans/cycling-training-glossary
and its also in the Time Crunched Cyclist 3rd edition I have on my library. I seamlessly switched from HR to power in October 2016.
I think we are just talking about different things. It’s not really important though. Sorry for tangent.
Today I received my new FTP estimate for the first time. I went from a modest 174 to a slightly less modest 179. This came after doing 6 week SSB LV 1 and starting a new 6 week block of training. I feel this to be accurate. I really liked how Goddard -4 felt with the new estimate. I always hated the ramp test and opted for the 20 min. FTP test. Both need to be executed well to get a fair estimate of FTP. A lot can go wrong in doing these tests. Anyway, I am thrilled by this new feature and am grateful to the TrainerRoad team for it’s development. If workouts become too hard or too easy AT or my own adjustment will suffice. For those of you who continue with the tests, I tip my helmet to you. But for me, I think this new feature will work quite nicely.
Sorry, obviously misremembering - I did it on HR but haven’t used it for a long time now, although I do remember that now you mention it.
Think the answer to your forum question would be
I’ll give you a TR example from Sustained Power Build Part1 and Part2 with screenshots from before AT:
Part 1:
Part 2:
Notice the increasing difficulty/TSS from part1 to part2. And IF often increases as well, but not always. However there is a clear progression in training load (total work) over 8 week build across these Sustained Power zones:
Pre-AT you can see that mid-block FTP changes had no impact on increasing progression across the 2 build blocks. And the same while using the CTS/FasCat/Velocious plans. If you have an unexpected bump in fitness, you keep doing the work as planned.
Post-AT there are new TR talking points that could be interpreted as TR diplomatically saying, pre-AT, TR plans were doing it wrong (whatever ‘it’ is). Because now I read that FTP increases will result in lower difficulty workouts in order to provide a “smoother progression” and “workouts aren’t suddenly more difficult.” And post-AT many plans reduced intensity, before the plans were indexed to your PLs. And I think that is a good thing!
The difference between TR and CTS/FasCat/Velocious/lots-of-other-coaches is that TR has less endurance and more intervals. And post-AT, TR has moved a little bit towards the rest of the structured training world.
