Im experiencing the same thing. It’s a known bug that TR has claimed to have fixed but hasn’t. I’ll move workouts to give plenty of buffer and the supra long thresholds workouts still appear as “not recommend" and wont count towards predicted AI FTP.
If it was a fatigue issue, the fatigue detection would recommend a different workout, if it’s the wrong workout it should adapt.
Cloudripper -3 also has longer recovery intervals. But…it has those Tempo intervals before and after, which is probably what evens them out mathematically. It really comes down to are you better at going further above on the overs or at sustaining some power after the final o/u. Either way, it’s odd that one is fully Not Recommended while the other is only Hard. Seems like a big leap.
Indeed - it’s going to be different strokes for different folks. 110% overs affect me far more than the tempo sections on Cloudripper variants - hence my predicted RPE for Cloudripper -3 is (roughly) 65/35 hard/very hard, and 35/65 for Blackcap. It just shows how workout levels aren’t always a good guide to judge by.
Not sure that it is a big leap.
If he opened it, the warning would most likely say that the most likely outcome is hard but that the failure rate is too high. So it’s probably a hard workout but with like a 3% failure rate.
It’s not saying the most likely outcome is all out or maximal effort.
I’m a rule follower and I just wanted to get on with, so I unpinned today’s workout (do today’s workouts pin automatically?) and did the new one (which changed to 3.3).
Some signal(s) from the workout, which was the same I’d done a 2 weeks ago, and ‘Hard’ instead of 'Moderate’, actually upped my prediction by 1w.
That’s really interesting. That’s how I would have described mine, like the ‘Not Recommended’ weren’t credited properly.