πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰ Polarized Training Plans Are Here! πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰

The evidence suggests otherwise. What other session suggest it is correct?

2x 16 minutes at 100% isn’t that hard, tough on occasions if fuelling, recovery, hydration and heat management is off but should be doable normally.


I can do sweet spot 2x20 at 94% just fine.

Like it’s just fine because it’s still at the point where you can manage things? Hmmm… :slight_smile:


Educated guess: you are indeed doing threshold 97%-98%, not sweetspot :slight_smile:


If you can’t do 2x16m FTP intervals… 1,000,000% YOUR FTP IS SET WRONG.


Say it again.

This could be a song.

A vast, not all, but a vast majority of people have an optimistically set FTP. Particularly, if it is based on a ramp test. A significant portion of people over test with this protocol.

It really is VERY simple, just ride your very best power for 40 to 70mins. That is probably your FTP, or very close. All these other hack protocols are exactly that, hacks.

This is based on the proviso that you believe FTP equates to approx MLSS.

It’s relatively amusing to be fair. Folks be buying 10K bikes, paying subscription fees to training programs, building the ultimate training pain cave but, they can’t do a damn one hour effort…

Not much chance of becoming a fantastic cyclist if you can’t do a one hour effort. You’re certainly not winning any truly significant bike races.

If you can’t do 2x16mins. Just quit now, save yourself the struggle.


(PS. This is humor, or an attempt at it. Please don’t freak out… Your FTP is still wrong.)


2 x 16min @ FTP should be achievable with a correctly set FTP. I’d highly recommend reading the Kolie Moore thread to get a flavour of what riding at FTP should feel like.

100% agree with other comments, if you can’t do 2 x 16 then you need to reduce your power until you can complete then and then consider reducing your FTP.

If I were to approach 2 x 16 @ FTP, I would use my LTHR+RPE to guide me through the efforts. First interval I might aim to be a beat or two below LTHR. By the end I might be on LTHR or a beat or two above. I might try nudging up intensity to see how it feels. If it’s sustainable, leave it, if it’s not, dial it back down.


I wish the low volume plan limited weekday rides to max. an hour (though this is an issue not specific to the POL plans, but a lot of the other ones too, leading me to self-plan on TR loosely based on the existing plans).

1 Like

+1000 to this

I really think it comes down to semantics. Most people equate their TrainerRoad ramp test to LT2. While it may be close for some, its not as close for others. The guys at TR made these workouts based on what your TR FTP is. Do I think my TR FTP is the same as my LT2? No! I actually know for a fact it isn’t because I also did a blood lactate test a few days before my last ramp test and my LT2 was 233. My ramp test gave me a FTP of 251. Should I be doing all my workouts 7% lower than they are? No.

Your ability to a certain percentage for a certain amount of time based off that FTP isn’t universal. That doesn’t mean if you can’t do a certain workload for a certain amount of time that your FTP is wrong(especially if its somewhat close). It means that energy system isn’t trained or developed yet. This is EXACTLY why TR developed progression levels and adaptive training.


No they didn’t, but if that is what you want to believe (they are as in Seilers intervention study)

Maybe not all, but your Threshold (and below) workouts yes.
VO2max just do max ave watts that one can complete the VO2 intervals.

This is why you cant do 2x 16 @ 100% when in reality 3x 16 should be perfectly doable.


But TR never said they build workouts based on ramp test result. Some workouts were created earlier than ramp test, and were never adjusted.

Trainerroad build WO and training plans based on the widely accepted assumption that FTP is a proxy for MLSS. After, they came with ramp test as a way to assess this FTP with a 75% of last minute ramp test power based on the bell curve coming out of the data they had. They never stated their FTP is different than the one you test for 20mn or the long real 40mn+ test. Never. They said that in general it is very close. For you, it is 17 watts. Huge difference!

Definetely yes. Sweetspot, Threshold and over/under. Maybe not VO2max

Yeah in the end it will reduce your power level to sweet spot instead of threshold or reduce intervals to below 12mn, where your anaerobic contributiuon helps you finish the interval. After a few weeks, you might see some progress on FTPand will be able to go 20mn long. But it doesn’t change that the first workout were not performed at threshold, but at superthreshold. Which makes me wonder if a lot of people are feeding the ML with inflated FTP, the athlete with correct FTP setting will get some weird results out of that. Everybody was shocked when the β€œupdated plans for AT” leaked. Interval power levels for sweet spot way down in the range of high tempo, shorter intervals etc. I am not suprised, it is just the logical consequence of having so many people crushed by sweet spot which is indeed threshold…


Yes, you should. There is nothing as β€œTR FTP”. They have implemented ramp test for users convince to eliminate pacing and fear of longer test. They are not β€œmagically” scaled to their β€œFTP”. But do whatever you wish to do as this is only your trainig and your body. People here only point out where the issue of incompleting workout is.

There is certain amount of people where their real ftp corresponds with ramp test and there are some it isn’t. Threshold workouts are so dreaded (and for a good reason) if your ftp is simply inflated by the flaws of ramp test.


Interesting point about how all those inflated FTPs might affect AI/AT… you’d hope at some point it would ignore (set) sFTP or (ramptest) rFTP and use a modelled mFTP if it detects a major difference.


At threshold it will be pretty easy for AT to find out who is lying (to himself) about sFTP. If you can’t sustain 2x16mn, it is obvious. But for sweetspot base, it will be much more difficult. If you do sweetspot with inflated FTP, you are doing sub-threshold. And this you can go very long. It is only after crushing yourself during 3-4 weeks at threshold and start failing workout because of fatigue that it will detect a problem. To discover problem right at the first workout with sweetspot, you need to go with 3x30mn sweetspot. Not fun. So I am really worried about that.

1 Like

Yeah thinking it is sweetspot when it is threshold, that is a lot of wasted unproductive training if it leads to burnout (weeks to spot it.)

Also no chance that it will be able to spot Z2 is Tempo or low end sweet-spot. The likely outcome is not being fresh enough for the hard work above threshold, VO2max for example. It will just assume that you are worse than you are at VO2max sessions. Worse case you might not get anytime, or very little in at VOmax.

If you don’t know you’ve got an over inflated FTP thats one thing but I can’t get my head around knowing it and sabotaging ones own training.


The potential problem is if the corpus that they are using for training says that not being able to do 2x20 is normal then it has no signal to change. Could very much end up in a β€œNo, it is the kids that are wrong” kind of situation.


How about we look at it from the opposite perspective. Say I adjusted my FTP to where my blood lactate test said my LT2 is - 233 watts. That means for Miller Peak I did…

108% for 16 min
8 min rest
108% for another 8 mins
1 min rest
108% for 2 mins
30 second rest
108% for 90 seconds
1 min rest
108% for 2 min

SO…if my FTP is set to high and I was doing supra threshold work at that level for those durations I’m fine with it. If fact, I think its pretty impressive to hold 108% for 16 mins then again for 8 more mins, etc.

Exactly my thought. It will then assess and suggest adjustment properly for the people with same too high FTP. But for those who set FTP properly, it could prescribe some suboptimal workouts.
For example: people with too high FTP: trend shows 8 workouts in a row during 3 weeks at sweetpsot with increased duration shows failure/very difficult rating in the 3rd week. Let’s stop increasing duration after 2 weeks. Very good for the β€œtoo high FTP” club. For the β€œgood FTP club”: the stop in duration increase in 3rd week is not optimal.

1 Like

Truth is probably in the middle. As I said, probably 3-4% overestimation on ftp in your case. But yes, your performance was nothing to be ashamed of, considering your ftp is really overestimated. Endurance athletes are tougher than normal people, and we are all able to do 2x16mn. What you felt is closed to what you should feel with the 16mn 102% intervals coming later. And here I am sure the progression in the plan from 100% to 102% will help you to manage it.

1 Like

I don’t think there’s such a thing. In fact I’m sure I’ve listened to Chad define FTP as how pretty much everyone defines it. N.B. not hour power. So I’m not sure there’s anything specific to TR going on.