First time poster, long time reader.
I’ve been using TR for many years now, straying away and coming back to it mainly due to the quality of the app which is awesome. Thumbs up folks. It just works with whatever trainer I use. I think my first ride on TR was in 2013 or 2014 and the last one was this morning.
I have been experimenting with Sufferfest and Xert and generally agree with them that FTP is only one part of the picture, and LT1, LT2, MAP, anaerobic capacity don’t scale linearly thus using percentage of FTP for every type of work is a bit too brute and unindividual.
That’s not a critique, being a long time user (and a spinning instructor) I can see how the TR team ended up doing it the way they did it, so I have no problems with that. But my question is… Are there any plans to introduce power curve based power targets? Either observed (like WKO folks do if i understand correctly) or predicted (e.g. Xert)?
Since the peak performances are logged anyway, then they could be used for prescribing the target wattage at various interval length as oppposed to % of FTP?
@chad, @Nate_Pearson, @Jonathan? Do you plan anything like that?
PS. For now I just do it by myself, I look at the power curve and adjust percentages in the TR app manually. Or find a workout that matches my targets.
Strangely, until I encountered TR, I thought that everyone with a power metre did it this way.
I think this is a good idea in theory although I have no idea how realistic it is to implement. Like you said, at least TR gives us the powers to control the intensity ourselves.
I know Sufferfest offers the 4DP test but does it actually scale different types of workouts depending on your own personal power curve?
I believe so. After doing the ‘Full Frontal’ test; which is by far the worst thing I have ever done on an indoor trainer. It then takes your power for the four durations and it will adjust workouts based upon these metrics. Clever stuff.
That is pretty clever. You’d imagine there is some pressure on TR to keep up with that side of things (yes, I know they’re still superior in plenty of other ways)
Xert is super cool as is able to build workouts tailored your capabilities. if your signature is dialed in it is scarily accurate.The smart workouts are brilliant and you can tailor them based on your power curve which is especially useful when going over threshold. No tweaking yourself, no estimating, its all done for you. The workpout player is incredibly user friendly. training is adaptive, miss a day, no problem plan adjusts, go really hard one day on say a club ride, no problem plan adjusts. Also rather than having to test your ftp every so many weeks, Xert changes your ftp based on your current training load so the workouts consistently adjust daily with your current training load.
I’m a long time user of TR and love all the guys do. i’m also grandfathered which is a big plus, but i never use it now. It just isn’t as good as Xert. looks better yes but from a training perspective, it isn’t even close.
Something I’ve been trying recently with VO2max work is rather than holding the prescribed power, I go for my PR -10W or so, seems to work for repeatability.
I’m getting good results off it too, been getting PR’s in workouts as well as races doing this
I am also active Xert user. But I am a bit tired of problems with the Android app (using beta now). CIQ app got a lot better though.
Good UX and convenience is a strong argument
I would love to see TR fill the gap on the methodological side of things…
Out of curiosity, does any Xert user see significant diferences in the power targets assigned to them Vs TR. and what zone do you see the big differences?
Not sure (since I have not dug deep into it), but there’s a related thread that might have some info, or be a better place for that question.
Above threshold is significantly different for me. I use their smart workouts and have a dialed in signature as I’ve been using it for 2 and a bit years now. Lots of people sceptical at first but always seem to come back around once they actually spend some time with it.
It’s individualised to your actual performance and the training advice adapts to work completed. So if you miss a day or two or go out for a long ride at the weekend the training advisors accomodates that. Not only that, it looks at how hard you have gone and adjusts intensity of the prescribed workouts coming up to avoid you burning out.
People don’t like the fact that you don’t have your whole plan laid out in front of you (you can actually do this but it takes some time). Also, things change, you get ill, have a long day at work, it’s a nice day so you ride outside. All this is taken care of.
I actually like getting up in the morning, looking at the advice for the day and selct one of the top ranked workouts rather than knowing 4 weeks on tuesday it’s VO2.
Plus using their cool garmin data fields or android app, you can just train at the desired “focus” and freestyle your workout if that’s what you want. Really cool for when you are riding outdoors.
It takes a bit of effort, but it really is worth it.
The big problem I see with SF is their 4dp test is brutal and I wouldn’t want to do it at all much less regularly but… short power can respond very quickly to training, so you should be doing the 4dp test even more often than you do TRs ramp test to keep it up to date, or else there is no point doing it.