yes, I’ve been declining a red day for a few days now. I wonder since it does not factor in swims, if it will count tomorrow as a recommended Red/off day if I just have a swim?
And if it DOES account for runs, should there be a post run survey to help it adjust?
What @swilliams said… 
I just had this sort of thing happen. Admittedly it happened on my calendar because I loaded tomorrow’s workout today without rescheduling, which left a copy on the calendar tomorrow (which I would’ve deleted anyway).
Because of today’s TSS, tomorrow has been changed to yellow & RLGL wants to adapt it to achievable endurance. That’s expected.
Because of passing Reinstein today, AT wants to adapt next week’s Byers Peak -2 (L4.9) to Mount Goode -1 (L5.1), as shown. That’s also expected.
It does highlight that tomorrow’s adaptation is because of RLGL, but the option available is still the binary accept/decline: all or none.
Granted, it would be unusual to have two days in a row of Threshold workouts like this, but it seems plausible it could happen to multiple endurance rides in Traditional base, or if someone has played with the proposed workout dates in plan builder & put two days of intervals together, such as VO2 max one day then sweetspot the next, which I’ve found to be a manageable progression thoughout a week if the VO2 max workout is short & sharp. (Think South Twin -2, not Gawler -1 
)
I really hope a future update makes these adaptations separate.
After a big weekend I got a red light for Monday, I think this has been mentally been good for me to feel OK about taking a rest day. I was not second guessing what i should do.
That’s interesting that it suggested reducing the duration of your endurance ride as it didn’t do that to me at the weekend.
I had 2 days off Thu/Fri due to a work trip. 2 hours threshold over/under workout on Saturday, which I rated Hard. It then turned Sunday Yellow but didn’t suggest any reduction in time for my 6 hour outdoor endurance ride.
I completed the 6 hour endurance ride (well, 5.5 hours as my speed was a bit higher than I expected for the route I chose). I rated it moderate. RLGL has now made today (Monday) red and I’m fine with that as I had a rest day planned anyway and it’s the start of a recovery week. Tomorrow is yellow (planned 45 min easy ride already on the calendar).
I guess this shows it is individual given it reduced your endurance duration but not mine. So it clearly has a range of how yellow it thinks you are, and that’s a good thing. My jury is still out but I’m quite happy with what it has done over these past two days.
Was this scheduled 6 hour outdoor endurance ride placed on the Calendar by you manually? If so, then that would never be adapted by TR. RLGL can still colour the day, giving you the fatigue signal, but it’d be up to you to adjust the workout manually if you wished to.
Plan Builder gave me a 5 hour one IIRC and then I picked an alternate and increased the duration. So I’d expect Adaptive Training still to pick that up? Or am I wrong?
Ah right. Thanks
Correct. Even following typically recommended TSB, CTL and Ramp Rate, I have been getting red days. But just as you were thinking, those are just before my planned rest days.
Progressive overload, followed by recovery, is the most critical aspect of training to gain fitness. Yet RLGL is guiding me away from progressive overload. RLGL seems to be too focused on short term fatigue (overstrained) instead of long term fatigue (overtrained). But it’s pitched as an overtraining warning. I think it should distinguish between the two scenarios and communicate that.
You can and should be your own coach (or get human help) to guide your training regardless of AT and RLGL. Hopefully RLGL gets tweaked a bit to be more conservative with the red flags, because I think it’s crying wolf too much and make some people that do need a rest ignore it and some that listen to it stagnate.
Quoting myself because this along with the fact that AT isn’t going to suggest adjustments to any workouts that have had alternate selected or were chosen by the user makes these AI/ML features very low value add, IMO.
I am often selecting workout alternates for a variety of reasons:
If AT and RLGL can’t handle this, then I might as well use a static plan and TSB and make all the adjustments myself.
If you choose an Alternate or a random workout TR thinks YOU want to do that workout for whatever reasons you’ve determined. So you’ve gone outside of Plan Builder to choose your workout. Why would then TR/AT then change your decision? It would be super annoying if TR kept trying to change a workout that I specifically choose, particularly regarding all of the reasons you’ve mentioned.
Spot on! This is kinda what I was trying to say in my original rather disappointed post way back up near the top of this thread but you have explained it far better than I did! Especially now I know it doesn’t take workout alternates into account.
I regularly increase the duration of my prescribed Sunday endurance ride. Not by a ridiculousl amount but by an amount I know I can handle just fine, especially outdoors. If RLGL isn’t considering workout alternates (up or down in duration or Pl) then I’d expect that to be fixed before it goes full release.
If I had followed RLGL days since my plan started in December I reckon my fitness would be lower than it is today (by all measures, not just CTL) and I know I’m not over trained. I appreciate it is likely erring on the side of caution so I’ll continue to keep an eye on it while also monitoring all the other factors that TR can’t see… As others have said above, we shouldn’t rely solely on the robots to tell us what to do! 
That’s just a user interface issue. The point of this technology is to provide some guidance to the user and help dial in the exact right load each day.
Here’s what I think would make sense:
Wouldn’t that be way better? You as the user would feel like you understand what’s happening and why. You can provide the algorithms all the data they need to understand the difference between reductions in training due to fatigue vs other factors and better tune the adaptations. They could even start making some more sophisticated suggestions for training plan volume and other factors. The cleaner and more detailed the data in, the easier it is for the model to give good output. Right now the reasons for users adapting their plans manually is completely obfuscated to the model. That’s bad.
Sure, but it will NEVER happen. Your expectations are very high and you will be disappointed. All you’ll likely ever get is the ability to choose RLGL’s level of moderation. According to Nate, in the future you will able to choose wether you want RLGL to be conservative, moderate or liberal. Maybe, just maybe, TR will also separate RLGL adaptions and ML adaptions, but that’s about it for the reasonable future.
I think we need to select alternates the day of, or the day before, after your last workout. That way RLGL would be incorporated into the alternate selection model.
The critical part is really just always showing the adaptations and letting the user accept or reject the adaptations individually. They already have all the UI work done to show adaptations. They just need to let you accept or reject individually. It’s fairly trivial and doesn’t require changing the algorithms.
Adding the survey upon manual modification is pretty low hanging fruit too. Using that data is way more complicated, but they can take their time on that. Getting the data available to them should be done ASAP, IMO.
The more resources we expect TR to put into making RLGL our version of what it should/could be, the longer it will take to bring out WLV2 (unstructured rides). I don’t see TR making that trade. Better to bring an additional feature to market.
Personally, I’d like to be able to accept RLGL adaptations separately. But like most things, I can do my own work around.
I am using Intervals.icu, athletica and elevate to compare vs RLGL. It is curious that while at elevate and intervals.icu I am in an optimal zone, I was at RED with RLGL on Sunday. I did a 3hrs z2 ride that day and I could feel my legs a little weak, specially on those sudden accelerations from the group when resuming after a red light. I’m not an expert so I am not sure if that is the feeling I should feel on an optimal zone or it was an indication that I should rest instead as indicated by the RLGL.
