I thought the point of this feature was to help account for strength training that an athlete is doing, not prescribe it. In that context, specifying what to count as a set for this feature as “those that go to failure” seems more prescriptive rather than descriptive. Obviously I don’t know how this data is normalized and scaled for use in Red Light/Green Light, and perhaps the same guidance given for TrainerRoad workout RPE to “not overthink it” doesn’t apply as well here.
Still, from the perspective of what the interface ought to be like, it seems like giving very generic guidance like “number of working sets, ignoring easy warm ups” and then learning how a given user’s working sets impacts their fatigue over time would make Red Light/Green Light more accurate. Encouraging users to not even document a set that doesn’t go to failure seems like throwing meaningful data away.
This brings back exactly my point. Intensity can be calculated if the user has a documented max effort for the lift. Similar to an FTP test, other work is built around that value. This is how a majority of power lifting programs are built.
I do recognize this is not meant to prescribe work as the other user mentioned as well and ideally just feed RLGL more data. I just don’t think the amount of folks truly doing 3x10 or 4x8 back squats are doing those sets to failure and will certainly be putting those values in the system. Obviously the closer we get to a single rep there is an increased likelihood of lifting near failure.
Best solution all around is to get a few strength training coaches on the TR team and build strength programing right into our TR programs. If we can hit/miss those targets it would yield much better for the modeling.
I don’t agree that people know their 1RM, especially cyclists.
This is a hot take, but I don’t think people should really be squating in general, especially to failure. Risk of injury is high. Neuromuscular fatigue is high. Recovery time is high. Takes a high degree of skill to do correctly.
I think squats are best for power lifters.
I think you should think about these constraints for this cohort
Most lIfters are inexperienced or intermediate.
Most lifters have no clue what their 1RM is
Most lifters could not safely test their 1RM without risk of injury
Many lifters do 3x10 regularly but never get close to failure or 1-2 RiR
For our modeling, we need athletes to go to failure on sets. You could leave 1-2 RiR and probably get the same result, but it’s best to prescribe going to failure.
If you’re going to 1-2 reps in reserve enter it. If you’re just lifting to go through the motions and it’s not hard, then don’t enter it. It’s not really weight training then.
We can get the data but we’ve seen the accuracy vary. It also includes warm up which shouldn’t be included in working sets.
So you’d have to go in and adjust after and it could get confusing to exclude erroneous sets and warm up vs just adding exactly what you did from the jump.
I’m very much a beginner at strength training. But for whatever it’s worth, nearly EVERY respected source of advice I can find says squats are one of the most essential things you must do for strength, health, and aging.
Have you guys thought about using the heart rate data to estimate fatigue?
For example, you have all this data on my heart rate already (endurance, tempo, all out, etc). You can create easily a curve of my heart rate versus load (TSS) since you also know the workout I as doing. Then you can use this data and the weight training heart rate to estimate the fatigue or stress I did during the workout. This should give you an estimated TSS for the workout.
I know this wouldn’t differentiate between upper body or lower body workouts but it would at least show if you did in a LOW, Medium, or HIGH workout.
I agree, but I also don’t think most experts would recommend doing squats to failure, so… there’s a conflict between those recommending we do more full body movements and the idea behind how TR is scoring strength workouts.
Personally my HR during strength training doesn’t even come close to reflecting the training stress and fatigue incurred. Especially with heavy weights, low reps. HR stays pretty low throughout. YMMV.
Possible the stress would show up in HRV data, though I’ve had a few attempts at tracking and correlating that with pretty mixed results.
Certainly wouldn’t do squats to failure. For cycling I’m not sure it’s necessary or beneficial to be doing any lifting to failure, at least not every session. Being consistent, maintaining good form, and usually leaving a little in the tank to avoid impacting key cycling workouts seems to be what works best for me. I’ll go to failure towards the end of a strength block in off season, but that’s about it. I would have a different approach if gaining strength or muscle mass was the primary goal of course.
Wyh wouldn‘t you take your squats to failure or very close to it (or any lift you want to progress in)? You won‘t get stronger by doing some reps with 60% of your 1RM.
I also wouldn‘t take DL and Squat to failure during the season. I usually just do 2 heavy sets a week and no progressive overload march - october. There is research that strength gains can be maintained with 1 low rep set to failure every 7-12 days. I just go heavy for two with 1-2 RIR. In the off-season I hit them hard.
I do go to failure on upper body lifts though during the season. It probably won‘t make
me a better cyclist but for sure a more capable and healthier human all around
Because I am a cyclist looking to improve my full body fitness, not a body builder looking to maximize strength and mass, and I have tricky knees. But, it’s not just me. Googling will find lots of sources that don’t recommend beginning lifters take squats to failure.
And I’ll add that going to failure is not generally recommended in anything I’m seeing. I was addressing the “people shouldn’t be squatting in general” part. Sorry if I was not clear.
