A training plan by any other name… (think Shakespeare)
I get the issue to a degree, but considering that they mentioned Masters plans ages ago and finally delivered, that connection makes a certain amount of sense. And regardless of the name, they at least try to mention more of the ‘why’ behind the new plan options so people can choose appropriately.
Maybe we need to start another campaign to rename “Masters” just like we finally succeeded in getting TR to drop “Sweet Spot Base”?
Extra Recovery - would seem obvious since that is in their actual verbiage covering what defines “Masters” in this instance.
Just a reminder for some people here - not everyone has the same perception/response to training as they do. Telling people that if they find SS challenging then their FTP must be set too high is misguided.
I often find SS challenging and it’s not uncommon for me to fail workouts. I’ve done thousands of hours of training and racing at an ok level so I’m not an aerobic newb. I set my FTP in TR at c.85% of my recent fatigued 20 min power (and that recent 20min power is 90% of my summer CP20 so arguably my TR FTP is set conservatively). Some days, riding at 92% of TR FTP is hard and I might fail it. Others days, SS isn’t so difficult.
I could follow some people’s advice on this forum and set my TR FTP ever lower so I never fail a workout, but I know I’d be much slower as a result.
No, it isn’t, if someone, for example, can’t do 3x15 or 3x20 sweet spot (like 90%), then their FTP is likely overestimated. I know coaches who set the floor for sweet spot as 60min time in zone. If your FTP is exhaustion to 40mins, you should more easily be able to complete 60mins at 90%, especially so if it’s broken into intervals with rest. I’m definitely not a special athlete and I can do 90mins uninterrupted at 90%. I just don’t think people should be getting scared away by 45min time in zone and if it’s because they can’t complete, then yes I maintain there’s a problem with either the FTP they set or the fatigue they’re carrying
I think there are a few more nuances to it, for example somebody might find it hard for various reasons. However if you do “some” muscular endurance work, then those challenged should get to the point where 3x15 sweet spot should only be mentally challenging on the trainer.
Ditto. On par with people having a preference for (or better ability to tolerate) long sustained efforts vs short/sharp ones and efforts at different power levels, I expect that the SS power range may feel easier/harder for different people for a number of reasons.
I like the old TR “hard but doable” concept for SS, but that is not true for everyone.
I checked out your account to see what was going on here. It looks like you’re doing a lot of custom & unstructured workouts, which can cause trouble with Adaptive Training at this time.
Problem 1 stems from custom workout levels. Custom workouts (or non-TR library workouts) may not be assigned an appropriate Workout Level when imported into TR. A custom workout may have a higher or lower Workout Level than it should, which makes comparing custom workouts to TR workouts difficult at present.
Problem 2 results from associating ride files imported to TR (from Strava, Zwift, etc.) with custom workouts that have potentially incorrect Workout Levels. Associating rides to TR workouts can face this issue as well if the workouts are not completed as prescribed.
While we plan on fixing these problems in the future, for now, trying to use custom workout Workout Levels may lead to inaccurate Progression Levels – which is what we can see on your account at the moment. This is why it seems daunting to do sessions recommended by Adaptive Training with your current Progression Levels.
For now, Adaptive Training works best with TrainerRoad Workouts. Trying to account for custom workouts and unstructured rides may throw off AT’s workout recommendations.
For clarity’s sake, we’d like to add that there’s nothing wrong with doing custom workouts and unstructured riding – we just wanted to shed light on why your Progression Levels appear as they do right now and how that impacts AT’s current functionality.
then clearly a case for more fans, one of my lasko fans crapped out over the weekend, and even though my basement was below 60 degrees, I didn’t have as much airflow today doing a threshold effort. As a result, it was harder than it normally would have been
Or just sometimes you can’t hit a workout on a particular day.
3x20m at 90%, which your saying should be straightforward for anyone who doesn’t have their FTP set too high, is a 6.6 level workout. Plenty of people can’t do a 6.6 level workout (especially not on a day they just aren’t operating at their best for whatever reason).
By that logic TR should just get rid of all <5 PL workouts across all zones. Can’t do 4x5m at 111%? FTP must be set too high.
You’re trying to be sarcastic but I do feel that there should be some floors. 3x15 at 90% is a reasonable floor for sweet spot. Vo2 shouldn’t be done at a percentage of ftp, so I’m not going to comment on that portion but I do believe there should be better fence posts, and I believe progression levels just mask issues with ftp estimation
Agree, this workout should be doable with correctly set FTP.
But if you follow MED approach (Minimum Effective Dose) and 3x12 or 4x10 gives body sufficient signal for adaptations, doesn’t it make sense to start from lower? It creates less stress and therefore hopefully more consistent long term training, plus longer steady overload period before plateauing.
