TR not for "serious" amateurs?

[Jonathan]

@jz91 this post makes me sad . You misrepresented TR and the context being discussed here in this thread in a few key ways.

@jz91

However I still have some reservations specifically on the use of TR’s plans by more experienced users.

To make a concrete example (but others could be made): sustained build high volume.

Weekly average volume is 10 hour max so hard really to consider high volume especially if one can also ride outdoor.

Important to separate “experienced” from a “High Volume athlete”. They are not necessarily, and even not frequently the same thing.

You’re selecting our High Volume Plans as a representation of TR in general, yet it is a plan that is meant for low single digit percentage of our athletes.

That would be like me selecting 1-3 of 100 rides that you’ve done and saying that it comprehensively represents the way you train. That would be an uninformed and unfair assumption for me to make.

The High Volume plans are designed for people who:

1. Don’t have what you are inferring as true high volume time (above 10hrs per week)
2. Are able to accomplish favorable adaptations to a high workload and want to push their limits

Again, this is for a low single digit percentage of our athletes.

Separate from TR entirely, the amount of athletes that (1) consistently carry +10hrs per week of training time (2) need that sort of volume represents an even smaller fraction of cyclists. However, that is regularly and erroneously referenced as the common context for cyclists, when in reality, most cyclists couldn’t tolerate that training load and could see more benefits from lower training load.

As TrainerRoad stands today, it isn’t designed for that very small percentage of athletes that want to do +10hrs per week. Can it work for them? Sure! They’ll have to use the tools we have like workout alternates, extending workouts, and using TrainNow or selecting from the workout library to best fit their situation.

And with all of that said, it is extremely important to return to the first point in this message about “experienced” not meaning “high volume”. There are many +4.5w/kg athletes who use TR, and they accomplish a wide range of goals with our Low and Mid-Volume plans. They are experienced, yet they don’t need high volume to accomplish their goals.

@jz91

The key issue I would have however is with the overall structure of the plan consisting of 2x Vo2 workouts + a threshold workout and to round off a sweet spot workout each week.

That’s okay to take issue with that. Again, the high volume plan you are referencing is designed for a very small percentage of our athletes. Important to keep in mind our plans are informed on data from over 150 million workouts, paying close attention to success rates, improvement, and when those things are not happening. They aren’t designed on mere hunches, or what’s worked best for ourselves as coaches or a handful of athletes.

@jz91

I’m not sure how train now would play a role in this as it should provide training suggestions on a particular day so not really a tool to use for a training calendar which is taken care of by AT and the baseline plans.

Athletes on Low Volume plans commonly use TrainNow to make sure they get endurance workouts that progress in an appropriate fashion.