I’ve found much more success by keeping the long rides pretty chilled (~.65 IF). That allows me to push the volume a bit, and stay fresh for the once weekly/3 times fortnightly hard intervals. I feel better on the bike, and while my FTP is only up a touch on what it was with the TR plans, VT1, repeatability, RPE, and general well-being are all much better.
The best thing my coach has ever told me is that it’s very hard for most cyclists to ride the easy days too easy. Take it very easy, go longer not harder, fuel more than you think, and all will be good.
The only time you’ll see me anywhere near 0.8 IF for a long ride is a sportive.
The way i read your response you were only partially agreeing with what i said. It seems like you still advocated for pushing the IF up on the weekday indoor rides.
Since then several others have stated similar opinion to mine. Since there are many paths to reach a goal, no one answer is right, but my argument about all or none for AT instead of a more varied approach is why i don’t use planbuilder or have AT turned on.
In my experience, the indoor rides are the ones where my easy can truly be easy. It isnt very hilly where i live, but enough so to add more fatigue than necessary. This can happen from time to time when i have a Monday off from work so i ride outside, but normally my Monday’s are super easy, which is easy to do with tr. Pettit -1.
Train now does the same thing, always suggesting i go out and hammer it. Occasionally i see an easy ride suggested, but that is very rare.
???
In my quote I wrote that I think it is better to ride longer at lower intensity if one has the time to. That is exactly what you wrote several times, too.
PS If you my wording was ambiguous, then just put it in context with the rest of the post.