Hi. Since the update I have lost the two weeks of taper for my upcoming A race. It now just has me training normally right through to the race, except for an opener. Any thoughts! Thanks!
Can you post a screenshot of the two weeks leading up please? 
This workout was very hard and I needed to drop to 98% of planned intensity for the last 2 intervals. TRAI predicted 68% hard.
I have been sleep deprived with neck pain, and had a very stressful week of work having just recovered from a cold. It is no surprise to me this was a v hard work out in the circumstances. TRAI has moved FTP prediction for end of period from 296 to 288 from 285 current (up from 283 pre AI launch).
As I recover from all the above factors, I expect to find future workouts easier than predicted and have TRAI adjust both subsequent workouts and FTP prediction accordingly.
Only posting this to say well done TR team - I really like the way this works, I like its dynamic nature and teaching me not to be attached to a number but just show up, do the work and trust the process to yield results.
I’ve heard this kind of topic discussed. If you had to drop the intensity to complete it - is it be definition not a Fail? I don’t have an opinion currently on this - but I’m sure this is a can of worms.
Maybe it is a fail - im not precious about language, but maybe it needed an all out survey response. In ride, whilst I can assure you the temptation to bail was very high - i figured completing at 98% would be a better training stimulus than stepping off the bike. If that leads to better training returns that all I care about really. A concern was given all the factors listed - if I went ‘all out’ On survey response then my next threshold ride in a week would be too easy as the factors are a short term exception rather than a norm and I expect their impact to reduce by next week.
That looks like a contact support to me. Or tag @eddie @Caro.Gomez-Villafane @SeanHurley here to take a look at it.
I think this may have been a bug, but thought it was fixed. There is an issue that there can only be 1 A race per plan. So it may be treating it like a B race. May want to reach out to support.
Oops! Set to public now.
To be honest, IMO you do not have enough volume or intensity to increase your FTP. You rated almost all your intensity workouts hard/very hard. To me you should have a substantially lower FTP. Your calendar to me suggest you are almost de-training as I don’t really see any progressive overload.
Hrm.
I’m having trouble mapping what you’re saying to the core of what I understand (or what I think I understand) about TR, or basic assumptions about approaching training as a masters athlete (which seems to at least start pretty consistently assuming two days of intensity). Walking through the following, please straighten me out if I’m misinterpreting what you’re suggesting.
Can you elaborate on insufficient intensity contrasted with the notion that my FTP is overstated? I do find the intense workouts to be hard. I think they’re supposed to be. Often they’re very hard. Same deal. If a 1:15 Threshold workout is moderate, I think something’s awry, though the discussions on surveys suggest that nobody should be getting too wound up about the detail here.
Moreover, my FTP was as high as 258 (under the old paradigm) last year. I had a large gap where the only exercise was installing a paver driveway, dropping my FTP to 209 at the end of 2024/early 2025. Over the last year it’s slowly and steadily come up to 247 (adjusted down to 242 with the AI release). Where would you draw a “corrected” FTP number from given a long string of data suggesting that TR’s had time to slowly monitor and adjust?
Further moreover, note that I twiddled most of the available knobs (from Conservative up to Aggressive, and actually dialing back one setting to Moderate initially showed an improvement). So TR AI appears to disagree with you about which direction to adjust, though again, you seem to be suggesting both that my FTP is overstated, making the workouts too hard, and that I’m not getting enough intensity.
Yet furtherer moreoverer 
the crux of my question is, if I’ve used Plan Builder to build my plan, accepting its recommendations for volume, set volume adjustments to dynamic, and twiddled the training approach slider to get the best result… What you’re looking at is what TR gave me (give or take the possible need to clean-slate the whole plan in case repeated adjustments tangled something). If you are correct that it has insufficient volume or intensity to the point of a lack of progressive overload teetering on de-training…. Why? Why would it give me that plan? I’m signed up to get a schedule of workouts that will make me faster, which it seems they generally have, but TR’s estimation predicts an end of that pattern of improvement based on the very training it suggested.
my initial workouts were spot on with what my said ftp was. my initial prediction was very high, it had my ego going. my first workout with a little bathroom break giving me some failure was irritating. life getting in the way and not being smart to push the workout to another time and bombing my workout was devastating especially seeing my predicted ai dump hard. thats more on me than the workouts selected. im okay with “not quite ftp” formula right now but I can see where more advanced people will have a harder time. might have to have an option. to use which ever formula or a test verification.
I would ask: what are you training for? Racing? Just general fitness? To get faster? What does getting faster even mean?
You have been pretty consistent around 3 hours, which for bike riding really isn’t much volume. You body will reach homeostasis pretty quickly (i.e. FTP will remain the same).
TR support is world class, so I would let them answer for the plans, but IMO you would need to add at least one more Z2 day. I would also find a 15-20 mi Zwift race and race that as hard as you can. 
As for overstated FTP, my understanding is if you are rating TR threshold/sweat spot workouts constantly >= hard, your FTP is too high for the TR system.
I did my blown workout hard but I know it was because of me not that I couldn’t do it. maybe it needs to be a 2 stage question. Will hitting moderate over ride the results? or minimize? I wish TR was around when I taught spin. I’d would of stole the profiles. 
Like what Torgo said, 3 to 5 hours a week seems like not a lot of stimulus. How well are you recovering from the workouts you’re doing?
Is it viable for you to add an endurance day to Tuesday? Or to extend your Monday & Wednesday workouts with some (more) Z2?
Edit to add: If you’re not at your limit in terms of recovery & scheduling, see if you can do more. Once TR sees you doing more, it can prescribe more.
Thanks, and thanks for the new word 
- We are self-coached athletes. Assisted by TR, not dictated to.
- Play with the settings more, change the plans, or switch up some endurance rides to dynamic and sweet spot….see how it affects the outcome.
- Double check your understanding of easy and very hard. I suspect I’d call those vo2s Hard.
Fatigue mgmt indicates you aren’t under huge load. More could be more.
The threshold workouts aren’t progressing much.
HTH
@jesseransom Here’s an alternative thought to look at - with a big caveat that I don’t ride MTB and certainly don’t race them, so please ignore if I’m talking nonsense!!
But what kind of plan do you have - I ask because it doesn’t look like a ‘build FTP’ plan, looks more MTB race specific than that? I can see that all your races are 1 hour duration, so it looks like the hard workouts you have are aiming more at the power profile that would be required for them?
I think you could also look at your dynamic endurance workouts - they’re all pretty intense, right at the limit of endurance range. Maybe dial back the endurance component of your training approach to conservative and see if that gets rid of the yellow days after them, and allows the system to increase the difficulty of your threshold workouts, as you’ll be carrying less fatigue? Worth playing around with, I think.
If the AI is predicting a huge increase, should the rider manually increase difficulty in the last couple weeks leading up to the predicted increase? Like a small increase two weeks before and another increase a week before so the difficulty doesn’t just spike upwards? My prediction has been consistent for a couple weeks so the AI seems to have conviction about it.
The level of your workouts after the increase should adjust down - compare the actual watts you’re being asked to produce between, say, a threshold workout before the increase, and one afterwards. You should see a small progression, not a big jump.