So, I have a question regards the framework of TR w/outs v Sufferfest (SF) w/outs.
This is based around me recommending TR to some friends, who are enjoying the transition to structured training, but also others who are already in this world - but on the SF and see TR as too structured and lacking variety.
My take on this is that after nearly 20 years of training I understand what my body responds to and now 5 years into TR - I can use the theory behind the training plans to curate my own workouts as well as pick and mix Chad’s workouts.
However, the one question I can’t answer categorically, when asked by my recently converted friends is why SF w/outs include a variety of training zones (9 Hammers being a classic example), where the vast majority of TR w/outs stay in one or two main zones.
I imagine Chad would say that this is to maximise the training benefit of a specific session - be that Sweet Spot, VO2 Max or recovery and not try to add complexity into the mix that will detract from the aim of that session, which is focussed on the physical adaptation that a ‘pure’ session will derive.
If this is true my only comment would be that when I ride outside for 60-90 mins, I often do Stravavals when I vary the length and intensity of these intervals and derive huge benefits in the summer months when I do this. So why can’t TR introduce some of this variety into the mix in its plans?