I’m trying to think … considering our age, maybe the ideal plan for us would be whatever direction we want to take in our choices of build. But in sweet spot, build etc that we simply keep to low volume and fill out our days with strength training. Men really loose it from the waist up when we get older.
That’s the big caveat to all of this. We’ve got a strong idea that both paths are good, but we don’t know for sure what’s best for each rider.
I’ve got some ideas on how to build this now and I think that we can constantly improve based on the choices/data that come from masters athletes that use this feature.
I also think this could be helpful for anyone that doesn’t recover the best. I remember I used to do a hard, aerobic, recovery three day block and that helped me be fresh enough for the hard days.
I also like the idea of breaking free of the 7 day cycle for people that aren’t slaves to the 5 day work week.
To set expectations for everyone you’ll see the thing amber is working on launch first before we dive into this. That feature will help you too, and you’ll know what it is because we think it’s a big deal .
And keep the ideas coming! We’ll comb back through this thread multiple times while we improve support for masters athletes.
We agree . I believe TR will be the study/data source for this moving forward.
As long as we build a system to improve we’ll be golden.
This may not help with any final decision, but I originally preferred the extra recovery week option and was happy to see both options implemented. However, having a little time to think about it the recovery week option is an easier option to implement with the calendar and this may have skewed my thought. A longer ie 9 day option could well be better for me. I am returning from some health issues and am currently building up, adding volume and intensity slowly. The additional load is dependant on how well I‘ve recovered. I feel my fatigue levels are easier to manage this way.
I’ve wondered for a long time if TR isn’t sitting on an absolute treasure trove of data – one that researchers in white coats would drool to have – that could answer some of the questions we are asking TR and TR is asking us. Although I hate it when my data is sold to marketers, I don’t mind at all its going to bona fide scientists, or to the TR team, which I trust.
Trouble is, the data at present can’t even be examined – by anyone, even at TR – for age-related patterns because so far as I know age has never been a part of anyone’s TR profile. That’s the #1 reason I made my own TR data private – it tells a different story if you assume I’m 30, or know I’m 78. Of course it’s partly ego, but not just. A scientist would have to know that in order to make any sense of it.
I don’t know how other users feel about it, or what other privacy issues I haven’t considered it, but I for one would favor including age – voluntary of course – as part of our TR profile. If it were I’d switch my 3+ years of data to public – well, maybe not the notes I write to myself! – and hope it did somebody some good, sort of like organ donation. And just pray that I didn’t suddenly get swamped with ads for hearing aids and stool softeners.
In the The Bell curve of cylists - how fast are the average TR users? post there are graphs by age group so TR must already have a way to know our age.
Age is asked during onboarding.
Yikes, one more thing I seem to have forgotten, as well as where I put my glasses . I did go recheck my profile page before posting though, and didn’t see age there as part of it.
And I also forgot the Bell curve thread, and that the one Nate posted had age categories. I wish I had recalled it before opening my big mouth because that older thread also had a post saying TR doesn’t plan to involve academic researchers. Sorry.
A geezer plan, eh, interesting. Some of my thoughts, which others have mentioned, are:
- it would be nice to have the option to customize the work/rest ratio in plan builder rather then always going with 3:1 or 5:1 ( and also to choose different ratios for different plans). I can add in a rest week on my own but it does muck up the long term plan.
- a few have mentioned a 9 day week, that is a great option. It would be nice if this could be varied in plan builder - in other words I might select a 7 day week for Base but a 9 day week for Build
- some more direction on a recommended option when a workout is not going well. (this is probably applicable to all users, not just the geezers). I know that there are “minus” levels for many workouts, but I am usually already into the workout when I realize that it may not end well. My problem is I don’t know if I should shorten the intervals, reduce the number of intervals, reduce the intensity of the intervals, or increase the rest period between the intervals. Any one of these will get me through the workout but some may compromise the goal of the workout. Sometimes Chad’s onscreen commentary will provide direction but I may miss it. Perhaps some direction in the weekly notes would help - for example maybe a comment that if a certain workout is proving difficult you can reduce the intensity by 5% and still maintain the goal, but do not shorten the interval.
Lots of choice is good, we all age differently and we all have different strengths and weaknesses.
Thanks for entering this discussion, Nate, it is always nice when you and “the gang” participate - one of the reasons why TR is such a great product!
Three other ideas to consider:
- Ability to select a 3:1 work/recovery ratio in base. I’ve been using @mcneese.chad alternate SSB plan and it works well.
- Ability to adjust intensity by phase or week. For example, ability to tell plan builder to choose the -1 version of workouts (or equivalent) for a given phase or week. Could be applicable on the + side as well.
- A “Geezer” maintenance plan based on the concepts in Joe Friel’s “Fast after 50” book.
Thanks again, Nate. Love what you guys are doing.
I’ve been reading this thread from the beginning and I believe this is in post number 44. I was specifically looking for a reference to Faster After 50 and was amazed that it took so long to appear. Anyway that book is founded on a lot of scientific research, if you have the book you will know how many references there are to scientific literature, and Friel does distinguish between late starters and those who are already well trained. TBH although this thread is titled over 60s I believe the principles very much apply to over 50s.
I haven’t finished the thread yet but my own recent experiences have led me to adopt the principles of the book, more days of exclusively doing weights, currently only 1 VO2 and 1 sweetspot session a week and the rest is HR based recovery.
My time trial performance will tell me if this has been a good strategy.
I.d go for built in recovery weeks. plan builder makes it difficult to add an extra week here and there
Nate, I’m 65, my second season with Trainer Road. I raced up to my mid 50’s, mid or upper pack masters in NorCal. I put the bike away until April of 18 and started riding. I started TR in 11/18 and did LV SSB 1 and 2. I felt that I have didn’t have any base, and “had built a house on sand”. I spent the summer doing a lot of zone 2 and some VO2 work (Polarized). I’m finishing SSB MV at the moment, I took the 3rd week easy, but felt like I didn’t really need the rest. I’m cooked from Carson, Palisade, and Eclipse back to back, which was just too much. My plan is to go to SSBMV 2 but eliminate one of the workouts, and replace it with a zone 2 ride. For those of us over 60 coming off the couch, I think a prolonged zone 2 period before moving to SSB is very helpful
I raced on and off from my 20’s and consistently from my early 40’s to Mid 50’s I stopped riding altogether due to a stress related skin problem that threatened to completely derail my career (general surgeon). Started riding again after retirement at age 64. It’s been a shock to me how deconditioned I was/am, although my time after cycling was spent lifting weights and hiking in the Sierras. My FTP is currently less than 200 watts, and I don’t know if I will ever get back over 3 watts/kg. It’s been an education to see what I can tolerate in terms of intensity and frequency. If I had to do it over again, I’d probably do one Tabata session and one threshold session/week, just to avoid loosing so much.
With the wide diversity of riders and goals for people now using TR, I question whether the changes being discussed should just be linked to age. It seems to me that there are plenty of “younger” people who would benefit from either more frequent recovery weeks or more time between intense workouts. In other words, there are reasons other than age for which having these options could be helpful.
Having said that, as a 62 year rider, I have been following the mid-volume plan for the last 3 years and see no reason for myself to need or desire either of these options (unless it can be shown that it would make me faster!).
TR just announced group workouts where up to 5 can do the same workout, talk, see stats, etc.
Seems like a neat idea. PC or Mac only for now, no Ipad or phone support. I don’t have too many IRL friends on TR so should we figure out how to get some 60+ cyclists to virtually share the same workout? From watching the live demo on Youtube, they plan to soon allow different riders to do different workouts. 🎉 🎉 🎉 Group Workouts are here! 🎉 🎉 🎉
I have a potential work around for being able to do different workouts than the host. It requires a PC/Mac and another PC/Mac or mobile device.
Run the TR Group Workout on a PC as a guest (not the host) make sure to unpair your devices.
- You want to join the group workout, but not have anything linked to this device and TR app.
Run a second TR app via mobile or a 2nd PC/Mac, with devices paired like normal.
- You actually run your individual workout from this app like any other solo TR workout
This should allow you to join a group workout, but not really “do” it, even while the host and any other members are actually following the workout. I have not tested this, but expect it to work fine. The main limit is needing to run TR on 2 devices and the extra steps to get there.
This will all go away once they allow mixed workout use, but for now, this might help people ride together without needing to match the workout at least.
I am 66 y.o. new to Trainerroad. I used to race as Cat. 3 in my age category.
I have done intervals routinely, prior to Trainerroad. I believe at our age it is
very difficult to improve, you are trying to maintain. The caveat, is that applies to master cyclists who are well trained, and have included interval training throughout the years. Personally, I am happy if I can just maintain ,
I feel any gains will probably be small.
At 65, I’m not really trying to improve, just return close to my former racing self after 9 years off.
II’m 67 and never raced (other than the so-called Senior Olympics where the longest event is a 40K!). Maintenance is the first goal, but I know that I feel stronger when I’m consistent on TR. And I count it as an improvement every time I record a PR on a Strava segment, which I still do regularly. Small personal victories are important!