Who's over 60 y/o and using TR?


And that’s for me a big disadvantage. I have stop using TR workouts/plans and instead create my own workouts/plans. Not so difficult because there are much info on the net and several good books about the subject.

Has anyone over 60 started the adaptive training program? Impressions so far? I’m on the list but still waiting.

Nate in a post in this topic asked about the option of stretching a 7 day plan to 9 days for seniors who aren’t weded to typical workweek. From the podcasts and announcements on Adaptive Training, that does not seem to be a specific option. But in concept, AT should consider the load of previous workouts in designing your next one. We will see. I’m on the list to try AT but have not gotten a go-ahead email yet.

FYI I also use Intervals.icu and like the way it tracks fitness to provide a fatique assessemnt and a chart showing when I’m in optimal training zone, fresh, or “high risk.” True confession, I don’t think I’ve ever gone into the “high risk” zone. You might try it out for a graphic of your training. :rofl:

David / Jay / other gray eminences,

I second the plug for intervals.icu. I feel 30 years younger just having its horde of graphs holding up its end of my pretensions, and the wannabe nerd in me could probably spend the rest of his life actually figuring out what they all show.

Like David and others I too am eagerly awaiting AT for everybody, and particularly those of us who were honing our pitchforks because the promised geriatric plans hadn’t materialized. TR may have done a really deft end run around that with AT, which may deliver even more personally tuned prescriptions than we could have had with the most thoughtful generic “masters’” plans.

And I too hope that the cycles of work/rest can be soon be tweaked at all levels, from intervals, to days, to seasons – maybe even with ML help. A day makes sense as a time unit rooted in physiology, a month maybe a bit (and less with age) but the 7-day week has no basis at all in the work/rest rhythm our body responds to best. It’s economics, not training science, that makes it still a fundamental unit in the TrainerRoad world. One of the perks of getting this ripe is more freedom from Monday morning, and so it should be here too.

I look forward to AT, but I still hope that Nate and the marvelous team will sometime devote a podcast to what the TR mountain of data (which we generated, though he owns it) actually shows about old people exercising a lot, and what seems to help / hurt them.


I normally use the TR 20 minute test (or a variant of it) to set my FTP. However I decided to try the Kolie Moore test instead. I preferred it as it did not rely on you knowing what result you would get and starting out at that pace. Came within a watt or so of what I thought my FTP was.

Search the workout library for FTP

1 Like

Diamond Valley Road Race +2 was a brute for this old dude but just what the Doctor ordered. Hit right in my weak zone.

1 Like

I see a few mentions of age 60+ people doing the ramp test. The ramp test gets my HR within two or three beats of maximum, and I understand, that’s true for most people. It occurs to me that that might not be the safest thing to do at our ages. Regardless of our fitness levels, all of us have some atherosclerosis. My concern is that heart muscle, even slightly starved of O2 at those heart rates, might set off a serious arrhythmia. Thoughts? I love doing really intense exercise, and just today I got my HR to within 3 beats of maximum, (true max, not calculated) but I am increasingly inclined to use something like Xert to estimate FTP, rather then the ramp test.

1 Like

Thoughts, yes, since just a few days to 80, and – maybe like you – I go back and forth between worry that I’ll blow up my heart with a ramp test and Terminal Denial – “I’ll never die if I just keep pedaling my ass off!”. But no cardiological knowledge at all.

One thing I note is that today you “got [your] HR to within 3 beats of maximum” – not clear whether it was the ramp test or some workout – and by maximum you mean “true max, not calculated.” From which I gather that you have actually thrashed yourself on more than one occasion to the point that your HR stops rising, no matter what you do. That is, gone harder than even the ramp test to get that data point.

Hm. Trying to understand the risk management here. Need my HR max to be True, not calculated, and am willing to go 2-3 beats harder than the ramp test to make sure it’s not just a guess. But I wonder if going almost that hard on a ramp test won’t explode my old heart. I’m laughing at me, not you. Because that’s how my brain works too!

The only relevant data I have is that since the ramp test always makes me feel like I’m about to die, I switched to the longer slower KM type of death – er, test. What surprised me is that my HR went 5-8 rpm higher on the KM test even though it “feels” marginally easier and “safer” than the ramp test. If your ticker acts like mine, and you don’t want it maxing out on an FTP test, then the KM type of test may not allay your fear either, because you may find a new max, even if it doesn’t feel so awful. (I have a hunch it may feel less threatening because I feel in control of the intensity rather than a victim of it as on the ramp test, and so can actually go a little harder physically without the mental stress.)

Be nice to know from cardiologists how risky high intensity is for us at different ages, other factors being equal.

1 Like

I was able to do a stress test. Never a runner, so the stress test was on a treadmill. I instructed the crew to keep going and not quit when my pulse got to 135, which was their usual cutoff. My legs gave out at about 163 pulse, which is not my max. A week later I did a ramp test and the pulse peaked at 173. The stress test was completely negative, so I’m not too worried about pushing the limits. Age 66

The usual (standard?) advice here in the UK is that if you haven’t partaken in physical activity for many years then get checked out before pushing things. The inference is that if you have then unless you’ve a history of heart disease you will be fine. Of course “physical activity” is seen as jogging/pottering along not burying yourself. Even then my non-medical opinion would be that if you’ve been exercising hard for many years then a short max effort like the Ramp Test isn’t going to be a problem.

I don’t get near my max HR on the Ramp Test, it’s my breathing that’s the limiter. Pushing hard on some of the local steep (> 16%) climbs trying to get a PR or Strava top ten, I’ll get to at least 5bpm higher and that’s for a duration of a couple of minutes.

I have the same concern, stress my heart too much with ramptests and such.

The only test I’m going do, is the common 20-minute test. If done correctly, you never go to max HR.

Probably shouldn’t admit this but we have moved in with my 74 year old mum for a few months until our new house is ready - and I’ve let her use my TR account a few times at 50% effort :joy:

She cycles with friends regularly so it’s some good training

1 Like

Ha! Good for her for doing a little Quality Control. And you for helping. If TR gives you any flak for letting her ride on your account, we’ll tell Nate’s mom!

1 Like

I’m 68 and had a CT heart scan two years ago that showed moderate calcium narrowing of my LAD (a/k/a widowmaker). I performed a nuclear stress test afterward and my cardiologist told me to ride as hard as I want. If you haven’t had a CT scan, I’d suggest it to quantify the degree of atherosclerosis.

Like Oldcrank, I’ve also moved away from the Ramp Test, which I think is too VO2 Max intense (and left me nauseous) and may not be the best measuring device for some 60+ cyclists. And I didn’t show any increase in FTP from RT. The Kolie Moore test takes longer but is more tolerable and yielded a nice bump in my FTP. (My experience: Kolie Moore's FTP test protocol - #535 by DavidWms

If you use a PM, Intervals.icu provides an estimated FTP from your Strava data. I did a hilly, intense (97% IF) 23 miles yesterday, and Intervals bumped my eFTP 5 watts. In truth, I haven’t tested my FTP since last Fall so no doubt it’s declined some through my sporadic Winter training, and I think the Intervals eFTP is likely accurate.

1 Like

Third ramp test in 90 days. 16% bump. Felt good. Covered screen and listened to a playlist.

68 and will be 69 in August. I started lower than I felt I should be but followed Mid volume.

I am very surprised.

My father died of a heart attack and I have ridden as a way to help protect myself. I will ask my doc about a CT test. Great idea, thank you.


I don’t know if Harrison Ford does TR, but I hope I’m in that good of shape and can still slam my stem (check out the saddle height v. handlbars) when I’m 78! Indiana Jones 5: Harrison Ford, 78, gets on his bike during break from filming in Northumberland | Daily Mail Online


I turn 60 in a year and a half, so my ears perked up at this thread. My TR journey could be summarized as “learning to rest”. Rest, as it turns out, does not come easily to me. (58 year old triathlon focused male that has done TR for about two years: Initial FTP 180 -->272, with 300 yet in me I hope).

Observations: 1) my strength is decreasing, especially in areas I once overlooked; 2) my flexibility is decreasing; 3) fatigue is getting in my way. In order to stay in the game I cannot afford to overlook any of these, but rather need to find a way to balance them.

The rule of thumb I’m working with right now is to plan for 50% endurance (aka a mid-volume plan), 30% mobility, 20% strength. But how much rest? I would love to see some additional data/recommendations about how to balance these out in aging athletes. I also need to learn to make recovery a primary variable if not THE primary variable in my program planning, not just an after thought.

1 Like

Over 60 note on a lesson I had to relearn.

You can’t race hard, probably shouldn’t race at all, with a cold. Worse race in the past 5 years

Then the next weekend. It takes more than a week to fully recover from a cold. First two hours I was killing it then the wheels fell off. Went from high sweet spot into VO2 power to my Garmin asking me questions like Why did you even bring the big ring? Your little gears are lonely and would like to be with your chain. How can you make negative power? I didn’t even know I had the smartass feature turn on.

Oh well. Still had fun and I’ll race again next weekend, if the cold is fully clear

Sounds like a good breakdown, although I’m not sure what mobility involves. Yoga, Tai Chi, Core? I’ve been remiss in not doing core and upper body but am changing that. I think endurance or polarized plans make the most sense for 60+ if our goal is health and longevity, over a constant reach to “improve.” I’m finishing a recovery/endurance week, which has felt great. If I’m not doing a TR workout, I tend to push myself at times where my normalized power is close to my FTP.

As far as recommenations to balance the components, I don’t have easy answers. Earlier in this thread @Nate_Pearson teased out that TR had (and still has) something in the works for masters and above cyclists, but the adaptive training obviously is taking priority.

A broader comment for 60+, I have not yet seen comments here or in the AT thread (Adaptive Training Closed Beta Update) from “old guys” who are in the current closed beta (4,000 subscribers so far.) If I understand AT, it should help with the balance issue.

Don’t recall if I referenced my age (67) in the closed beta thread, but I have made a number of posts there.

Most of my contents are about learning how AT works, or more specifically, how to use TR the “right way” to get the software so that AT can do is thing. Because I’m doing all outside rides the are some things where there are software hiccups (hence the closed beta).

I had moved to the experimental polarized plan, bit moved back to AT sweet spot low volume plan because AT doesn’t do it’s thing with the experimental plans.

I’m two weeks in so really can’t comment yet on how well AT assists to allow the appropriate mix of stress and recovery for folks our age.

1 Like