Two years later … now 69. What I have noticed in the meantime is that my capacity falls pretty far down if I do not keep doing some kind of TR workouts during the week, between brevets.
This year I am looking at the Sustained Power Build program (low volume) and my plan is to do two of the three suggested. I don’t bother with the weekends, since the brevets take care of that.
The Sustained Power plan is my starting point, but I almost always check out the “Train now” and follow the suggestion quite often. I figure the suggestions are probably more tailored to my present situation than a static plan.
Nice to have choices.
But TR will not stop the aging process only combat it.
So now 62 and the year has been me working on 2 hard workouts a week and 2 endurance rides. The intention has been go hard twice a week…and handle the other two rides in a more relaxed manner. I was looking at how I was doing and was noticing most of my PRs for the year were 5 watts or so below my prior years. It just had me wondering was I progressing or regressing with some of my changes.
Anyways I decided to ride what was the first loop I would do when I started cycling in 2015. At that time it took me close to an hour to do the route. I planned to make it more of a threshold ride for me and see what I had left as I did the ride. I had been feeling sluggish the last month or so and was thinking I would likely struggle but would see how it goes.
I finish the ride…the time is slower then last years ride which was definitely more wind aided and went…o well…not bad…was steady…breathing was good…legs felt good. Then off I went to do 50k for my Sunday ride.
I get home and look at my ride in TR and see All time Records? So off I go look and see that my power from essentially 19minutes to 30 minutes is the most power I have ever done. I was quite surprised…it wasnt a huge increase but it was an increase. Just helps me confirm that going easier is working for me. Anyway…I just wanted to let others know my version of toning down my intensity has helped.
I’m the OP for this thread and just turned 70 last week. My TR plan is scheduled to renew tomorrow and I’m struggling with whether it makes sense to do so. I like the workout protocol better than Zwift, but based on advice of the experts I respect the most, e.g., Joe Friel and Stephen Seiler, polarized training is what I prefer. At TR they only have two “experimental” polarized plans that, as I understand, don’t fully integrate with TR - hence the “experimental” label. Is anyone else of a similar mind? I know I can use the Train Now option to pick workouts on the fly but would like to have a fully integrated polarized plan. FYI my training focus now is for a series of gravel races that begin in January.
First, thanks for starting this helpful thread, David! I’m 68 now and looking at very similar experts as you – and would add in Peter Attila and Inigo San Milan as two more who are very much in the “lots of Z2, with some key Z5 stuff” camp.
I just auto-renewed after some similar wavering. My decision (other than inertia) is primarily to keep my legacy pricing for another year based on the hope (wishful thinking?) that I’ll get some add’l value out of WL v2 when it comes live (and also hoping it’s sooner rather than later) as my spring/summer/fall riding is all outdoors. While I’m following the LV POL EXP plans and adding in some occasional extra Z2 rides.
The main value I’m seeing in TR right now are AI FTP and defined workouts. As you know in a LV POL plan the intensity workouts alternate threshold/VO2 max every other week, and I find if I need to adjust my schedule I see the PLs drop because of the decay rate TR uses. So if I really reflect, I could use any workout creator source and player, use Training Peaks for all my activity (including strength work, Nordic skiing/biathlon, other adventure stuff) and figure out another way to think about establishing FTP or performance metrics/training targets.
So, don’t know if I’ve helped you, or just tried to rationalize my own recent decision:)
I still find it has value at this point for me. For me it works but the plan is more of a framework from TR and modifications based on what I think I need to work on. I am 62. What I have been doing this year is plan builders low volume plans. I only do 2 of the workouts. The rest of my riding is group rides, solo endurance outside or other easy endurance ride. I ride all year on the trainer for at least 2 inside workouts a week. I have still found AIFTP to be functioning well and it still has helped improve my progression this year. In prior years dispite the workouts I would do during the summer my FTP would decline as I entered September. This year I am already at a higher FTP level then I typically would be. It shows in the workouts that I am now doing that typically I wouldnt be able to do until late spring.
Following Tr low or mid volume plans. More intensity in the past.
I should add in the summer I would still tend to do a VO2 workout once a week along with my outside riding. Outside riding in the past was often more intensity as well ie over .85. I have tended to do longer slower stuff outside more often along with consistency in doing my 2 workouts a week of structure
I agree that legacy pricing is a strong motivator to continue and will likely tip the scales for me to renew to hold out for the long-promised WL v2. But it’s been over 18 months that the WL has been promised. As someone else commented, the rate of meaningful updates from TR used to be fairly consistent, but it’s been a long time since any meaningful update has been rolled out. He speculates they’re now focusing on trying to incorporate Zwift workouts as a top priority. I’m not sure about that but think that Zwift must be a big concern to TR’s growth projections (unless there really is a Zwift/TR merger afoot.)
David, I currently do one Group workout per week that is HIIT, most others are outside generally. choosing a ride from 12 months ago, then find a similar workout on TR for the progression levels. So I’m using TR mainly for the calendar and analysis . I too are of the opinion that two HIIT workouts a week are sufficient and ride at Z2, or low Z3 if its a swift hour ride. HIIT workouts are selected by duration and progression level, careful not to go past “productive” status.
At the tender age of 63 I will say that I to love Trainer Road. However, I do not feal that the platform perfectly fits my needs. I will renew because I am grandfathered in. I would like to do a 9 day week plan, for more recovery. Or, I would like a better polarized plan that was not experimental, and have confidence that it worked. Through winter I will use the the maintenance LV plan. As we move into Feb. I may increase the volume depending on whether I can find a spring race that suits me. We shall see!
For all of my Sexagenarian friends, I wish we could collectively reach out to TR and encourage them to devise plans better suited to our age group. I do not feel that they address our needs as aging athletes and I am quiet sure that we are a significant portion of their revenue stream.
Agree with this. I’m 69yo and TR has been a real game changer for me in several positive ways, but, I agree that they don’t seem to have any way to account for older athletes specific needs, particularly for more recovery. I’ve also wondered is polarized is a sort of hack for older riders, but am unsure. It does not seem like core plan building and adaption programs really account for riders our age. That being said, I’m fully committed to continuing – I just wish I felt the program was more accomodating to who I am, which, after all, is the foundational concept of adaptive training.
I can assure you polarized training is not a hack designed to placate us old guys, although it may be an ideal solution for older cyclists who likely have more time to train than those cyclists who are also fully employed with young kids, etc. Stephen Seiler is the guru of PT based on his work in Norway with world-class cross-country skiers and other athletes. Joe Friel also has fully endorsed PT. One of the biggest hurdles for PT for me is that the Zone 1-2 work needs to be fairly long to build the base, which many Type A cyclists find boring and hard to endure. Plus, the weekend group rides, which are fun social events, can turn into hammer fests where we try to keep up with the younger guys/gals.
Nate has said he wishes TR could design and nine-day “week” but that seems to be a fundamental challenge that their software can’t handle at this point
And in doing so he came across the mode of action of the mitochondria. These are cell components that are responsible for generating energy. They produce ATP, written out as adenosine triphosphate. The molecule is the universal energy carrier in the human body. “The exciting thing is that endurance athletes have their mitochondria working perfectly. In patients with diabetes or tumors, however, the mitochondria malfunction,” explains San Millan.
Currently 68. I’ve tried TR Plans a couple of times in the last 3 years, always finding myself burning out before completing them. Last winter I did Zone 2 exclusively and added one VO2 workout/week after Friel’s description. My goal was to get to 3 min on/90 sec off x 5 at 120% of FTP. Never made it. Started adding in some FT P workouts in the spring, the rode exclusively outdoors unstructured during the summer. Subjectively I was in better condition at the end of the summer. Early fall brought a cruise, Covid, new grandson, and a stint back at work. Planning pretty much the same thing this year. The idea of 2 indoor structured workouts during the summer is appealing. I also do one weight workout and one calesthenic workout/week. I signed up with Trainerday, and am going to go back and forth this year, trying to decide which to keep.
DavidWms, when I wondered if Poliarized is a hack for older riders, I didn’t mean that it was somehow fake, but that if might inherently allow more appropriate recovery time.
What’s come up in the thread multiple times is the feeling that the standard training plans can be too much for certainly this group (60+) but in general, for anyone that’s not racing. I had a burnout a year ago while trying to follow the SSB plans, when what I really needed was more endurance focused plans, like PT. While I have some specific bike goals, they aren’t about moving up in racing status.
I enjoy the structured training, esp. since it’s not a social media cartoon, but I would like more help through training plans. Formally accept PT, moving it out of experimental. Add more options built around endurance and PT. Have more “age appropriate” programs for those of us who need more time to recover.
I did reach out to customer support about PT and what TR’s priority is for new updates and received a response. They say the PT compliance rate has been lower, which has slowed their assessment to take it out of experimental:
Polarized Plans
We’re analyzing the data we have from athletes that follow our polarized plans in an effort to better understand the differences in performance outcomes between pyramidal and polarized training intensity distributions. So far the data has shown a significantly lower compliance rate with polarized plans, shrinking sample sizes and making comparisons difficult. We’re still monitoring and anticipating increased data points that will help us get a clearer picture of how a “textbook” 80/20 plan works in real world conditions and what variations and adjustments need to be made to improve performance.
Company Priorities
Workout Levels V2: Using AI to quantify your unstructured rides, giving you credit for every ride you do and using that to adjust your training.
AI FTP Detection: No more testing! Using AI to calculate your FTP from all of your training, not just a single effort.
Red Light / Green Light: A tool that will look at when you’ve overdone it in your training and racing and making proactive changes to your training plan as a result.
Anybody have any idea what percentage of TR users are > 60? It seems that attention to the needs of this group are low profile, leading me to wonder if we’re a small minority.
only combat it.