Based on those I ride with very few use TR. most that ride indoors are on Zwift. Anyone I know on Tr is younger
1 Like
That’s true here too. Personally don’t care for the “gamish” appearance of Zwift. I’ve tried it a couple of times, and stopped both times.
2 Likes
Enlightening discussion. Here’s my take as 65-year-old guy who trains for endurance epics: Ride Around Mt Rainier (155 mi x approx. 10000’), multi-day tours (70+ miles/day). Thanks to TR, I’m fitter than I was 15 years ago when I did lots of unstructured miles and no intervals. I’ve studied Friel, Seiler, San Milan, Michael Greger and other nutritionists, Starrett (mobility), and random strength “gurus.” I use cycling for two objectives: #1, maintain/improve my VO2Max (due to its strong positive correlation with health span). So, Threshold & VO2 workouts. #2, improve my vascular system and increase the efficiency and number of my mitochondria (also associated with health span). So, Z2 workouts. The TR Polarized Plans allow me to accomplish those objectives. I use the plan as my foundation. I then check metrics from my Garmin watch (like HRV, training load, recovery time, resting HR) and how I’m feeling to decide if I should skip a workout or adjust the plan. If I decide to adjust the plan, I check both TrainNow and the list of workouts to change the day’s workout to achieve my desired workout zone & level. While I usually end up following the plan with TR recommended adaptations, modifications are easy to make.
Here’s what I like about TR:
- AIFTP (Awesome. It hits the mark better than other tests for me)
- Polarized plans (a good mix of easy and hard for the objectives I’ve set)
- Progression Levels (allowing for intelligent adjustments to work out levels)
- That TR is a serious app for serious athletes (unlike Zwift which is fine for someone who wants to play around)
I do wish that TR would: - Stop calling the plans experimental (“experimental” seems like a technicality to make the TR development geeks feel better; and the term seems to turn people away)
- Reduce the amount of degradation in level when a not getting credit for a workout in a particular training zone.
- Enable a 9 -day “week” in plan builder (seems like it should be a straightforward coding project)
7 Likes
59 yrs old. Been doing Polarised since June this year.
I do the 8 week plan then modify it for my needs.
AT continually wanting to push the PL level on endurance workouts and I continually decline. I do one endurance workout a week raising the PL a tiny amount. The other endurance workouts are then at a lower PL, deliberately. AT doesn’t think this should be so is always wanting to give me hard workouts. My ftp is 320 and AT training thinks I should drop it to 313. No thanks, endurance workouts are fine and the VO2 workouts are hard but doable.
At the moment only 1 VO2/threshold a week, 2 in the summer. Generally AT handles these workouts better.
Basically I use the 8 week plan as a template then ‘self coach’ as AT would have me burning out. I’m happy with ftp/heart rate levels.
Just off to do Phoenix -3 which will just nudge my PL up .1!
3 Likes
I provided some feedback to support on what I also believe is the erroneous PL pushing of endurance rides intensity in the POL plans.
The response I got today suggests they have had a discussion and there could be a future change in the AT logic where acheiveable endurance rides might be recommended as the default, rather than progressive. They didn’t comment on the extensive progressions element that clearly still make sense.
The example I had given was “Walker” with a 2hr interval at 75% being given as a recommended adaption due to where my Endurance PL is.
Edit: 59 next month
3 Likes
I agree that >60 is likely a tiny percentage of TR’s subscriber base. Although >50 is supposedly the fastest-growing demographic in cycling, the majority seem to be content to ride without committing to a disciplined training regimen. Zwift seems to capture most of those who want to train indoors. Wahoo has also updated its training software to include more Zwift-like features, including a chat feature similar to Discord.
From a business perspective, TR is glad to have us but given our small numbers, which will naturally dwindle in the next decade, their focus is likely on the 25 to 45 age group. As they admit, the software is designed around the minimum effective dose to improve performance. For younger cyclists with full-time jobs and small children, that approach makes the most sense. Hence, they’ve invested mostly in the SS/Tempo approach.
The good news is that using the PT as a template with changes as needed is relatively easy. One big downside is, as I understand, because PT plans are experimental, they don’t really work with the AIFTP feature.
Yep, we hear you!
While our initial strategy was to build Masters-specific plan blocks, we found this wouldn’t solve the issue like we had hoped, and could possibly lead to more complications for Masters Athletes.
We’ve found a better way to solve this with Adaptive Training. The plan is to allow athletes to select which days they want to train and when, and through that customization process, add in how many days of intensity they want.
This will be guided intelligently by Plan Builder to keep athletes compliant with productive training, but allow very individualized customization in work and rest.
3 Likes
Cause and effect? I wonder if their lack of attention to communicating about their work on polarized plans, as well as user lack of confidence in how they’ve designed it (I’ll own that from time to time I find myself questioning how “right” they have it) leads to lack of compliance and people doing their own thing vs following the plans.
Yes to both! One of my bigger frustrations with my use of the LV polarized plan is that with SS and VO2 Max alternating weeks if anything changes in my schedule and I bump my intensity workout back a day or two the PL is back to where I had been a few weeks early and I’m served up workouts I have done to get me to the pre-degredation PL. That can become an annoying cycle (almost wrote Downward Spiral – from the early days of The Sufferfest when you bought/downloaded individual workouts:) )
And on 9-day week, that’s a start, but rather than one-size fits all I think having the ability to schedule how often to regularly have an intensity workout on a POL plan would be a real win. Although I would be happy to start with a regular 9-day cycle.
That’s not my understanding, and I’m not sure why that would be the case. I think I’ve read here that all workouts, indoor structured, outdoor structured and out unstructured all factor into AIFTP and is part of the working leading to PL v2. @IvyAudrain or someone else from the TR team?
NM on a response here; just saw the AIFTP thread and this was posted 18 hrs ago (bolding by Ming from TR in the post):
As before, AI FTP Detection analyzes ALL rides with power data: whether indoors, outdoors, structured, or unstructured, AI FTP Detection tracks your fitness without the need for tests or all-out efforts. And as before, you still have the option to test your FTP any time you like with a Ramp Test or other method. The choice is yours!
Holy crap! (In a very complimentary way:))
4 Likes
This sounds great! Any idea of timing on this?
This sounds great @IvyAudrain. BTW fellow posters, the other impressive difference between TR and other platforms is that only TR has @IvyAudrain
7 Likes
Thanks for this. The point about Polarized Plan adoption was bugging me. It’s hidden behind a feature flag and, as far as I can tell, has not been broadly promoted. That seems like it is being set up to fail.
That only speaks to current subscribers. I have to expect the market for those over 50/60 as well as others who are more recreation/endurance oriented could be a much bigger market. I’m obviously not in the product planning sessions for TR, but it does seem that the non-racing market is being captured by competitors. But, some of us in that non-racing camp do enjoy the structured training that TR offers, so my hope would that this presents an opportunity to broaden the addressable market.
Glad to hear there is focus on the Master’s age group, but, to my points above, that’s broadening the racer segment. I’d like to hear more about efforts to expand structured training for those that don’t want the cartoons but want training that is more endurance/recreation oriented.
3 Likes
Where can I find TR’s polarized plan? I’m interested but can’t seem to find this option.
I think you’re talking about adoption, where the TR post DavidWms shared was about compliance and shrinking sample sizes, which I take to mean people starting plans and not keeping to them, or dropping out and starting a different plan.
First go to your web account vs one of the apps, select “account” on the left nav list, then select “early access.” That’s where you enable POL plans.
When adding one to your calendar you go to Training Plans on the left nav, and Polarized is the last option on that list.
Hope that’s helpful.
FWIW, as others have commented here, medium volume has two endurance and two intensity workouts per week, where LV has two endurance and one intensity. I think most are using LV and adding additional endurance workouts if they want more volume as the additional intensity workout is not well aligned with a senior/master athlete’s needs (IMHO).
1 Like
Lol, unfortunately it has to haul a lot!
Interesting factoid on the podcast yesterday. Of all the subscribers on TR, 15% have a W/Kg ratio > 4 W/Kg. But over 50% have <3 W/Kg with FTP of <230.
Previously, just hitting 3W/kg was one of my main goals on TR. I haven’t achieved it yet, but haven’t given up. That said, it’s no longer one of my top goals. My goal is to continue to improve my health overall. Cycling is the foundation, with more balance now for weight training. As Peter Attia, MD says on his podcast, in an ideal world, we would all participate in the centenarian “Olympics” by consciously training now on all of the the activities we want to continue doing in the last decade of our life.
2 Likes
can we start calling out anyone with W/kg over 4 as outliers? 
I’m sure there are some 4W/kg folks that are slow responders, I think that is another qualifier we need to describe different athlete types, which may or may not be related to all that increase recovery needed when passing into the 60+ y.o. age group.
2 Likes
Very helpful. Thanks!
There are many more 60+ riders who ride for fun than worry about boosting their fitness. They aren’t interested in following structured plans or capturing power data. They ride their bikes as much as they want. Many are retired and cycling happens to be their choice for recreation, exercise, and socializing. Some may have competed in the past but that’s not their focus now.
Looking at Strava leaderboards by 60+ age groups, most entries are without power and HR.
These riders post their activities but are more interested in number of days and distance ridden, not time in zone or watts.
Some are pretty darn fast just pedaling along. Aarghh!
I don’t think you can convince this group they need to track their power numbers and ride their bike indoors watching a chart or loop around in 3D world.
I think the potential market for TR is a sliver of the 60+ demographic who cycle.
If I had to take a guess 60+ is probably less than 2% of TR users.
1 Like
HRV and older cyclists Here’s a new Training Peaks article on why masters athletes should monitor their HRV that may be of interest. Why Masters Athletes Should Monitor Their HRV | TrainingPeaks
I’ve monitored my HRV for over a year, first using chest HRM and apps (HRV4 Training and EliteHRV) and now using the Oura ring, which records it during the night. Similar to resting and max heart rates, HRV is highly individual. Mine is chronically low, ranging from 17 to around 40 on a good day. It’s another data point I consider, and I may lower intensity if HRV is lower than normal. There are other threads on the forum on HRV if anyone is interested in learning more.
1 Like
Ive no idea what HRV is and what having a low one does to you. I must look into it. p.s. im 57 so interested…