2 Likes
It is hard to comprehend how hard true elites really train. When you add up the warm-up, cool down, recoveries, the intervals themselves… top runners can easily put in a 15 mile session. And that is after a morning run. And then there’s another morning run tomorrow! Training like this, the body is in a constant state of fatigue and being pushed to the limit. It’s the only way to find the precipice.
But training like that is for the young and hungry. Should a parent, spouse, professional, masters (or whatever label you want to add in here) train like that. No. We got to go to work tomorrow and bills to pay. What is optimal for me at this stage of life was not optimal for me when I was 23 trying to hit a national qualifying standard.
2 Likes
Unless, of course, you spend sufficient time around them.
1 Like
Another reply…haha. I just…I can’t believe they buried the lede on this change. 
I guess I’m glad I checked (and asked) and that you shared the info. I’m excited to just build a normal plan, masters be damned. I’m…gobsmacked. anyway. thanks! I still think I need more volume but I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt for a few blocks. 
I guess it depends on a person’s history and interest, but the release of Masters plans was rather huge IMO. They teased them MANY years ago for more than a little while in the podcast. Then they announced they had ditched Masters plans once they released Adaptive Training, claiming that AT was the effective cure-all. Many people lamented & complained about that choice and had practical experience where AT still fell short in related use cases. I think it got to the point that TR realized AT’s shortcomings in this light and finally deemed them was worthwhile.
Considering the “we’re gonna do them… no wait, they’re not needed…” history, I think the release was the greater part of the multiple items included and worthwhile as the lead. The other tweaks to the plans is notable but on par with the other incremental changes that have taken place over the years, so it is less of a drastic change from my view.
4 Likes
Yeah, that makes sense. I did a plan as a comeback from covid malaise, burned out hard after a full plan (base build and specialty) and noped out and didn’t look back until the announcement of Masters plans by Nate. I missed all the intervening history. Thanks for catching me up. I wonder if people need a ‘if you’re just returning to TR’ thread since a lot has changed, and if history is any guide this time of year might see an influx of fitness seekers.
-
Could be worthwhile, but I suspect a quick review of the Announcements category here could be a decent starting point that already exists.
-
That changes order upon comments, so I could see potentially having one topic with a list of them in the order of release (newest on top) that could be quickly referenced. Let me think about that and maybe see if @ZackeryWeimer and TR think that is something they want.
We have done a something sort of related with using “FAQ” in topic titles on some repeat use topics:
This combined Announcement tracking topic might qualify for that FAQ status.
1 Like
I sent you a direct message if you need a hand working through the updated plans we released recently – feel free to reply back if you need any help or you can always reach out to support@trainerroad.com!
1 Like
This is 100% me as well. I’ve been on LV since I joined TR a few years ago (young kids + demanding job limit my time available to train) and I’ve mostly stuck to the prescribed workouts (occasionally adding a z2 when time permits). FWIW it got me to 4.2 wkg but started from ~3.5 wkg when I joined (standing on consistent athletics starting starting as a kid).
What I’m contemplating (when my daughter starts sleeping through the night consistently) is moving to the MV masters plan. Guessing a little more volume is worth sacrificing one interval day/week?
3 Likes
Again, we are directed to this excellent review: Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S): Shared Pathways, Symptoms and Complexities - PubMed
A very important distinction, I believe, is that AT works to keep you effectively dialed into the pre-existing plan. Poor plan compliance will result in downscaling. It does not posit that the underlying plan is effective or optimal. It’s a subtle but important difference.
1 Like
Sure, and I admit my summary was very brief to just cover the basic point while lacking in some nuance. Noting that, I still believe that is potentially related to the real ‘why’ they have essentially admitted that ‘Masters’ plans were a worthwhile (maybe even necessary) option they chose to offer. But until this release, choosing “the right” base plan in conjunction with AT was their recommended solution, “masters” athletes included.
I saw it referenced by TR reps with nearly every instance where people asked about getting Masters plans and frequently in relation to issues they actively had with AT and plans in use. TR did mention options for people to tweak plans, but still pushed back at the repeated requests for masters plans until this very release.
2 Likes
Oh no you’re totally right. I mean it more as a clarification in general that at is not some fundamental proof point to the underlying plan. 100% compliance to something that fundamentally may or may not be broken does not necessarily mean anything.
1 Like
Unfortunately, that article by Louise and company doesn’t provide any data re. the actual incidence of overtraining. (In fact, despite acknowledging that the hallmark indicator of such is a long-term reduction in performance ability, they lump overtraining together with functional and non-functional overreaching in their assessment of the literature.)
I find the masters plan vs non masters confusing. Swapping out sweetspot for endurance on low volume and to a certain extent mid volume is a huge change. What’s wrong with toning down the sweetspot or indeed having tempo as an option. I don’t understand why tempo exists as an energy system in TrainerRoad it is never prescribed or suggested by trainnow. This binary switch seems simplistic and a bit of a gimmick especially given that adaptive training was supposed to make it redundant ie if sweetspot was too intense the survey responses should cause plan modification.
1 Like
-
That “huge change” is precisely the point of the difference. The Masters plans are aimed at reducing stress on the athletes that may not be able to handle the regular plans by stepping down to Endurance.
-
As I mentioned in another comment, even with AT in place there were riders (masters & otherwise) that still had issues with the main TR plans and their intensity. This new option is indeed a large delta on purpose, to give people options between two different foundations. AT will obviously be part of that going forward, but the core of a plan intent (number of intense days) is till the key choice people have at the outset.
-
The only gimmick I see was TR expecting AT eliminate the need or benefit of Masters type plans. They chose to discard their intent to add Masters plans after teasing them for years because they figured that AT would solve the core issue there. It may help in some situations, but we still saw people having issues with the original plan templates despite AT in use.
-
Adding Masters plans that have real differences makes perfect sense to me and fills a gap that continued to exist even with the good that AT brings to the TR picture. Far from a gimmick, I see it as them truly listening to their athletes and addressing their needs more completely.
4 Likes
Yeah, but no, because AT would just serve up easier sweetspot ad infinitum.
It wouldn’t swap out the SS and replace it with an hour of Z2, say.
1 Like
Well why is that, any ML model should be able to recognize patterns that suggest the reduction in intensity is not enough. If I fail multiple Thursdays in a row for example or rate as very hard the model should easily identify a trend and suggest changes.
Some Good points thanks. I do feel low volume masters base though is a step too far. Very few if any people will experience anything over noob gains on ~3 hours a week with that intensity distribution. It’s really A maintenance plan
1 Like
It may be a “maintenance” plan to you or others here, but if that is all someone has time to do & properly recover from… that is what they can do.
We sometimes get lost thinking that people have no limits and/or the aim is peak genetic fitness, when the reality is that many here are just looking for fitness to play in their local rides and be a bit better than their friendly rival.
We sure have people with more lofty goals, along with the time an ability to dig into the higher demand / volume plans, but it seems TR’s bread & butter comes from the typical weekend warrior that is shooting for far less than national level podiums. As such, a Masters Low Volume plan could well be a fine choice for plenty of athletes. It doesn’t have to be the “best” plan for everyone to be useful.
20 Likes