This where I come in and say I raised my under 8 minute power curve simply by riding more.
5 Likes
100%…it is not only about that one particular workout / ride.
That applies to every workout and every training plan though. I think it helps to eliminate some variables and answer one question at a time…in this case, which has the larger training stimulus?
Ability to be consistent, recovery, etc, are related but separate metrics.
1 Like
More is not always better.
2 Likes
It’s not only about total time in zone (or level 
). There are also things like interval length, and length of rest intervals. Sure, you did 27 minutes at or above VO2 zone, but if that’s 2 minutes max at a time with at least 10 minutes in between, that’s a different beast than 4 minutes at a time 3 minutes apart (to make up some random numbers since I neither know what TR prescribed or what you actually did–it’s possible your outside ride has as long or longer intervals and as short or shorter rests than an actual workout–but my group rides don’t).
5 Likes
Which suggests that sometimes it IS 
I’d be curious if people had opinions on in what circumstances more is better as a stimulus, and when less creates a larger stimulus.
There is no simple answer to that question.
2 Likes
Well, there was no resting…it was full gas for the middle 35 miles of the ride. So I had a few attacks/long pulls on the front of a minute or so at 400-600 watts plus a few sprints…but pulling off and settling in to ‘recover’ was still always tempo/threshold. The group stayed at 26-30mph the whole ride once we got out of the city.
Yea just out of curiosity I looked at the ride…heart rate sat at 160-195 for an hour straight.
2 Likes
Just to expand on what my real question is…I dont think I or anyone else is questioning whether structure itself has value…I trust that is the case. I’m wondering if anyone has something that could quantify the benefit of structure vs non structure; specifically assuming all other criteria are equivalent, and where the scale tips from 1 to the other.
For example…are we to believe that one would be faster doing 1 60 minute structured workout, vs 20 hrs a week of unstructured riding consistently? There has to be a tipping point where the expected outcome switches from one side to the other.
2 Likes
I suspect that 6 × 3 minutes all out fast cadence VO2 Max intervals in an hour will do more specifically for your VO2 Max than 18 × 30 seconds (say) at VO2 Max power spread across several hours.
A lot less fun, though. 
2 Likes
Ha yeah. I almost created a thread about that clip. And gee I wonder why users are getting burned out
1 Like
Yea I mean every training question CAN be looked at as “it depends.” But surely there are strong correlations and trends one could looks at to come up with a reasonable range of answers. Otherwise we should just say we dont know that structured work is more efficient than unstructured at all, if the answer to every question is “it depends.”
1 Like
Faster how? Which 60 minute workout? What is your goal?
This is why the answer is “it depends”.
It seems to me that everyone seems to forget that TR has always been about the “Time Crunched Cyclist”.
Not the 20 hours to noodle about every week cyclists 
8 Likes
Well, since we’re looking for specifics…I’ll just use my own situation lol!
Currently in SSB2, working towards CX racing in the fall. The weekday group ride replaces either the Tuesday 30/30 vo2 type workout, or the Thursday threshold type workout, both of which are 60 minutes. More often it replaces the threshold workout, because I really dislike threshold work solo
Yeah, in this case (I’m not a coach), my gut says you’re missing out by not doing those 30/30s and doing a group ride. I would think the bursts are valuable, but that depends on your CX course. For Threshold, your described group ride where you were holding what I assume is a high percentage of your HR for an hour is probably very good for your CX race, but on the other hand, doing Threshold intervals at higher power could also push up your ability to go faster for longer. It depends :-p
1 Like
I’ve posted data about myself, here is one of a handful of threads where I attempt to summarize:
This pic in particular:
along with power curves:
and if you look at the thread linked above, basically I got faster simply by pushing my average hours/week up to 7-8.
Simply put, I trained harder than TR in the 2-year self coached era and “got fast” and then with TR dropped hours/week and kept most of the intensity (pic above), and got slower. Then with FasCat and a coach, increased hours again and dropped intensity. Nowadays most of my training is endurance/conditiioning with some intervals. And the intervals I do now are not focused on repeatability and fixed to some % FTP in erg. Instead, like my self-coached days my intervals are done outside and a good percentage of them are designed to push myself near limits (see my Colby Pearce Interview thread and podcast for that coaching approach).
Thats me. IMHO you need to figure out who you are as an athlete and train to your strengths/weaknesses.
1 Like
Yea that’s my fairly uncertain anecdotal conclusion as well. I seem to get larger gains when doing 8-10hrs a week of majority unstructured rides during the summer, vs following the ~6 hr mid volume TR plan to the T over winter.
1 Like
Its definitely individual, although at a high-level and in general, volume drives fitness. Where the crossover is, well again its individual and depends on a lot of things, such as:
- training age
- genetics
- off-the-bike stress
- ability to recover
etc.
So of course you see people use the TrainerRoad approach and achieve excellent results.
I clearly need a lot more aerobic endurance and conditioning work, in order to do the really hard work. And small doses of really hard work seem to have a big impact on driving my fitness gains, along with the slow&steady gains from doing the ‘easy’ conditioning work.
4 Likes
- nutrition
- training history
- quality of sleep
- and more
“But I want a simple answer!!”
Sorry…“It depends”.
2 Likes