It seems, to me, that PL adds another complicator factor to the equation, and maybe - completely speculating - this layer of complication has been hard to overcome.
Join, for example, uses time in zones to analyse and change the upcoming workouts. So if I did an unstructured ride, it’ll read my TiZ and adapt the next ones based on that TiZ. I don’t know for sure if that is the way it works, although it’s the way it looks.
The prescribed workouts are solely based on zones, power or HR. No PL to overcomplicate. It looks simple for me.
It looks like oversimplification little bit: surely SS90/60 6x10 is quite different from SS90/60 2x30?
I mean, beside IF/TSS, interval length should be considered as well.
Absolutely, it’s an oversimplification. And I have no idea if that is the way Join works. But is really that different?
You have 6x10 (60min @90%) spread in 90min. There will be 30 min of z1 to be accounted for. If you have the same 1x60 with 20min warm up and 10min cool down. It’s 60min TiZ 90% plus 30m z1 to be accounted for. Is there a huge difference in those scenarios? Just because you have 3min between 6x10 and 1 straight 60min.
Also, Join has a way simple workout database. It’s straightforward, and they looked designed for the outdoors - warm-ups and cool-downs way longer than TR.
My point was: PL adds a layer of complication to the equation, and it seems that this has been the issue.
Let me preface my opinion by saying that i’ve never done a 1x60m at 90% effort, but I suspect the difference (in RPE… and likely muscle fatigue)) between 6x10 @90 with 3m z1 recoveries between them to FEEL much different than a 1x60m @90% effort.
@svens perfect, but that is the result of training, we were talking about the famous (infamous?!) WL2 and the possible reasons why it’s so hard to implement.
@Will_Peters I believe it also depends on the circumstances. On a group ride, you’ll do the 60m @90% easier than 60m @90% staring at blue bars in ERG mode.
Yep, understood. I certainly do not grasp whole complexity implementing WLv2 either. Just wanted to point out that it is not as simple as using only IF/TSS/TiZ.
While eagerly waiting for WLv2, I am not too frustrated because of delay – I am quite pedantic and disciplined following workouts outdoors, just like indoors. Beside that I only do lot of additional Z2 rides that haven’t affected AI FTP detection much. It has been always spot on for me, have double checked couple times with long tests.
I get that WLV2 should fix this problem, but I wish TR would push out the fix for this “simply” problem now, and not weight till they solve the world hunger problem for unstructured rides. Plus, pushing out a solution for non-TR created structured rides that are ridden indoors should fix the issues with TR’s workouts that are mis-categorized / inconsistently categorized (e.g., are intervals at 80% of FTP Tempo or Sweet Spot?).
I’m the opposite of this. I find group rides extremely stressful and frustrating as we accordion back and forth, pedal/coast/brake, pull at the front, float in the back, etc., and it’s almost impossible to hold 90% for all those reasons. So, between power surges and drops, and a far higher stress level, I find it far easier to meet workout goals indoors.
For the TR team - if I understood your comment correctly, you’re talking about introducing Peloton style Leaderboard ranking within workouts. If it’s anything like on Peloton, this leads to a lot of negative behavior. People will intentionally skew power output (digital doping) to move up the leaderboard, push intervals into the next zone or sprint at the end to increase output, etc. You may also see lots of negative accusations amongst users. If I misunderstood the comment, I’d gladly be corrected.
The key part regarding WLV2 starts a bit after 38 minutes in. He talks about how RLGL runs on WLV2 and that for even people that train outside all season, not even using TR outside workouts, not even structured, that [Z] will work for them. By [Z] I’m not sure if @Nate_Pearson meant RLGL, WLV2 or both. It sounds like he meant RLGL but I’m still not sure after re-listening.
