@mcneese.chad I do just as you note, I link fairly well executed Z2 rides to endurance workouts, but I generally don’t use the outdoor version of the workout itself. Why? Because outdoor unavoidable stops and starts really screw up all the readings on my workout as I’m rolling. On the other hand, I’ve developed an alternative that I’d like to get some opinions on: when doing a straight endurance ride (and I get a lot of them, because I’m on a high volume Master’s plan :-), I use the regular Garmin ride function, and I hit the lap button just before and after any unavoidable stops. In this way, i have clarity on my avg. power and normalized power for as long as I can go continuously. for those laps I strive to harmonize NP and AP, usually succeeding. Overall then, in review, I can look at all the “on” laps and check my level of compliance. I think this has really helped me dial in Z2 rides. In some local I ride, it is often easy for me to get multiple 15 to 40 minutes segments of uninterrupted Z2, over a 90 to 120 minute workout. Thoughts?
As said in my answer to Nate in that other thread, I’m a bit confused.
This first part is exactly what I remember Nate talking about in a podcast around 2 months ago. So is TR starting over with WLv2 yet again for the second time now or is this referring to the start over we already heard 2 months ago?
Overall this sounds a bit like no real news and therefore really disillusioning as it seems to me that we should not expect WLv2 for this northern hemisphere summer once again 
- News = News (even if you don’t like the info or fact it means a desired feature is not near release).
Progression sometimes include regression (2 steps forward, 1 step back), and that’s what I read in Nate’s comment.
- His wording seems fuzzy (perhaps on purpose) but I read that as a 2nd restart, which would mean the 3rd iteration of WLV2 starting most recently. Hopefully he can clarify, but regardless of the actual version steps, it seems that we are still not close to any new WL system seeing broad access anytime soon.
Thoughts: Anything we can do to gamify true zone 2 workouts is a plus 
Hitting the lap button sounds like a good idea to me. Sounds like it keeps you in the game, and provides more interesting post-workout data. If I didn’t have rails to trails for uninterrupted riding, you’d probably have me doing it 
Whatever works for you? I’ve come to the conclusion it doesn’t matter, just let the timer run. And think in terms of a range of power, not a specific target. I’ve done a huge amount of endurance riding over the last 4 years, and thats what I’ve learned.
I’ve posted some stuff in the past, an example from last year:
After the first 10 minutes into a 100 minute (1:40:00) endurance interval this was on my Garmin:
130W average, and 169W NP.
Ignore that… pretty good compliance just looking at the last 2 minutes of power in that real-time power graph right on my bike computer.
Post ride its easier to see compliance in TrainingPeaks:
Intervals I highlight 30-sec power (dark blue / purple line), as it won’t display a power range. Plus 30-sec power is a much better indicator of the demand on your body:
Changing my thinking to that way, over 4 years ago, and I was quickly able to make erg-like power outside.
Looks like a workout predictor is in the works. Not sure if this is the right thread for this. @mcneese.chad @Nate_Pearson
I use Xert, but always miss the TR training plans. Yes, I can import my own to Xert and select the next ride in my sequence, but it’s a bit of a heath robinson workaround. When I queried, I was told “just select today’s recommended training” … which isn’t quite the same thing - by a couple of light years.
Absolutely. The modeling is terrific, but ultimately just from a mental standpoint, it’s nice to have a program.
Woah, I just noticed the ML System comment predicting the right workout. Has there been more discussion about this elsewhere on the forum?
The $2 thread has some comments from Nate - without clicking back I think the earliest is this upcoming week for early access
Recent comments. Note that the things that are supposedly coming soon are other sports impacting your RLGL. But evaluating workout levels for outdoor rides sounds like it’s a year or more away, surprise, surprise.
If they get that last section done, or even better with outside WLV2, I’ll definitely be back to try TR. The gap is too big right now.
I saw that post about WLV2 coming for TR workouts. Honestly, I don’t even know what that means. I thought we already had workout levels for TR workouts. Does that mean that it’s going to look at work actually done during the workout rather than assuming the prescribed workout was completed? You’d think those things would be pretty close to each other in most cases, so I’m not sure what the new feature is going to include. If you are building an engine/logic/AI/whatever that can look at actual work performed and translate that into reasonable levels and zone adaptations, it seems like it shouldn’t matter if there is a TR workout “guiding” the session or not. Or maybe they are using the TR workout definition as high level guidance and then making minor tweaks based on actual work completed. That wouldn’t move the needle for me, but I guess maybe it’s a stepping stone to something bigger? I just hope/wish they aren’t trying to boil the ocean here with looking at non-TR rides. A huge step (in my opinion) would be just giving credit for obvious intervals and endurance blocks rather than trying to pick out zones and progressions from rides that are all over the place. Sure, it would be nice to get some “credit” for the hard saturday group ride that is just a mess of power spikes and no intervals, but don’t let that requirement get in the way of releasing something useful that could work within a set of reasonable guidelines. There are lots of tools out there that can identify intervals/zones from a ride file without having a workout definition. Some suck, some are OK, but certainly good enough to be much better than nothing.
If a ride is a mess/mix of zones, ignore what isn’t easy to identify and make those kind of efforts wlv3 and get on with releasing something useful for the more structured “unstructured” rides. I might be in the minority on that desire, but it seems like trying to make sense of totally unstructured rides could bog you down forever and prevent real progress. Analysis paralysis as it’s often called. Or letting the pursuit of perfection get in the way of meaningful progress.
Totally agree. With 2 price increases in 2 years for me I don’t think it’s unfair to expect more actual deliverables. Think minimal-viable-products (well, features…). It can’t be that hard to
identify outdoor z2 rides and slap endurance levels on them. Maybe some basic threshold and vo2 intervals. I don’t need every outdoor workout to get a level assigned. And certainly it would be madness trying to apply to many races. Waiting for the perfect solution here appears to be a fools errand.
Yes, but this is just the next version. It is my understanding that with WLv1 the PL scores of TR workouts needed to be tweaked by hand. I found some that have not been classified correctly (e. g. sweet spot workouts with breaks were scored slightly harder than ones without breaks but the same total duration at sweet spot).
You’d also want consistency between indoor and outdoor rides.
Interesting question, I was thinking the same thing.
I think there are plenty of differences, e. g. how to deal with breaks (e. g. because of traffic lights or having to wait at an intersection) or changes in power due to circumstances (wind, having to accommodate traffic).
Yes, although that isn’t the only thing that matters. If you want to find quantitative metrics, it might simply not be that easy.
I agree with you that TR should be more pragmatic and just focus on taking smaller steps towards solving this problem. It seems the learnings along the way are necessary to improve the situation. Personally, I’d start with scoring endurance rides since harder, unstructured rides most likely won’t push the PL needles. (That doesn’t mean those rides aren’t good or useful, just that their utility cannot be easily measured with PLs.)
I suspect that RLGL will have bigger impact than scoring of outdoor rides for many athletes. If RLGL takes sleep data into account, it’d be even better as it is for me right now.
I share your confusion…I was asking myself if that means that I still need to be on a plan (like TR logic mostly depends on that plan) or would this work with TrainNow and just doing my own structured riding.
Inflation? Money is not worth what it was, not by a long chalk. How about they adjust for inflation, and then increase price based on deliverables? 
Hey all. Been a minute since I was on here. Is WLV2 still a thing? Name/rebranding? Looking to specifically see when unstructured outdoor rides will be evaluated, given a rating for their impact, and shown. Anyone able to direct me to the correct thread? Thanks
If I remember the podcast/thread comments correctly… they hit a road block, learned a lot, scrapped it and are starting over. Some parts are used for red light / green light.