My understanding of TrainNow is some of the benefits help those who don’t currently use a training plan with because they don’t have a race or just don’t want to be tied to a plan for whatever reason and for those who maybe are on a low volume plan and want to add in a workout which I guess that then factors into AT.
But I know in a podcast Nate specifically said you can solely use TrainNow and still progress in your cycling fitness. Obviously different than if you were following a plan with a specific event in mind.
I currently have a coach so following her plan as I have some big races I want to check off my list and then I’ll go back to TR for my plans. But once I go back to TR and especially as I get older I’m less interested in racing events so much as just having fun which also means I want a looser trainer schedule where I know I’ll be fit enough to complete events but not locked into certain workouts.
It would not even have to be limited to entire plans, but rather as @TooManyDogs discusses, work as a TrainNow feature.
The way it could work is tracking your Time-in-Zone (TiZ) for each zone (the way WKO5 does) and track the length of your intervals. Progressive TiZ approaches (e.g. Tim Cusick, TP) gradually increase (alternating) increasing the length of the interval and the aggregate TiZ for the zone being focused on in the workout.
TrainNow does this to some extent but with TR workouts, but those workouts may not be what you are trying to focus on (e.g. throws in anaerobic work into SS and threshold efforts). I have been doing this approach since joining TR in 2018. However, it requires using a a large spreadsheet and manually modifying a TR workout or creating my own (WC). A huge time sync such that I often just do some workout that “feels right”. Personally, from monitoring our race team that has largely moved off TR → Zwift, as well as my own experience, I think there is a large opportunity for such a flexible approach.
If they are all subscriber to 189 for a year, which we know is not the case, with so many loyal customers ($99) and people on pay monthly for part of the year, it is more likely to be in the 10-15m region … but that’s if if it’s 150k subscribers
your reels and paid ads should see improvement, organic reach on a typical photo/post (both long form & short) are in the trash.
I manage a few accounts that went from the ~20k total reach to under 2k. Reach from hashtags is ~10% of what it was previously, explore is gone, and the only accounts still performing well are those that had a strong number of posts showing up in their follower’s feed already.
I did a long ride on zwift this morning with a group of hundreds and lots of chat. Discussion of peloton and potential buyers, but no chat related to TR. It surely means all rumors here are baseless.
The first rule of software prototyping is you start over once your prototype works. At least that was the professional advice when i was studying software engineering. I have never seen that done in practice
Pretty sure you can use AT without Plan Builder. I’m not using Plan Builder at the moment, just a mixture of TR blocks and blocks from elsewhere, and for the TR blocks, AT works fine for me.
Agreed, I think not having AT tied solely to Plan Builder is a very good thing. I think Plan Builder can be really useful for people who are starting out and want the structure really planned out for them, but I think there are certainly people out there (myself included at this point) who would prefer to structure things themselves based on their own research in a way that works best for them, and Plan Builder just isn’t flexible enough for that.
Train now, alone, would be an absolute game changer for the vast majority of Zwifters, that don’t have a great understanding of training principles and get lost and confused with the random selection available within Zwift. They probably all want to get faster but don’t know how to go about it.
TrainerRoad want to make people faster. There’s a huge audience of indoor cyclists that want to get faster but don’t know how. It’s such an obvious win-win.
100% agree. I think there are large numbers of cyclists who are not shooting for some elite status but still like seeing progress but just don’t want to get locked into some plan or long term goal setting. They just want to ride X number or times per week.
I’ve never seen that happen. The first question I get asked after a prototype is “so when is that going live” after I’ve already explained thoroughly it’s all hard coded and just smoke and mirrors at this point.
I don’t think most of my cyclist friends have anything but Zwift or Sufferfest on their radar. Occasionally rouvy. I mention TR sometimes but their training is mostly just group rides and riding in general
