Trainerroad

themighty

I find it great, though agree with the complaints about intensity. I've blown up on build before using the cycling plans. I've recommended it to friends but always with the caveat that they'll probably need to switch out one intense session per week.

I'm on the full distance Tri mid volume plan at the moment. The intensity is much more manageable than the cycling plans. I still tend to swap out one sweetspot session for zone 2 so I can add in some intervals on the run (the run structure is pretty limited).

Macy0161

Is that not partly the volume picked though? With WFH I do have time for High Volume, but I know I couldn't handle it, so I stick at mid volume and add endurance to that (extra day of an endurance workout, and using extend cooldown feature at the end of intense workouts).

When I was trying to add running on top of the cycling plans it was too much - trying to follow TR for the bike, and a separate plan for running. I ended up burnt out on the bike and injured from the running. I really haven't found it too much since I just focused on, and prioritised, the bike. Only when I've added 4th or 5th intense rides with zwift racing.

themighty

That's pretty much what happened to me. I was on LV bike plan and tried to add easy running (I'd been out for a while) - just exploded.

I'm doing something similar with the plan as you. I swap out the VO2 workouts for tougher ones and add Z2 to the end. I think the intensity is a bit of a feature though, I looked at doing the Olympic MV plan as a warm-up to the half or full distance. The build phase has 4-5 days of intensity some weeks, between run and bike (didn't look at the swim, prob another there). That's crazy even on the reduced hours. 3 is max for me. I know that the intensity comes down as the volume goes up, but I'm not sure it's balanced correctly.

Edit: Just to be clear I'm a huge fan of the app, I'll be sticking with it. Learning to adjust the plans to suit your training needs is a must and it's set up to make it as easy as possible.

Mr. Cats

It’s interesting that the replies here are mostly saying that there’s too much intensity and adjusting the plans a bit to suit is necessary. Seems like there might be something in the original video critique.

When swapping out intensity, in the past I’ve done it by stretching out the time between intense sessions - so doing over 4 weeks what’s prescribed for 3 etc. This has suited me as I always need Monday out to recover from a Sunday group ride. In that way I’ve felt that I completed all the rides in the plan, just taking a bit longer to do it.

themighty

Mr. Cats wrote: »

When swapping out intensity, in the past I’ve done it by stretching out the time between intense sessions - so doing over 4 weeks what’s prescribed for 3 etc. This has suited me as I always need Monday out to recover from a Sunday group ride. In that way I’ve felt that I completed all the rides in the plan, just taking a bit longer to do it.

That's a good approach. There's a Master's thread on the TR forum that suggests something similar. Think Chad McNeese had a plan built up that way, if you search for that.

In fairness to TR they're pretty clear that the plans won't be perfect for everyone. I just know myself that I can handle a lot of volume but I get fried on the intensity. Someone else might be fine on it.

Last week I'd my VO2 set, then back to back 3x20 (Thurs and Fri), then tempo on Sunday. Still feeling a bit frazzled today. I'd normally drop one off the sweetspots. In future I'm going to go Z2 on the Thursday and progress the sweetspot to 2x30 3x25 and out on the Friday.

Macy0161

I think there's an element that people who've struggled go on the internet to complain about it myself. A bit like if you go looking for reviews of (say) a turbo trainer, the facebook groups would make you think there's reliability issues, when really no one goes on to say "it's grand".

My mid volume plan is 3 days intensity/ hard and one sweet spot. For the sweet spot the weekly tips always say there's the option of doing something less intense but longer. My big takeaway from that thread is how few actually read the weekly tips and/ or workout texts!

My "moderate" workout for next week has the following in the weekly tips...

This week of training closes out with some ol' fashioned, no-frills Sweet Spot repeats bent on lifting your sustained power capabilities in a gentler manner than less forgiving Threshold repeats. But if you want things even gentler (but longer), replace Antelope with Boarstone +3 or gentler (and longer) still, Town Hill.

Also, the youtube is criticising just the build, of high volume.

JimmiesRustled

Most of the complaints seem to be about burnout or failing workouts.

My 2 cents on the topic, and from reading around on both the Trainerroad forum and on here, is that the issue is your FTP being set too high rather than the workouts being too strenuous.

It goes back to what I've spoken about before on here with regards testing FTP. Lads heading out and doing a 20 minute test and treating the value held for 20 minutes as their new FTP. When questioned about it the idea that 95% is pretty much 100% seems to be often floated and that's before you get into the fact that a 5 minute W' depletion effort is supposed to be made before the 20 minute effort.

95% of 20 minutes, while generally accepted, isn't the case for everyone. Some may be able to hold for an hour what they hold for 20 minutes in which case it would be 100%. While others may struggle to hit 80% of their 20 minute power over an hour.

I remember back when TR were developing the ramp test it originally started as 70% of your last one minute and I think this was increased to 75%. The issue I have here is that yes they increased the value but it was based on aligning the Ramp test with the 20 minute test.

You now have people that have done both saying that their ramp and 20 minute test are between 5-10 watts off so they'll just stick with the ramp test.

So if you take an example of that. You decide to do both a ramp and a 20 minute test back to back, this is assuming you're 100% recovered. You average 316 watts for 20 minutes, which gives you an FTP of 300. In your ramp test you do slightly better and you average 407 watts for the last minute giving you an FTP of 305 watts.

You take the 305 figure because it looks better.

You've a 25 mile TT coming up which will mean an hour of power for this example. It's on the same bike as the Ramp and 20 minute test. You're going to try and average 305 for the hour. You manage 270. Which means that your FTP has technically been set too high the whole time. Instead of 95% of 20 minutes it should have been 85%.

Your sweetspot intervals have all been threshold and above. You over unders are over overs.

Sweetspot should be uncomfortable comfortable. You should be able to do them 4 times a week without burning out. Obviously there are external factors including work and family etc that impact your recovery/sleep.

The way some people test their FTP is mad. It's like I was saying to one of the lads in the club; If you can hold 400 watts for 8 minutes its the same as 20 minutes. If you were able to hold it for 8 minutes, you were definitely able to hold it for 12 minutes. If you're at 12 minutes then 20 minutes is only 8 minutes away and you've already done 8 minutes. That's the type of mental gymnastics you see from some people when FTP is involved.

As Macy has already more or less pointed out, if you feel rubbish the day of your interval session. Take a break or failing that hop on the bike, see how you feel after 10 minutes and then make the decision.

themighty

The inflated FTP is a good point. The ramp takes 74% of the last minute. I think even if people are using the ramp for FTP it still won't be accurate for everybody. Even if it's only high for ~5% you still end up with a pretty vocal contingent.

In my own experience I've burnt out quite bit in the past. My current FTP was set 10 weeks ago after 3 weeks off the bike, I comfortably cover 3x20 with Z2 HR and I'm flying through VO2 and threshold workouts. So, FTP not too high. It's less the effect on the body, more that sleep gets affected and I end up paying for it a few weeks down the road. Maybe I'm just getting old though

Macy0161

themighty wrote: »

It's less the effect on the body, more that sleep gets affected and I end up paying for it a few weeks down the road. Maybe I'm just getting old though

Hadn't thought of the potential of timing of training. I workout in the morning, so no impact on sleep from intense workouts close to sleep.

There's so much noise on the TrainerRoad forum about the Ramp Test. For me, it underestimates what I can hold on longer efforts - I just dial down VO2 max. Others that are stronger on VO2 max it seems to overstate it. I still think they have the compliance data to show it works for the vast majority.

themighty

Macy0161 wrote: »

For me, it underestimates what I can hold on longer efforts - I just dial down VO2 max. Others that are stronger on VO2 max it seems to overstate it. I still think they have the compliance data to show it works for the vast majority.

I'm generally the same, I've struggled with VO2 work previously and coast the steady state.

Normally I'd run or swim in the mornings and bike in the evenings, should prob switch them over now that the pools are closed. Would prob solve the sleep issues alright - I'm just getting soft with the sleep ins.

Lumen

My 2c:

Ramp tests are an utterly bullsh!t way of measuring thresholds unless you have someone taking bloods. They're good fun and not very tiring, but if they produce an accurate number it's only by pure chance.

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

Your sweetspot intervals have all been threshold and above. You over unders are over overs

This has been my experience as a first time user of TR coming back from many years of declining cycling. Fortunately I know my own body from racing years ago, so when I found myself hitting my old threshold HR doing Carson, and failing under/over workouts like McAdie+1, I knew something was up.

The issue isn't just that ramp tests can produce inaccurate FTP estimates, it's that typical intensity-heavy TR training actually trains you to be better at ramp tests more than it raises your FTP. So you see this incredible gain, +50W FTP in 50 days in my case, but the workouts get steadily more impossible! I haven't burned out as I'm been ramping TSS very gradually (now up to about 400 after two months) but if I carried on it would go bad soon.

Also, TR forums are a cult. The podcasters/coaches are revered and criticism is met with Tesla/Mac/whatever emotive fanboi pile ons. I've read several threads where people are complaining that their outdoor group riding is negatively affecting their indoor TR workouts. WTF? There are people cultivating 350W FTPs with daily interval sessions who barely cycle outdoors at all (even with no COVID restrictions), apparently only "race" twice a year, and I suspect they're not even proper races but sportives/gran fondos.

I've decided to keep my TR sub going for now, but I've decided to limit hard workouts to 3 times a week and do Z2 for the rest. If my pseudo-FTP suffers as a result, so be it, but I think I'll be a stronger cyclist. If I can be arsed to keep it up.

Hopefully we can ride properly outside again soon. It's still turbo training and it's still hateful.

Macy0161

Lumen wrote: »

I've decided to keep my TR sub going for now, but I've decided to limit hard workouts to 3 times a week and do Z2 for the rest.

Is that not the plans though? At mid volume, it's 3 hard workouts, and one moderate (with weekly tips to swap for something longer and lower intensity). They've said on the podcast that they only put in the moderate one as they were getting so little compliance with the longer zone 2 one (i.e. people swapped it for something shorter and more intense!).

I think training for a ramp test depends on the plan(s) picked. It certainly hasn't been my experience of doing a couple of seasons using it for endurance events, so sustained power build/ century speciality. I'm doing General Build this time, so I guess I'll see does my ramp test number match my sustained effort number.

fwiw I did the Kolie Moore baseline test last time, and got to 50 minutes (so up the ramp). I verified that with Lamarck. I got through Carparthian Peak +2 over and unders at that "FTP". That "FTP" was 13% above my ramp test result.

They're also not the only ones using a ramp test to be fair either.

Lumen

Macy0161 wrote: »

Is that not the plans though? At mid volume, it's 3 hard workouts, and one moderate (with weekly tips to swap for something longer and lower intensity). They've said on the podcast that they only put in the moderate one as they were getting so little compliance with the longer zone 2 one (i.e. people swapped it for something shorter and more intense!).

I think training for a ramp test depends on the plan(s) picked. It certainly hasn't been my experience of doing a couple of seasons using it for endurance events, so sustained power build/ century speciality. I'm doing General Build this time, so I guess I'll see does my ramp test number match my sustained effort number.

fwiw I did the Kolie Moore baseline test last time, and got to 50 minutes (so up the ramp). I verified that with Lamarck. I got through Carparthian Peak +2 over and unders at that "FTP". That "FTP" was 13% above my ramp test result.

They're also not the only ones using a ramp test to be fair either.

Picking one at random, SSBMVII, every week has four interval workouts and one 60 min Z2 (Petitt).

IMO that's just wrong. I understand the argument that people don't want to do Z2, but that's no excuse for prescribing wrong.

It shouldn't be necessary to watch podcasts or pick out hints about this. Their default plans should be sensible out of the box.

This, combined with the heavy reliance on ramp tests is a recipe for bad training.

Anyway, there's a recent thread on the TR forums that goes into the arguments from both sides at excruciating length for hundreds of posts.

I'm still of the opinion that it's a cult. :pac:

Macy0161

It's in the weekly tips in the app though regarding the "Sunday" workout? It's not like it's that well hidden - what I quoted earlier is direct lift from the calendar/ plan in the app.

In normal times I swap that one for the club spin - whether that is zone 2 really depends on who is out!

Shoco83

I’ve been using TrainerRoad for years now. I always only ever did the low volume plans even though I have the time to do the mid volume plans. I find that works great for me. This gives me time to just ride my bike for fun, or if I’m doing a work out outdoors I do the workout first then just ride after that with what eve time I have left.

I have no issues with the intensity at all, sure there are some workouts that I feel like I’m gonna struggle through but always even to get there which is the point.

Macy0161

Pretty big announcement yesterday - still in closed beta, but adaptive training. Adjusts based upon your past performance, goals, strengths/ weaknesses. I tried to watch the youtube this morning, but the cognitive load on top of carpathian peak over unders was too much!

Today, we’re thrilled to finally announce Adaptive Training!

This is an entirely new foundation of TrainerRoad that uses machine learning, science-based coaching principles, and our unprecedented data set to give you the right workout, every time.

Adaptive Training does this all through taking your performance, life, and goals into account, intelligently adjusting your training to help you get faster.

Adaptive Training is aimed at solving problems like:

Having an easier time with one training zone compared to another
Feeling like the Ramp Test doesn’t work for you
Feeling like you just aren’t good at a particular training zone
Missing workouts and wondering what to do next, whether it’s just a few workouts or multiple weeks of training
We’re talking about this in detail on our podcast now if you want to check it out!

dahat

I’d be interested to hear how you find it over time given that you’ve been a long standing TR user.

Lumen

Will be interesting to see what's in this adaptive training thing.

I'm finding the Fitness charts in intervals.icu really helpful to keep me in the "green zone", complementary to steady TSS ramping in the TR career screen.

I'm not doing any periodisation because rest weeks are a grim prospect in lockdown.

bp_me

You can play with the outlines of adaptive right now by using "TrainNow" which is already live in the production (or definitely beta) applications. It's leveraging the same ML model.

Macy0161

dahat wrote: »

I’d be interested to hear how you find it over time given that you’ve been a long standing TR user.

I signed up but I'd say it will be a while before I'm in, as it was a good while after the podcast broadcast.

Interesting thing for me, who's messed around with testing protocols as the ramp test understates for me, is that you do the ramp test. And then it adjusts, say VO2 max or sweet spot based upon your past compliance. If I understand it correctly. I haven't time to watch the full podcast - hoping to actually go for a within 5km spin tomorrow rather than the CI race, so I'll try and listen then with the single ear bud.

I know they've been working on it for years anyway. They're also supposed to address the whole sweet spot v polarised thing as well.

Jimbo789

The Trainer Road podcast this week is about polarized training and their response to the criticism by people like Dylan Johnson.

adrian522

I've signed up for trainer road and received a month trial.

I did the ramp test but it seems like the workouts based off it are a little too easy. Well I've only done one so far but didn't feel like I had to work that hard during it.

Should I do the ramp test again or do a few more workouts before deciding? I think you can manually increase the score/FTP anyway. I'm using a dumb trainer with a speed sensor and had the trainer set to the lowest resistance during the test.

Also is it stupid starting into a plan now a good chance I'll end up doing most of my cycling outdoors for the next few months?

themighty

What plan are you on? You can tell how hard the workout is supposed to be based on the IF of the workout. If it's an hour at 0.5 to 0.7 it should be very comfortable. Above 0.9 would be extremely difficult. If you're on sweetspot base low volume 1 I think the first one is Ericsson -1, which is not too bad. If you're on mid-volume it's Taku which is very, very easy.

Things ramp up pretty quickly. If you think you gave the Ramp test a good shot I'd give it a couple of workouts before adjusting your FTP. It can be a little too high or low for people. The adaptive training is coming to everyone in a few weeks so it should adjust everything for you in future, if you find workouts too easy.

Check your tyre pressure regularly if you're using a wheel-on trainer - it can affect the resistance.

As regards signing up for the summer if you've a Garmin or Wahoo head unit you can push the workouts to it and use them outside. I've yet to do it but I'm hoping to make use of it in the summer. I'm still using the 920xt it's not compatible unfortunately. Last year I did 1 or 2 of the hard sessions indoors and did my longer rides outdoors. Make the most of the month, and see how you get on with it. I've spare referrals if you want another one later.

Lumen

If you think your FTP is set too low from a ramp test, do the 20 min FTP test.

That'll knock some sense into you :pac:

adrian522

Thanks, the workout was Goddard -4 , 45 mins. IF = 0.83.

The next one is Erricson -1, IF = 0.76.

Interesting that it can be done outside, I must check if I can push it to my Garmin watch.

themighty

adrian522 wrote: »

Thanks, the workout was Goddard -4 , 45 mins. IF = 0.83.

The next one is Erricson -1, IF = 0.76.

Interesting that it can be done outside, I must check if I can push it to my Garmin watch.

I've done Goddard but not the - 4. I don't remember it being very hard. There are definitely a few workouts like Taylor - 2 and Bluebell that most find easy despite having highish IFs, especially if you're anaerobically inclined.

See how you get on with Ericsson, and judge from there I guess.

adrian522

Thanks, the workout was a series of 1 minute intervals, followed by 2 longer intervals but at a lower intensity.

I'll follow the plan for a week or 2 before making any changes I think. I guess it would be more accurate with a power meter or something but I don't have that at the moment.

I'll check the tyre pressure as well to check all is ok there.

themighty

Just double checked, my watch is covered by outside workouts now. I'll be training outside a lot more from now on .

adrian522

Where is the lust of compatible devices? My Saturday workout seems to be just a steady effort but for inside it has 90 mins but outside it says 135 mins.

themighty

adrian522 wrote: »

Where is the lust of compatible devices? My Saturday workout seems to be just a steady effort but for inside it has 90 mins but outside it says 135 mins.

https://support.trainerroad.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032333891-Garmin-Devices-Compatible-with-Outside-Workouts

At the moment the longer Z2 rides just get 50% added to them when you go outside. I think the rationale is that there's no coasting on the trainer so you get more work done indoors. It's all rolling hills near me so I mostly don't bother. I might add another 30 mins to the longer 3-4 hour rides. They're supposed to be revising that when they update the plans.