I feel like the ‘specialty’ has gone from specialty phase plans. They seem to be lacking the race like efforts.
But I’m starting climbing road race this week, switched to the new plan and still looking forward to trying it.
- What does that look like?
@mcneese.chad I probably could of worded it better. Race simulations would of been better, I mean workouts like Mallory in Rolling Road, dardenelles in TT etc.
All of these plans were built individually, workout-by-workout, so no broad strokes were used. As such, we were able to leverage all of the data we have gotten from our ML and AT to be able to improve progressions but still make sure specific goals were being reached (hence all of the workouts that were created).
The Sustained Power Build and 40k TT plans have very clean and data-backed progressions that focus on raising threshold (Sustained Power Build) and then focus on race-specific intensity (40k TT) with a more substantial taper.
In which regard do you feel the new plans are lacking good progression or specificity?
2 Likes
First, it’s not really an objective assessment, just an eyeball test.
First, just seeing workouts that previously were in SSB2 in SSB1, including several difficult overunders including Warlow, McAdie, and Palisade. In Low Volume you have Leconte. Previously there was nothing really above Sweet Spot in SSB1.
Also just eyeballing the IF. I realize it’s not all the same, but the IF for SSB1 seems roughly similar to SSB2. And SSB2 seems a bit higher overall than it used to be with Threshold workouts right out of the gate and some workouts that previously were in Build.
My feeling prior was SSB1 was really noticeably easier than SSB2 and SSB2 was intense already, almost as intense as general build in my opinion. Now it seems there is nowhere to go hide, If you are new user, welcome to over-unders in your first week.
2 Likes
I think you are missing the context of what Workout Levels mean and how that compares to our perception of workouts in terms of difficulty. And to be clear, everybody is likely in the same boat, but the good news is that understanding will come around really quickly!
There have been many times when I see a workout and think, “That’s only a Level 3.8? No way! That’s way harder and no way I can do that even though I did a 3.6 last week.”. Then I do the workout and realize, “Oh, I guess it is a 3.8 and not too bad!” lol.
And same thing goes for the other way. I’ve had plenty of times where I think, “I can totally do that workout and no way it is a Level 6.7”, but then it destroys me because I’m only at a Level 4.
Point being, our perception of how hard a workout is, even if we’ve done it before, is not as accurate as the classification system provided by ML and AT.
As such, resetting expectations is a process we’ll all go through.
Specifically with these two plans, the goal is to bring about aerobic conditioning in the most effective way possible given the constraints. Leveraging the data provided by ML and AT that we currently have, these new plans are a more achievable and productive way to accomplish those goals.
5 Likes
You are probably right, since I’m not in the beta I haven’t been exposed to workout levels before. I am familiar with those workouts though and know what they require and they are coming up sooner in the progressions than before. Either way, I can manage, just seemed like a pretty dramatic increase in intensity in SSB1 versus what I previously considered to be a progression of TTE I thought was meant to be the base part of sweetspot base.
2 Likes
Completely understandable. I think you’ll dig’em and get better aerobic conditioning as a result. Stoked!
If it works better than the old ‘gradually ramp TSS’ system (I know there was more to it than that), this PL classifications system will be groundbreaking.
1 Like
As far as SSB1 goes I got my buddy on TR for his first year and the whole way through SSB1 LV he was asking when the training is going to start. Granted he also under tested on the ramp IMO (never having paced for a ramp I think this is a common issue for the very new TR users) so some more intensity in the early phases may be good for morale, and maybe start building stronger adaptations earlier for the work to come.
And if the intensity is too high, AT should correct for it. The only concern I have about the adaptations is the mental component: if the workouts start hard and have to get adapted down, the very proud athlete may not want to “downgrade” their work. However start them off easier and suggest an adaptation up, you’ll have people feeling really good about themselves.
Of course feelings don’t really matter, but they kind of do for compliance
3 Likes
@Jonathan - I’m just starting Sustained Power Build LV this week but over past couple months I’ve been consistently doing sweet spot, threshold and v02 workouts at a higher progression level than those in the first 5-6 weeks of the plan (and retested FTP today with little change). Is it worth me following the plan as these workouts would be much easier than what I’ve been doing or use the levels to choose workouts at a level I’ve been doing already and progress throughout the plan. Seems that these easier workouts really need AT to function well?
Maybe it’s clear based on the workout range you reference, but SPB could mean either Short Power Build or Sustained Power Build. So you might want to clarify the one you are using.
1 Like
Cheers Chad, edited post
1 Like
Nice work! I’d take a ramp test and try the new plans.
1 Like
@Jonathan I did FTP test this evening and no change (actually tiny drop), so confident FTP not increased. I’ve been doing stuff like 2x35mins at 90% (sweet spot LV 8), Kaiser -1 (v02 LV 6.8) and Pal isade (threshold LV 5)…so plan starting me on Sil (threshold lv 3.8), hot spring (sweet spot lv 4.9) and Saddle mountain (v02 lv 4.4) just seems bit low…in fact the workouts NEVER reach the levels of the workouts I’ve been successfully doing recently. I generally favour longer 30-40 min) FTP test and wonder if that is a ‘problem’ ?
1 Like
I reckon you have an idea of where your FTP most likely is? You could always try that for now and see how that works with the new plans.
You’re gonna love Adaptive Training – perfect use case!
1 Like
Feel free to add me to the beta!
.
Not done ramp test in ages, for FTP test I do 30-40 min effort and take avg power… historical got v similar result to ramp test when did them close to each other, but prefer longer tests as better workout plus like confidence of KNOWING I can hold that power of extended time.
1 Like
Love seeing the progression level in the calendar - even for custom workouts! Looking forward to full progression level tracking being released.
Question regarding how adjusting intensity/length is dealt with progression wise:
For aerobic rides, I have a basic workout I load, then adjust difficulty depending on how I feel, and extend it as I have time available. So I have one custom workout that works for 1-N hour rides.
I see that the progression level is based on the workout as assigned, so it looks like what I am doing is not likely to provide good input into AT (not in beta yet), as what I’ll get is some kind of ‘superpass’. Are there different levels of superpass? For example my workout is an aerobic 4.1 - if the workout I really do is a aerobic 6 one day, and another is an aerobic 8, do these affect my progression differently? (ie is one more of a superpass than another?)
I guess when it comes to 40k the lack of longer sustained threshold work. I remember the Dardanelles variants and hour record sticking out well during the plan. I think the new 40k plan has a 3x15 or 4x15 as is.
I completely understand that once AT rolls out and the subjective feedback is input things will adjust accordingly. I just know in my memory that those type of workouts were key to me during the plan
2 Likes
Thanks for the tip.