Okay, Ive sent a message to the team to investigate. Thank you!
2 Likes
Looking into it, thanks for the report.
OK, did a test on my PC & Android apps with workout that finished at 30% of FTP which seems common.
- I want 65% of FTP Endurance target for my extended Cool Downs.
- This requires a Workout Intensity setting of 217% (vs the default 100%).
PC Results:
- I got a total of 18 seconds running from 100% to 217%. This appears to be totally linear in progression and never “speeds up” like it’s supposed to with the continuous press.
- I got the same 18 seconds back down to 100%. This would obviously change if the final workout power was higher, or a person wanted a lower target for their extension.
Android Results:
- I got a total of 5 seconds running from 100% to 217%. Same 5 seconds getting back down to 100%.
- This clearly does the non-linear progression it’s supposed to do and definitely speeds up to make the process quicker than the PC version.
Not sure about Apple stuff, but there is at least one clear winner (Android) and loser (PC) with respect to the continuous press function.
- Can this be reviewed and the actual progression added wherever it’s lacking?
ah! I think the code to increase the speed was never added to desktop.
On desktop you can type in the number. So you can type in 217 and the chart will update.
I’ll get someone to make sure the button press is the same between platforms
3 Likes
I’ve never had it work anywhere near that smoothly when I’ve tried it across any of the devices I’ve used (various android over the last few years).
I use resistance mode exclusively so it’s never been a deal breaker, but I’ve tried in the past and holding it down ended up with wild overshooting/glitching of the number.
I have wished for a similar feature for the extending cooldown though. It used to be that you could tap the +10min the required number of times before it loaded the changes (eg 6 or 9 times for 60 or 90min) which was great.
Then there was the big app refresh and I was told that was never how it was intended to be used.
Now it’s, click - +10 - load, click +10 - load, …
I’m not sure if this has been asked, but I’m a commuter, so I’d like to say I have 2-a-day opportunities. Specifically, I want to say I specifically have X minutes in the morning and Y in the evening.
The Block Builder (or whatever its called) is letting me double up on a day (drag workouts) and select X and Y minutes; or do anything schedule wise. But I’m having no success in getting anything to adapt into my plan. I’ve asked support but I’ve had nothing back yet, they are probably busy with 100s of other folk who have similar problems; so I’ll carry on moving things manually on the day for now.
@Nate_Pearson Just tried this (as I had the issue of selected durations being overwritten). I could fix that, but then it defaulted me from Masters to normal, and didn’t seem to have a “Masters Plan” toggle?
I think I am running into the same issue 
1 Like
We’ve got some engineers looking into this now. Thanks for pointing it out!
1 Like
Support had me delete my old plan and re-add it using the same dates and customising it as I pleased (Masters plan, training days, workout durations, indoors/outdoors). It seems to have sorted it fast for now.
2 Likes
This is especially a problem for longer rides. The intensity adjustment feature lags more and more the longer a ride goes. Over two hours, the feature is almost unusable if hardware isn’t brand new. I have an iPad that’s a few years old. It’s like it’s recalculating the entire ride with each press, and the longer the ride is, the more work it has to do.
1 Like
This is probably the issue. It’s re-rendering the graph for every button press. Longer ride = more data-points to recalculate.
2 Likes
A 1:1 work:rest ratio would be great for parents who attempt to make peace with a week on / week off parenting schedule. I suggest this use case might be quite common. At the moment I won’t be switching to masters (even though I am a master), but will stick to a 3:1 ratio and then manually modify the second week to be … reduced
3 Likes
There exists such a thing as a parent? I’ll have to tell my wife about this! 
Every time my plan rebuilds, it forgets all my block preferences. eg I swim on tues and Thursday, long run tues night, track training thurs night… I set all this up and then want to make a small change to my plan and have to start all over again. It makes doing “what if” changes a nightmare.
2 Likes
This is great! How do I switch the Sunday ride from Sweetspot to Endurance? It didn’t change automatically in the plan I already had set up.
@Nate_Pearson I liked the podcast and love the new custom time feature in plan builder.
I still think there needs to be more transparency into what goes into building/changing the plans and the science/reasoning behind it. Anecdotally, my all-time best ftp was after a winter of doing the old SSBHVI/II strictly/religiously. That meant 4+ high level 90-120min sweet spot workouts a week. Now any base plan is going to have at most 2 sweet spot workouts a week, sometimes only 1, and base plans have included vo2 max and threshold workouts effectively year round. That’s a significant shift in philosophy for TR and anyone who’s done TR’s plans for years. Night and day difference, in fact. What inspired this change? Were people getting burnt doing too much sweet spot, or more likely to plateau? Are you you following the trend in modern training philosophies aside from what you see in the data?
What bugs me a bit too is the back-and-forth between sweet spot and endurance rides as well. The justification I’ve heard on the podcast many times is that “well, nobody was doing the z2 rides inside…so we figured sweet spot would be a better alternative.” To me personally, other people’s lack of adherence shouldn’t justify a change to a plan, IF the plan is fundamentally better. I want a plan that’s going to make me the fastest I can possibly be genetically, not the one that’s most convenient to everyone else. I think consistency and time is probably the most important factor to fitness overall and thats’s what most weekend warriors and causal cyclists struggle with the most. So from TR’s perspective it’s better to have someone on the bike, doing workouts and progressing even if they’re easier/shorter than not doing any work. That adherence will most likely generate the most fitness and if people keep getting fitter they’re more likely to keep subscribing. I worry at the ends of the bell curve, for people who are already consistent and put in the time year-after-year, that doesn’t work as well though and that creeps into TR’s decision making and the AI algorithm. If a 3-4hr z2 ride is better than a 2hr sweet spot ride, then it’s better, period…and should be prescribed as such.
6 Likes
Those are all really good questions. I think providing well-thought-out answers would be beneficial to TR as a business.
1 Like
If an item on the restaurant never sells it gets taken off the menu.
As for the why… you kind of answered it in your post. You said you were your best when you held to a plan religiously (i.e. consistency). If people skip the workout it is better to have an alternative they will complete. That said, a long endurance ride is vital to any endurance program. Runners do a long run… Cyclists do a long ride.
But long rides on the trainer suck. So in an effort to get a similar work load the intensity needs to be increased. Not ideal but something is better than nothing. Now that more and more are using TR for structure outside and the ever reclusive release of WLv2 the long endurance ride is back.
4 Likes