I get you know. 
1 Like
Thanks, @mcneese.chad
When I try to add PB, it wants to start me all over with Base - even if A/B events are in a couple months. Is the only way around that to backdate it to approximately when I started training this winter? thx
Having a similar issue to other above. Did the “update” with the new rollout last night. Logged in this AM to check things and everything related to my plans started auto-deleting. Now I have a blank calendar.
1 Like
It’s not the only way, but the most common way.
You can mess with the “Experience” settings during the PB setup. Between the 4 choices, it can alter what gets added for phases, especially if you are aiming to not do the backdate process.
Picking the Advanced and Expert should tend to avoid repeating Base for sure, and possibly Build too, but that depends on the total time from now until your event. So pick one and go to the Overview, see what it offers, then step back to “Exp” again, change it and see again in Overview. Pick whatever looks closest to what you want, assuming it gets something desired.
I get that this will increase average pass rates across the board. And I see in the comment above that completion rate is again a key motivator in driving these to an easier state. I have seen friends join and blow up thanks to over-assessed ramp FTP and too hard a plan - so this is good for TR’s business to ease people in. I wish it had been like that when I started. All good stuff.
The concern that still seems to not be heard in this thread is more that after years of work to learn to manage higher loads, and developing to the point that you can do so, and finding how to dial in the right individualized FTP, seeing results, and hearing repeatedly how when you plateau, you need to experiment with increasing volume or intensity, why would we suddenly trust on faith that a plan that dramatically and abruptly cuts volume and intensity is going to be successful for us? (of course short term, anyone that does this is going to be super fresh and have a great few weeks… so that may actually reinforce a potentially bad data conclusion - but at what long term expense?)
And Jonathan already acknowledges that if it was really available, AT will do exactly what we are trying to do ourselves and raise the level -
And multiple suggestions to just go find workouts that match the levels you were doing before - e.g. in the legacy plans - so we’re apparently not crazy to do that - yet are simultaneously told no, just abandon it and give blind faith to this new reduced plan.
It seems that every post asking about simply enabling access to the legacy plans somewhere for continuity until an functioning AT solution is really available to us has been ignored by Jonathan and Nate, so I guess we have our answer - they seem hardened in their position and unwilling to hear the voice of their customers on this point.
The strongest TR fans have argued nobody should be upset about the very slow AT rollout after all the hype - we still had the same product we always did - and that’s fair. But actually now we don’t. Now we’ve got to go hunt around for replacement workouts to stay on track with what we were doing, search through our old histories to manually piece together our plans in an app that we paid to organize this for us. Not cool… once I’m doing that much work, I might as well just use a knockoff app.
So now, the expectation for AT release is going to be that much higher - it probably will solve this issue if and when it works on all devices, inside and out. And we should feel more justified in demanding it come out ASAP as a fix to this since the bridge solution of continued legacy plan availability has been ignored throughout this thread.
34 Likes
Amen!
1 Like
I have the same issue as well. Now my entire calendar is blank.
1 Like
Totally agree.
I think these plans should have been released together with AT. Those who are accustomed to the previous SSB HV are now at a bit of a loss in terms of guidance. Should we really cut this much volume in base so that the baseline user can accomplish a tamed HV program?
Also, as suggested in other posts, can 9 hours be considered high volume at all? For those with access to the beta, does AT include longer workouts (i.e. during weekends) if one selects a higher time commitment than the plan would otherwise suggest?
3 Likes
Let me get this straight:
Say I’m not on a plan. Say I did a more or less exactly executed outside 3x20 Tempo workout on Saturday and an unstructured free ride yesterday.
How does TrainNow know what would be a fitting workout for today? Don’t I have to clarify at least an event type/date?
Oh and no need to explain in detail if this was answered anywhere else, just point me to the corresponding thread/post 
My calendar is now empty after the update…
I can still see the plan, but no wo scheduled.
There are more people having this issue…
I created a ticket for this already.
1 Like
My understanding is that TrainNow is not interested in preparing you for any event. It looks at your recent activity and says “looks like you’ve been taking it easy, try a hard ride today” or “you’ve been working hard, do an endurance ride today”.
3 Likes
See if this helps:
In short:
TrainNow just is about picking a workout based on your current state, with no specific goal in mind other than general fitness. It is not periodized with recovery weeks or any long term timing in mind.
Training Plans (with or without Adaptive Training) generally aim for a planned event, with periodization, multiple phases, recovery and taper weeks and such.
3 Likes
Couldn’t have put it better myself.
I’m sure there are many users very happy with the new plans.
Equally I can’t be alone in thinking things were absolutely fine as they were (with or without AT).
5 Likes
Hopefully AT can’t be far from general release if they’re at this stage 
.
I suspect that they’re trying to get people onto the new plans now, to avoid a stampede to switch over once AT is released. The strain on the servers is going to be severe enough already with the amount of people currently on the beta waiting list 
.
From what we know, n=4, Nate’s new TSS week over week is now 12, Pete rides E-bikes, crashes, breaks bones, and has a new week over week TSS of 12. Coach Chad has disappeared from the podcast, and Jonathan is learning to race, again. It doesn’t sound good for the always promised ML/AT that is coming to the re s t of us. ML may work for individuals, but can’t be applied to the entire population, as thst population is competing with each other, not trying to be the same. The biostatistics are missing something here. Without seeing the data, and being able to draw our own conclusions, this is simply bro-science. Most of us, want to be faster, than the mean, not the same as the mean. I want to make it clear, this is aimed at the new product roll out, not an attack on individuals. Those are only data points. Implementation of the new plans is not going well.
1 Like
I don’t think that nudging people onto the updated plans is a server/infrastructure issue at all. It’s fairly trivial to switch over from one plan to another from the platform side—hardly something that would consume a lot of their server resources. Even if it was a significant issue, I don’t think that attempting to throw the entire TrainerRoad user base onto the updated plans all at once (which is basically what has happened) would address that—it would probably cause the exact issue you’re imagining.
I think that the reality looks something more like this: the old plans led to some sort of performance gains, the updated plans are hypothesized to be an improvement, and now TR needs the data to validate their assumptions. So, naturally, any user that begins an updated version of a plan will be a data point in testing this theory. If the data shows the hypothesis to be true in 12-24 weeks, then that’s great—but if the updated plans are less effective, then we may very well expect some sort of rollback or change to address this once the data has been gathered.
This is just an unfortunate reality of how a lot of the tech/software world operates, IMO. A lot of what is sold to customers/consumers as an “improvement” is actually an experimental change that needs to be validated. In effect, you’re paying to be a guinea pig in some employee’s data science experiment. This could very well be an instance of this operating model.
5 Likes
I had this issue as well, mine showed up on Tuesday, same week as you just before the rest week. Chatted with support and was instructed to delete and add in another workout similar to the prior Tuesday (Baird +5).
One thing that is a little confusing is after deleting my old plan, then creating a new plan, I’ve noticed when clicking on the plan in the calendar a red Update button shows up. I’m tempted to click it thinking that my plan hasn’t actually been updated as intended with the modified workouts.
Do we “Update” in the Edit Block?
@Jonathan @IvyAudrain Thank you for taking the time to provide responses. It is a great that TR provides such open access to the team through the forum.
My question was not about ramp rate (which passes a sanity check for sure), but initial setting of the workout level for the plan. See from analysis below, it looks like I’d be starting too low to make any progress.
@Jonathan I think what you are suggesting here
is to keep the ramp rates, but set the workout levels in the first week to be within .3-.7 of what I’ve recently achieved (assuming I am in a state where fitness ceiling is not changing much at all).
Analysis:
Sampling over TrainNow workouts, I can estimate that I’m:
sweet spot: 4.5 - 5.5
threshold: 5.5 - 7
vo2: 7 - 8
My new plan I am starting this week has the following for initial and ending workout levels (over 5 weeks):
sweet spot: 3.1 → 5.2 (ramp rate of .42/week)
threshold: 3.6 → 5.9 (ramp rate of .46/week)
vo2: 4.3 → 5.8 (ramp rate of .3/week)
Wow you’re funny. First you throw shade (not going to quote that part), then you say because YOU can’t see the data that feed the model it has to be bro science. But if YOU can see the data suddenly it wouldn’t be. That’s ridiculous.
Since you’re so smart, I am sure that you know that you don’t train ML by just sticking it in the wild (applying it to users current plans) and waiting for it learn through trial and error. Instead, you train it on PAST data, of which TR has probably the biggest dataset in the world for structured training and intended workout vs actual accomplishment.
As they explained when they announced this, they have already done lots of work to train the model to filter out noise factors and look backwards at riders past performance and training and what actually got results. And they’ve been working in this for years.
Now there are limitations to this approach, but you seem to be assuming that they’ve designed this whole thing based on n=4 and the past few months of their personal training. That’s just ignorant.
7 Likes
I’m not sure how this is different to any previous plans. They were always a faith based bet on the TR team.
3 Likes