Threshold workouts are tough, but TR users should know that progression levels for SS, threshold and V02 max are calibrated differently.
For example, 3x20 min @ 95% (with 5 min rest) rates about 2 progression levels lower than the same workout run through the Sweet Spot algorithm. That makes sense. So, If you can barely complete a level 7 SS workout, you probably can only barely complete a level 5 threshold workout.
More surprisingly, though a 5x5 min @ 105% (with 5 min rest) rates a full 2.5 progression levels lower than a 5x5 min @105 run through the V02 algorithm. So, at least for this type of workout, if you can barely complete a level 7 V02 workout, you probably can only barely complete a level 4.5 threshold workout.
I find the PL algorithm to be very accurate for each intensity zone, but there are significant calibration differences between the zones to be aware of. I think a lot of people see a dip in threshold PL because they fail workouts at their V02 and SS PLs, and then they think, I just suck at threshold. Not necessarily the case.
On an aside note, Iâd wait to bump FTP until you get to the 7-8 threshold level, and Iâd lower it if youâre not at least completing 5+.
Whoops, did you mean for both of these to show 105%? I do worry that when you say ârun through the VO2 algorithmâ that you are using custom created workouts in this context, to which I should reiterate that custom workouts are still not fully supported in receiving accurate Progression Level credit yet. That will likely be part of the Workout Level V2 release, and Iâll be sure to provide updates.
Do you have a couple of comparison workouts as an example that support this? Iâd be happy to double check and look into this for you.
Levels are not intended to be compared from zone to zone. Each zoneâs Progression Level ranks only workouts within that zone, and are only meant as a way of quantifying relative workout difficulty within that zone. For example, a high level endurance workout receives its high PL from a much different measure than a high VO2max PL. That is to say, this isnât something youâll only experience between those three categories youâre mentioning.
For educational purposes, I should clarify that there is no one ârecipeâ applied across zones of: intensity+duration+rest=PL score. Itâs very uniquely individualized per system!
Hi! Yes Ivy, I used the workout creator and was not aware that the calculations may not be accurate. I probably should have used less definitive language.
Running a V02 workout at 108, 107, & 106% gives you a very good idea of how it would come out at 105%. My point was to caution people from making judgments about their threshold abilities based on comparisons to other zones.
I can attest that for me, a V02 workout is significantly easier than a threshold workout of the same PL. I know everyone is different, but what I read on the forums, more people seem to have that experience than the opposite. My Workout Creator experiment was somewhat of a confirmation of this.
Thanks for clarifying! I should advise that while the Workout Levels assigned for custom workouts are still not fully supported, we donât recommend putting weight into those results as âconfirmationâ when comparing levels.
Weâll be stoked to see this improved with WLV2, but in the meantime, it does just sound like you personally have some strengths in varying zones that feel more achievable than others; which is great and totally normal!
Let me know if you have any specifics you want to run by me on those Workout Levels and Iâll be happy to take a look.
Thanks for responding and being willing to engage on the forum. Your response came through just as I was failing my most recent threshold workout, lol. My ability to complete these threshold workouts has become so unpredictable. I have 8 months to right the ship, though, so all is good!
Well, I agree with those that says your FTP is estimated a little high than real; would you try to do a test and find out?
Also, if you take a look at the book from Joel Friel âFaster After 50â, youâll find out that the best way to slow the decay from aging is high intensity training, not long steady rides. I think is a great read for everyone interested in keep their fitness when wrinkles start to show in.
I know everyone seems intent on blaming TR plans, but could it be the overall volume? 3 x 4 hour rides a week. The TR polarised are generally one long workout of 3-4 hours a week iirc, even at high volume, just before a day off.
Albeit after training for the week, my circa 4 hour club spin would have me ready for the rest day (or two) anyway depending on make up, route etc.
Not sure how Adaptive Training works with polarised plans, but would assume that regular âtoo instenseâ answers would impact future workouts, and I understand it also impacts AI FTP.
i just done this , trick is to lower the % and increase gradually. for example if my ftp is 200. i start with 190, then gradually increase to 200 or even 205 ! it works !
If âthresholdâ is killing you its not your threshold.
Either you tested properly and had a hero day, or if you used AI FTP it got it wrong. Threshold should not be a bleed your eyes out type workout, it should be hard, but it should not bury you.
Youâll be far better off from a training perspective to lower you FTP, hit your workouts at threshold, increase your Time in Zone (TiZ) during a workout and be able to do that consistently, than holding on to a fake number for ego purposes.
Agreed here. A 2x20 should be doable if your threshold is set correctly. Thatâs a workout level 5.9. If youâre struggling in the 4s or below, itâs probably a good idea to lower the FTP number.
I think the reason that TR letâs users maintain threshold PLs under 6 is that there is always a large portion of new users with rapidly increasing FTPs. Once youâve started to plateau, itâs a different story. Resist the temptation to keep bumping FTP and get that time in zone.
is this in addition to the TR Polarized schedule? If so, thatâs a lot of hours (almost 20 if using medium volume); could this be why youâre struggling with higher intensity?
I agree 100% with this. I feel like this conversation is happening across multiple forum topics simultaneously.
Does not matter how you test (ramp, 20 minute, 8 minute, etcâŚ) or using modeled FTP (AiFTP, etcâŚ). It is a good idea to âtestâ this FTP with a 20 minute effort or a 2x20 workout than trust it as gospel. I used the number without confirming it with a threshold effort for months and was training too hard is my guess - my zone 2 rides being low tempo at times, and my sweet spot workouts being threshold efforts.
Take the AiFTP detection (I hate testing I clicked on that button many times), but VALIDATE it. That is the key - you canât trust the number as gospel. That is why people preach the Kolie Moore testing protocol - it is a TTE effort at threshold if dont correctly, so itâs not using a proxy to get your FTP but actually testing it.
And it doesnât need to be that you can hold it for 60 minutes (60 minutes is completely arbitrary number, but if you canât hold it for about 30-70 minutes, it is probably not your FTP).
I let my ego get in the way of proper training for months. I dialed it back 15 watts on TR, intervals.icu, and strava but am able to do the threshold workouts now - and they FEEL like threshold - that is most important.
Iâve never done the Kolie Moore test but Iâm 100% with you on Validation. At the moment my best 1hour TT is about 40w lower than my AIFTP (45w just a month ago). Its not really the systems fault but I reckon its getting biased by my road group rides and/or my ability (or lack of) to deliver more power inside than out when I donât waste energy on controlling the bike, traffic, etc which subsequently causing me to rise more from the TT position where I can meet that power target. On my TT trying to target my current best hour target usually results in something lower again so I like to target something in the middle circa 20w (11%) lower than AIFTP for TTs. Just now for training not with ERG and mainly outdoors Iâm using the AIFTP number but over winter when I do more indoor stuff I think Iâll use the middle value. Coincidentally before AI FTP that middle value was what I was training too I did exceed AIFTP last May for a just under 57mins TT but I suspect that was a âhero dayâ when the rain kept the temperature perfect, there was little wind and it both werenât enough to affect control
I think you do need to keep the intensity workouts (ref Joe Friel Fast after 50)
But do you need to do 3 long rides/week?
And do you need to ride 10-11 hours/week?
You are not getting enough recovery to do the interval sessions AND all your long rides.
No wonder you are not enjoying them.
If youâve got time to kill you could always replace one long ride with a walk ,or some gentle yoga or something you enjoy.
With cardiac drift my HR will rise slightly more than yours over time however I donât think as much as the OPâs. When my HR stays as table as that I would be in SS at circa 85% HR. At a fairly stable threshold HR is would creep from around 88% to maybe around 93%.
Hey! I wanna jump in on this post as Iâm seeing some advice about your FTP and specifically the accuracy of your AI FTP Detection results.
The reality (and good news) is: your FTP is looking very accurate, especially based upon your success in prior workouts and even some previous VO2max workouts. We know this when looking at some very similar 4x8 workouts you knocked out of the park at a similar FTP, meaning, the fitness is there for you to do these hard workouts, itâs just a matter of isolating whatâs preventing you from feeling as good as your fitness should allow.
Iâm fairly confident that this is an instance of under fueling (and recovery implications that go along with) it making these workouts feel more challenging. If you feel that âI canât seem to eat the 3K+ calories per day needed to maintain or even gain weightâ, itâs unlikely that youâre hitting nutritional benchmarks to fuel the work as well.
This is a mistake that I make, too, and in my experience, nutrition leading up to a hard workout has the most direct correlation with how successfully I can complete it.
Finally, while your goals are to just maintain fitness, I might recommend testing out a TrainNow approach to access a broader spectrum of workouts that may be better suited to your needs than the more rigid structure of polarized training. You may have a better outcome in terms of completing workouts, and you may have more fun with the variety youâre offered there!
Let me know if you have questions on any of these specifics. Here to help!
I did exceed AIFTP last May for a just under 57mins TT but I suspect that was a âhero dayâ when the rain kept the temperature perfect, there was little wind and it both werenât enough to affect control 