It not though, that is just the default, there has to be one surely? There are articles on how to set them, from what I have seen its based on age more than Pro/Amateur/untrained.
Not sure where I read the articles but pretty sure fastcat had one on the subject.
I get there needs to be a starting point for these, but why aren’t they “tuned” based on my training history? Given that CTL / ATL (or equivalent) are baked into a lot of training systems, I would think tuning these would be pretty fundamental. /rant
I’ve been holding onto my sub for months (years?) without using the platform because I was on legacy pricing and the concept of outdoor ride analysis was so intriguing to me but I finally threw in the towel and canceled yesterday. The loss of the, imo, more science-focused staff didn’t help either.
I appreciate the value I’ve gotten from TR over the years and wasn’t planning on making this post but after seeing these recent updates felt it might be useful feedback.
Given that TSB = CTL - ATL, it is massively impacted by the decay rates in these two parameters
This might be a “duh” obvious post 
but I had to say it
Xert has some really cool analytics, but their workout library was lacking (at least the trial one) and the planner isn’t as useful.
Like Join, I didn’t like the lack of having the plan laid out and both seemed to focus too much on “ronnestad” stuff.
Both workout player options are lacking.
I mean that none are “perfect”
That’s awesome. Of course to some TR is perfect, others want only their Garmin, some need Zwift level of interaction.
I find those screens noisy, and the gauge type graphic to be bouncy. Is there more smoothing available? I know Xert wants you to push beyond your known abilities every now and then to update the signature so definitely see it’s use.
I have found I can’t get the resistance of my trainer to feel quite where I want it on other apps and my Garmin so far. I’m sure if I committed to something other than TR I would adapt my sensations and get used to it, it’s just weird they don’t all have the same scale.
Garmin + intervals.icu is my setup
I have some criticisms of Xert, but I will say that the free trial library paints a poor picture. Once you subscribe it’s a whole different thing with several very good workout options. I REALLY like the way they make extensive use of over/unders (for multiple zones).
Me too
The worst part is that now they anchor intensities to their dubious metrics (LTP)……But in general I like their library, specially the climber workouts.
It’s nice to see the secondary progressions
Simple, because they can’t — they don’t have the data to adjust them to an individual athlete. TR has a big data pool that might be sufficient to do something like that at some point.
However, I reckon that these decay rates are not fixed numbers even if you consider a single athlete at a given point in time. I am sure things like recovery and life stress will change them. Hence, TR’s approach is much more flexible, their ramp/decay rates depend on an athlete, their compliance and the results of their workout surveys.
I personally like to see developments like TR’s AT and Xert’s system as an improvement over the status quo. They need not be perfect or do everything for me including mixing my bottle in the morning and making me coffee before I hop on the trainer.
I don’t think that’s a good attitude to have towards others, nor is that inviting if you want to grow Xert’s community.
Nor is it a sign of good product design. @oldandfast is more informed than the average customer for a training platform, and if he “doesn’t get it”, the onus is on the platform. Or perhaps he does get it and merely is of a different opinion than you.
Is that really a good way to determine your goals? For one, it is a road-centric classification (road + time trials + tri). It pigeonholes riders into a category. One fundamental question at the beginning of a season is whether to work on your strengths or weaknesses (in case they are limiters).
I also don’t think many people know what most of these things mean. Yes, if you are TTer, then it is pretty obvious what you need to do. But I have no idea what a Puncheur is even after reading the description, and how I should pick a strategy during a race if I were one. What if I am a pursuiter, but want to enter a TT?
Performance analysis and goal setting is where any platform I have seen loses out to a human coach. TR’s approach to let people pick an event type/riding style seems much more consumer friendly than that.
The biggest issue I see with TrainerRoad compared to some its competitors right now, and the point of WLv2, is that it’s hyper-focused on the progression of individual workouts and doesn’t have any concept of training load. In the case of the LV plans with three workouts a week, for example, you’ve basically got three lanes on the board and Adaptive Training is trying to figure out the most efficient way to keep you moving each individual piece down its lane. It doesn’t know or care that you had 4-5 hour gravel races each of the past few weekends, it only cares about trying to make sure this Tuesday’s threshold workout is achievable, but incrementally more difficult than last Tuesday’s. You can have a lot of success with LV plans and adding Zone 2 rides, but I think it’s very easy to lose sight of your overall training load when you’re outdoors having fun while the same SSLV workouts are always waiting there for you.
The problem that I personally ran into last year after adhering very closely to an SSMV plan in the offseason was that I felt like I’d essentially become a data-producing machine rather than a human on a bike. I felt (not infrequently) like I had to ride indoors even when I could ride outside because maintaining the progression was the most important thing for my early season A race. My A race came in the spring, I hit a bunch of power PRs, then burned out and rode sporadically for about a month and a half before I started looking forward to my late August event.
This year, I focused more on volume, consistency, and getting outside whenever I could. Even after getting sick multiple times and losing several weeks between New Year’s and mid-April, I smashed those PRs. Even better, I finished my A race more excited to keep riding than I have been in years.
Based on my own experience and speaking as a middle-aged, (now slightly upper!) mid-pack Masters rider, I’d argue that an app’s ability to help manage volume and consistency is vastly more important than its ability to ensure progression along individual workstreams without being able to transparently maintain overall workload.
Nailing two threshold workouts a week is great, but what if it’s not sustainable combined with the Saturday group rides plus races every few weeks? A training app should be able to look at your weekend, see that planned long endurance ride that turned into a 350 TSS smashfest because it was a beautiful day and you felt great, and on Tuesday say “You know what? You don’t need a threshold workout today, here’s some nice, relaxing zone 2.” There are a number apps out now that can do that already: Athletica (which I’ve been tinkering with and finding very good), Join, Xert, Spoked, and I’m sure others I can’t think of.
From a software development perspective, I think what people are missing is that WLv2 is actually TR 2.0. It’s a fundamental redesign of the entire framework. This isn’t just adding a feature, it’s adding a whole host of interdependent features hampered by god-only-knows how much legacy code and tech debt. All of which is 100% normal and common, it just gets confusing and frustrating when we’ve been told for, what 18 months? that it’s just around the corner.
I’d like to know from @Nate_Pearson if he’d still put that much resources on WLv2 or if in hindsight he’d taken different focus?
And some light minded poll for the community here:
What will be first to arrive?
0 voters
Great post. 
Athlytic has some of it too, but leaves the choice of workout up to you.
I think the thread about the guy who overtrained and is leaving has opened my eyes a bit to why outdoor rides is so important and should stay the #1 priority. There are lots of things I’d love to have and that I think are important for the app moving forward, but there is nothing more important than recognizing when someone does a hero ride on Sunday and not then giving them a breakthrough VO2 or Threshold workout on the following Tuesday. People love to say “you have to listen to your body and make smart decisions”, but MANY, MANY of us grew up in the age of “Shut up and follow the plan. If it hurts, then do more reps.” This is the downfall of Crossfit too, for example. People will do what the plan says.
Is this going to be in WLV2 or red light green light? I’ve heard both mentioned by @Nate_Pearson and @Jonathan
Exactly. The bottom line for me was when I realized how much I was worried about how the awesome outdoor ride was going to impact my indoor workout.
