Every time it is mentioned on the podcast…
5 Likes
During the podcast yesterday, Nate described what he termed “Hero Rides” - where there won’t be PL adjustments for uncommonly epic rides (his example was how a 9 hour Leadville shouldn’t force your “Endurance” level up to 45).
I don’t think he mentioned whether “Hero Ride” will be an automatic classification by ML or if it would be a subjective designation (like you checking a box), but it seems like not all unstructured outdoor rides will affect PLs. Which is honestly a great idea and a really good call IMO.
3 Likes
Will there no adjustments or they just will be scaled appropriately?
Either way. It’ll be nice when TR factors in unstructured outdoor rides.
1 Like
In the podcast, Nate’s description led me to believe that these “Hero Rides” would only grade the activity, but that those levels wouldn’t affect your training power levels.
1 Like
This is kind of worrisome. So you do a 3h ride, your PL get updated. You do a 8h ride, your PL doesn’t get updated. 
It speaks of the limitation of the approach. If this is true, it’s an ad hoc “hack” to fit reality to a limited model.
5 Likes
Well, we still don’t have details on how an activity is deemed a “Hero Ride” … it might be a simple checkbox. Where you can choose whether adaptations are based on that effort or not.
1 Like
The big question is: why is this even an issue?. I suspect because PL’s rely heavily in time in zone in a linear way and real life does not work like that.
2 Likes
No, I am with you. I mentioned this a long time ago actually. I think it goes to the marketing of PLs. They should be thought of training levels, not progression levels. That is, they represent the level of workout one can complete within a training plan. Just because I can complete a 2x40 minute sweet spot workout on an outdoor ride does not mean I can do that consistently within a training plan. I would further add that having a higher PL within a zone need not imply one is stronger in that zone. IE, if someone does vo2 max once every two weeks at a level 5, I do it twice a week at a level 3, I might actually have a better vo2 max due to the increased frequency.
However, TR wanted a way to replace/supplement FTP for various reasons, so they marketed PLs as a way to measure performance gains.
AT is an AI coach. As such, its goal is to recommend workouts based on your history. Much like a real coach not recommending 9 hour endurance rides because you did an 8 hour race last week, I would not want AT recommending a 9 hour ride. In all likelihood, the easiest way to workaround this is to ignore hero rides.
10 Likes
I kind of agree, it does sound “hacky”. You did the work, why wouldn’t their model give you credit for the work? If I race a half or full distance triathlon I will be tired, but my body doesn’t just ignore the fact that I just exercised for 5 or 11 hours. Longer efforts help to build fitness. This is where an actual mathematical model of fitness/fatigue (like WKO5 or Xert) is beneficial. I guess in several years when workout levels V2 is actually released ( 
) we can evaluate their final product.
1 Like
Why do you think it matters? Is it REALLY going to affect your training plan significantly?
1 Like
I think it would be a bigger issue if it did not ignore them. Right now I am imagining a TR user doing 24 hours in old pueblo and then AT recommending productive workouts afterwards.
Partner 1: “Think you could get around to painting the bathroom this weekend?”
Partner 2: “Sorry honey, AT is telling me I need to do 25 hours of endurance this weekend. Looks like you are on your own” 
11 Likes
I mean… I know it’s been a long wait for V2 but are we really complaining about how the final product may work without actually knowing much?
14 Likes
When has reality ever gotten in the way of speculation around here? 
/s
Joking aside, I agree that there is already some nit picking while all we know is a potential feature name and the most minimal of hints/info about it. Pretty much the equivalent of reading a headline and ripping it up without out reading the related article (that doesn’t even exist at this point for this item).
It’s at the core of why I feel TR is essentially in a no-won situation at this point. 2+ years of known cooking will almost certainly lead to high expectations and like any new feature or product, there will likely be some actual issues as well as a difference of opinion on the results.
It’s already visible with this simple sub-feature, and I only expect more whenever we get the actual product in hand. 
15 Likes
that is what happens when they drip feed partial information regarding an unfinished product…
1 Like
Ha. I don’t mind a bit of speculation but calling it a “hack” and it being *worriesome" when you literally have no idea what the final product is is laughable.
Like you alluded to… The real “worriesome” thing is when it’s released and people will be less than satisfied with the results.
I already find people worry way too much about day to day PLs. That may only be amplified with V2.
6 Likes
We are the TR Forum. Complaining about things we aren’t that informed about is one of our core characteristics.
19 Likes
If not giving a workout/ride credit towards PLs doesn’t matter, then PLs themselves don’t matter. Which is fine, but some consistency is expected.
My ongoing joke at work is every time somebody brings up a new idea I just say “I hate it” before they even get into the details.
6 Likes
= H8 IT!
2 Likes
lol and completely accurate.
Judging by this thread and plenty of other posts you’d think TR users have zero faith in TR.