sweet spot training and he used TrainerRoad as a scapegoat with great brand recognition to get more views. I think overtraining is the same thing as under recovering, and if you aren’t very serious about your training and recovery, the HV plans aren’t for you.ĭylan says it’s not but this video is simply the age old debate of polarized training vs. Yes, it’s difficult to follow these plans and yes, you’ll burn out quickly if they aren’t a top priority for you and if recovery isn’t a top priority. I know he isn’t saying you won’t make gains and he’s say more of “but what could have been?” but he’s also saying these plans are guaranteed burnout, which is bullshit. My FTP has gone from 265 to 325 at 150lb (68kg) and my repeatability is through the roof. I’ve been doing high volume plans for about 2 1/2 years consistently with about 95% compliance. Also this is the first Dylan video I’ve ever watched so take it with that grain of salt. I’m triggered by this and this post is a reaction to that and I probably bounce around a bit here. It would only expand their potential user base and give them even more data to use. With that said, I definitely think they should offer some specific 'polarized" and "pyramidal" plans to cater to different coaching theories. They also all say time and time again to start with a low volume plan and add z1 rides if you have more time. Sweet spot does that, and it also works on making us faster, fast. So they have to find that line of making the indoor training interesting, making it challenging, and making it work for the masses without making you burnt out. They also know that the most important thing with any training plan is consistency/adherence, period.
I wouldn't do the rides, and I ride like 10k+ miles a year. TR sees this in their data and their stats on plan adherence. It's boringAF to spend 2hrs on the trainer riding at 60% ftp. Part of the crux/problem for TR, which Nate has talked about on the podcast.is that if you put long z1 riding in a training plan. But my FTP is also the highest it's ever been. I've racked up a lot of hours/miles on the bike the last 5 years, and the high volume plans I've done this winter have me pretty darn shattered sometimes. The high volume plans definitely have a lot of intensity, and for most people that may be to a fault. Will be interesting to see if the podcast crew has a response or just let's it go. A plan that doesn't have the ability to say "something's wrong, we need to respond and make an adjustment" or otherwise blame the rider because they "didn't stick to the plan", that's a bad plan. If a training plan can't handle an event that that prevents you riding whatsoever for a couple of days (for example - from personal experience - twisting an ankle and being unable to ride for three or four days), or an event getting cancelled (eg, if you're making a weekly crit part of that training plan), and still allow you to bounce off that, it's not a plan worth following. The best training plan is one which is adaptable to change. The best training plan is not one that you can stick to.
Trainerroad tacx neo professional#
This is terrible, terrible advice - especially when trying to design a plan for someone who has a life outside of it - ie, anyone who is not a professional athlete. The TR guys have consistently stated that "the best training plan is the one that you can stick to."
0 kommentar(er)
