I am quite new to indoor training but I try to get as much as possible out of it.
I read workout descriptions carefully. Noticed that they carry additional info that supplement the workout itself. At least it was so that way.
Did Sub-Threshold With Surges: 4 x 8 recently.
I was happy to read all those assessment comments in the workout description. And “perfect session to practise comparing the 3”. Especially, that I had always problems assessing my RPE and my HR has drifted after a Covid recently. So it looked like a good opportunity to learn something out of it.
I should be warned though. Warned with those 5min references in description.
All HR and PRE targets were not set according to the description. 2h of the workout and I learnt nothing about my performance in terms of fatigue/fitness.
“We would even ask that you view this session as more of assessment, rather than strictly a workout” sounds now like a sad joke to me.
So, no scientist left in SYSTM development? All is done by Couchlandrian devs, without supervision? Just copy paste without revision? Done by Couchlandrians who do not see the difference between 5 and 8 min efforts and how they affect human body?