65 min a thin white line, comfortable intensity but it was followed by cobbler, nice easy recoveries, but the long sustained stuff at very low cadence .My bum does not want to sit on another saddle ever again, and my legs do not want to go near a pedal. Thank my lucky stars for the dial down syndrome
Iām guessing Iām missing something here butā¦.
Surely it is quite simple - you have paid to benefit from the experience and analysis from a team of qualified professionals who have decided that the workouts would be more beneficial with different targets.
If you donāt agree thatās fine but you paid for their advice.
The workout levels were probably adjusted to make the most sense for most of the people.
Some people are going to find the workouts easier, but still hard, and others are going to find them easier. Others are still going to find them just as hard as always. That is just the nature of a program that is not individualized.
Even the relationship between 4DP profiles and workouts is still based on averages. It is better than FTP by itself, but there is still much biological variation hidden behind the numbers. For example, there is nothing in the 4DP profile that tells you how much recovery you need, or how efficient you are, or exactly what biological processes you need to improve.
You cannot expect anything better unless you get measurements and workouts designed exactly for you.
Remember that the coaching and advise offered will change as science and knowledge changes.I believe the example of Kipchoge, the man who has the fastest Marathon time , was cited as an influence to move away from trashing yourself to building a more sustainable progress. Kipchoge believes that it is better to feel after a training session, that he could always have done one more rep . Always keep one more effort in the tank.
Thatās not likely even feasible, given the programming involved. Adjust the workouts if you must.
But @Coach.Neal.H has spent his life coaching the worldās most elite athletes. Given his proven track record, Iām inclined to trust his judgment regarding any adjustments to the Sufferfest workouts.
@LesAyre Totally agree.
Mind - and at the risk of being jumped up here by those eager to cancel any negativity on this App launch - the fallout on this issue has been accentuated by the absence any advance warning on the āintensity adjustmentsā or even a heads up on switchover Day 1. Indeed the opening announcement actually reassured that āSufferfest videos can keep their tough nature without being dilutedā ā¦
Subscribers were instead left to discover/ uncover the changes themselves, raise Qs on the Forum, with the explanation(s) for adjustments provided by way of forum responses.
Similar shock was brought about by the shuttering of SUF vids to a ācontent categoryā, accessible from a door down the corridor at the back of the house, rather than (as prev) load & proud as the front door swings opens ā¦. this has not unsurprisingly brought about a level of angst and or mistrust.
A similar fallout has accrued on the missing ride history feature. People donāt like surprises. Far greater understanding might have been achieved with greater transparency there too.
Itās regretful that the ride history feature wasnāt ready for launch, itās a pity that swim & run were introduced when āmanual entryā the only means for integration entry, itās a shame that there have been SO MANY systems integration failures which has hugely frustrated SO MANY subscribers and itās disappointing that the switchover communications have been way below desired.
All of the above points to an App being rushed out before it was actually ready. Whilst that reflects badly on the talented team that brought us Sufferfest in the first place, my guess is they are not those ultimately culpable for rushing it out.
@JSampson , Iām glad it works for you, systm. I love the fact that 9 Hammers is what it says it is. And when I can get thru to the end, of the old one, I know 2 things: Iām at my peak or time to do another Full Frontal.
The new systm #s do not work for me. The Sufferfest and all the, I guess old Sports Science from GvA, is the best for me. It is frustrating because now I have to go re-invent the old settings. With all the talk about how dynamic systm is, it would be simple to give us āOld Bleeding Eyed Sufferlandriansā a button to go back to Vintage Sufferlandria setup. A lot easier, I imagine than getting the App to work on Andriod back in the dayā¦
How do you know this without having completed a full 12 week plan? The numbers havenāt been changed that long ago have they? I initially thought the same, but my numbers seem to be creeping up much more quickly now with with lower targets and more recovery.
@Martin, I like to clarify something:
I wasnāt wanting to come across as impressive. Just simpley show others how you can easily put āThin Airā back to the āOld SUF Appā metrics. I did something similar with āThe Wretchedā yesterday, but it may need some more tweaking.
@DameLisa, Yes I have done some plans back in the day. āOld Volcanoā was great. The new one does not meet what I need now.
The #s have changed significantly on over half. That is per @Coach.Neal.H on one of these threads. I just recently did a Full Frontal and had some great gains over all my 4DP#s. If I go with the systm #s it turns the workout down now by 85% to 90% from the āOld SUF Appā
As a long-time customer of the Sufferfest and now Wahoo, Iām am just stating it would be great to have an option for the āOld Numbersā. So, I/we donāt need to go re-invent our workouts.
Understand what you meant. What I was asking is how do you know if the new numbers donāt work as well for you, given that we havenāt had the new numbers long enough to complete a whole plan with them?
Iāve likewise used the old Sufferfest numbers for years. But have seen a similar bump in the last 2 months on the new targets that exceeds 6 months worth of training under the old numbers. And thatās starting from a similar base fitness. Am keen to see what happens to my numbers now. Before I was always really balanced on the fatigue fence, but feeling much more rested on the plans with new numbers and able to push bigger power despite being a good bit older now.
Have you done any analysis on the new vs. old settings in order to see how your Power Duration Curve has shifted? The software available on iIntervals.icu, Xert, or WKO5 will do that for you.
Iām really pleased to hear that there has been a bit of toning down in intensity. Some sessions, especially the older hardcore ones, were really killing me even when I was on top form. I was already dialing them down a bit anyway, so it seems like I was right to trust my intuition there.
Iām looking forward to my next training block even more now.
I believe a lot of those older, hardcore sessions were designed before the science team started designing workouts.
As Dame Lisa says, while it is possible you understand your body pretty solidly well, what you are saying here is that you understand what will give you the best training outcome better than one of the most qualified sports scientists in the fieldā¦
There is a World of difference between āI can make it through all these sessionsā and āThis is what gives me the best training outcome over timeā. The former you can certainly ascertain for yourself, the latter is a lot harder.
There may well be some people for whom the original workouts provide an optimal training outcome, but unless you actually understand the science thoroughly (and arenāt just going on āwell it feels okayā) we should probably all appreciate the fact that we have such a decorated trainer planning all of this for us.
Iāve worked across various technical fields in my career and by far the most dangerous/difficult people you come across are the ones who, when faced with an expert, are still convinced they really know what they are on aboutā¦
While what you say about undertaking stress that does not improve your fitness is certainly true, it is also true that the workouts and plans are designed based on population averages. There will always be outliers.
We have no way of knowing what the appropriate course of action for any individual is. I, as an older individual, have the opposite problem. I am finding that the amount of recovery in the plans is not always optimal for me. That in no way detracts from the quality of the workouts or the plans.
Agreed, which is why I wrote:
However, targeting averages is a pretty good way to go and if people step away from ego, most of us still fit into somewhere between the upper and lower reaches of āaverageā.
The risk here, is that unless someone has absolute clarity over what is best for them (and, hey, if people think the plans arenāt perfect for them because they are an outlier then they could get a custom plan and discuss that) then probability dictates that they are at least as likely to make the wrong choice in modifying their exercise as the right one.
I know that I am certainly one of those people who, when left to āfeelā can drive myself too hard for too long and then end up burned out.
The ābenefitā of having the plans back in the old figures for someone for whom that was better would likely factor to fractions of a percent of difference in performance gain. The losses due to burnout or not being able to complete sessions far outweigh that.
Again, of course there will be outliers, but unless you know (absolutely not think) you need something different then following the plans as Neal lays them out will work for you and is the most sensible approach.
Thereās already a chart for if youāre feeling good or bad on a given day, follow that too.
Please expand, is this something within Systm?
No itās old.
There are some basic rules here that deal with when workouts are feeling too tough.
There used to be a chart which covered pretty much every video and made suggestions for what to do if you felt good or bad on a given day to either make them easier or tougher (or some sessions you should always leave alone) if you felt good or bad on a given day.
I canāt find it with a quick search and am having a bit of a busy day, hopefully someone else can link it up or Iāll look again later.