After riding recreationally for over a dozen years, I decided I wanted to get serious about getting faster. So, at the beginning of 2016, I started my first TrainerRoad Traditional Base plan. A year later I had increased my FTP by 150 percent!
In the following year, things did not go as well, and I saw a decline in my performance. In August of that year, I found myself in the hospital being treated for pulmonary emboli. I guess that would explain the drop in performance. It was my second bout with PE, having first been diagnosed ten years earlier.
After numerous false starts, I decided to try it again. My FTP had fallen below where it was when I started back at the beginning of 2016. So, in November of this year, I started the mid-volume sweet spot base plan. At the beginning of phase II of that plan, I took another threshold test. It was an unmitigated disaster. According to the results, my FTP had fallen by five watts! I was disappointed, but not surprised. At the beginning of the test, I wasnāt sure my body had adequately recovered from the rigors of the previous six weeks of training. The first few minutes of the workout constitutes a warm-up at less than 50 percent of my FTP. It should have felt effortless. It did not.
Ultimately I decided to postpone the start of the second phase. Additionally, Iām having second thoughts about my decision to switch from the traditional base plan to the sweet spot base plan. Iām just wondering whether the sweet spot approach is the right strategy for me. On the other hand, before passing judgment, I want to give it a chance. To be fair, I frequently substituted workouts that were more strenuous than those called for by the plan. Those decisions might have been detrimental. Also, I doubt Iām typical of the target demographic for TrainerRoad. I am 65 years old. Five workouts per week might be too many.
At this point, Iām wondering about the merits of a midstream switch from the sweet spot base plan to the traditional base plan. With the traditional base plan, I have a history of success. Although any number of factors could be affecting my response to the sweet spot plan, Iām a little discouraged. Until I retake the threshold test, the jury is still out. Only then will I know whether I had a bad day, whether Iām suffering from overtraining, or just needed a few more days of recovery. If I make a miraculous recovery, I might give the sweet spot plan another chance. Otherwise, Iām likely to switch to the traditional plan. Your feedback would be appreciated.
Iām just getting back into the TR plans after a 3 year break. I usually prefer to create my own plans, but I am considering returning to the sweet spot plans just because of the variety of workouts. Normally, I do fairly traditional workouts ā 2x20 sub threshold, 2x12 threshold, 3:3x3 VO2max, 3:5x30s anaerobic, and so on, etc, etc. ā itās worked for me and has help me win races and get on the podium, but they are boring as shit. I prefer to do them outside when you have something to look at and it doesnāt mater how monotonous they are.
Letās see how a Masters athlete with prior fatigue issues aligns to the research above. It will require some math. Fortunately, I use WKO4, and I have the data at my finger tips. This is what I see for my 2018 season. 87% of my entire year was spent under 80% of my Max HR. This was a strong season for me, the strongest ever. I did not overtrain, didnāt feel overly fatigued, etc, and I performed very wellā¦won several of races on the track or finished strong or on the podium, beat most of my peak power goals and so onā¦blah blah blah. I did this with my own training plan, based on my own research.