Why is Mary Austin changed?


#1

I have been looking forward to killing Leconte and Mary Austin. Every year I try and fail and I know I am able to this year.
So I look at the SSB2 MV and lo and behold Mary Austin has gone from a 0.92 IF to 0.89.

What’s next? Shortening Baxter by 10 min to piss off @Nate ?


#2

Proof!


#3

bump it up 3% to pyramid up to 2min @ 95%, 2min @ 100%, and 2min @ 105%, and you’ll get .92 IF again!


#4

@chad is trying to be less sadistic… He’s finally gone soft on us! Lol jk much love!

What’s funny is I just relistened to episode #73 today, and they were talking about their most dreaded workout and Mary Austin was one of them.


#5

Weirdo. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

But I hear ya. I’m doing MA for the second time on Saturday, with the new reductions I might feel a bit ripped off.
It’s called a paincave for a reason, not a fluffypillowfightcave or a yummychocolatesundaew/sprinklescave.

Mary Austin and Leconte are a couple of brutes, now slightly less so.


#6

They could perfectly make Mary Austin -1 and leave MA alone.

I think Leconte is changed too but I am not sure on that one. IIRC, it was a 0.91 and now it’s a 0.90


#7

I’m going to the garage to get my carbon fiber pitchfork. :face_with_symbols_over_mouth::face_with_symbols_over_mouth::face_with_symbols_over_mouth::rage::rage:


#8

Just checked – Leconte looks unchanged.


#9

Crap… I have Mary Austin coming this Saturday :flushed:
Challenge accepted :sunglasses:


#10

Found Verstegg last night. Is this Mary Austins’ sister?


#11

I’m going to guess it had to do with too many people not completing it as planned.


#12

This workout violated (bad Mary Austin, BAD!) our intensity rules. In particular, going above .90 IF for 90 minutes has too-high of a failure rate and my intent is to lower that rate by adhering to our standards.

You’re more than welcome to bump the intervals back up by 3% across the board though, that’s all I changed. I’m not here to deny anyone their suffering, course not; I just want riders to get faster and sometimes that actually means less is more.


#13

Maybe I changed more than that…? Anyway, if you return the steps to 95-100-105-100-95 you’ll have the original format.


#14

Very similar, yes! It’s a younger sibling. Give it a whirl and then ask yourself if you want another set. :smiling_imp:


#15

I think it’s a good move. I did the original one last Sunday and told my wife I either became too soft or this workout was too hard. I feel less bad about failing it now !


#16

I understand but trying to do that workout has been my offseason goal. I know I can raise the intensity up but you can do that to any workout. Pettit can be made impossible that way.
But Mary Austin was a landmark workout such that the name of the workout gives people anxiety. When you say “I’m doing Mary Austin” those in the know really understand why you need a rest day before it and you have to get your nutrition right and fluids and fans right and send your wife to the hair salon so they don’t bother you. All that to have a chance at nailing Mary Austin because she was a b#%ch. Now she is just a tough lady. There is a reason people are arranging “Disaster Day” and not “Longfellow Day”.
You could make Mary Austin -1.
You can sub in Carpathian Peak +2.
But please put Mary Austin back on the pedestal.


#17

Fair enough, @Alen. I don’t want to dismantle a TR icon. Mary Austin is back in all her original splendor, but SSB II still has to use the newly minted Mary Austin -1 for the reasons stated above. Enjoy? :wink:


#18

Thank you. I think. Gulp


#19

:raised_hands: :raised_hands: :raised_hands:


#20

Mucho kudos to @chad for listening to his customer base and acting on their requests. Very pro. :+1:

But TR is still his product so he should be able to alter/create as he sees fit.