WKO5 is here and it looks... different

MacBook Pro 2016 with 2TB SSD and 16GB RAM (2.9GHz Intel Core i7). This is basically the top-of-line MBP.

Approximate load times of “Workout Dashboard”

  • WKO4 takes ~3.5 sec
  • WKO5 takes ~4.5 sec

Every single panel shows “Working on it…” and in particular, “Power TiZ” is really slow. And Power TiZ is 0.5+ seconds slower to load in WKO5 (versus WKO4).


  • open web browser, go to TP (I’m using free to feed WKO4), click a workout, then click analyze and it loads in under 1 second
  • rarely use Golden Cheetah, but launched it just now and switching between workouts the charts load almost instantly

So I’m not hallucinating, charts take 1+ seconds to load and then Power TiZ sits there for another 3+ seconds before it loads. And it loads faster on WKO4, so that makes WKO5 feel slower. Plus in both trials (July launch, and right now), I can consistently and repeatedly crash WKO5. Where do I sign up for the beta testers group? Can I get a discount? My fault for buying WKO4 earlier this year, because my software marketing ‘spidey sense’ knew WKO5 was coming soon.

Like I said a little annoying compared to other apps on this same computer - earlier comment I was mainly thinking of complex PowerPoint or Word docs but did a little investigation to backup my earlier statement.

1 Like

Not sure if you are doing this, but if you are switching back and forth between WKO4 and WHO5 you will see slower performance due to the way the files are cached.

I’ve been running WKO5 for 2 days or so, and then just performed some stopwatch benchmarking. After the launch I learned my lesson and made sure WKO5 cached everything.

The Power TiZ loading time was so painful that I finished doing some tests, quit WKO5, and started WKO4 for comparison. WKO is just slow at refreshing charts, always has been from where I sit. It is the only “slow app” on this MacBook Pro. I’m not a software dev, but routinely compile stuff that takes 20 minutes to 8 hours. It is not that slow, and I’m generally patient with software, so maybe sluggish is a better word.

I took advantage of the 2 week trial but don’t think I’ll be making the purchase. The info is nice to have, but didn’t really tell me anything that I didn’t know from TP. I can also see getting some analysis paralysis and spending lots of time micromanaging my training that could be spent on the bike.

Oddly enough my mFTP in WKO5 and Strava’s FTP estimate (which I didn’t even realize was a feature) have been matching perfectly across various timelines :man_shrugging:

yup. I mainly use WKO4 to help analyze previous training and it has helped in that regard. I’d see more value using WKO if coaching a bunch of athletes. But for my own day-to-day training I’m all in on using TrainerRoad plans with modifications.

Question for the forum - does anyone know why time in Classic Coggan endurance level does not align with time in endurance iLevel? At endurance level the power range for classic and iLevels is identical, however the WKO4/WKO5 graphs don’t show that. Here is a WKO5 graph (WKO4 is similar):

Try creating a new dashboard, and then adding those two TiZ charts again to that new dashboard. You might find different numbers.

I had this issue (I mentioned in an earlier post) with the “power after 1500kj” graph showing two different things in two different dashboards. I re-added the chart to new dashboards (and even a new view) and all new charts added were perfectly consistent… so I just removed the old/incorrect one and the issue has not resurfaced.

unfortunately that didn’t work. So I’ve completely deleted all data/caches/etc and starting over as if it was a first install.

After a good think, it appears the iLevel chart is based on mFTP while Classic chart is based on sFTP. Right now there is a 40+ watt difference between the two, hence the chart differences.

1 Like

Surely this is able to be changed easily by editing the formula?

I wonder why the iLevel TiZ and classic TiZ charts (which appear side by side in the same dashboard in the default view) are based on different FTP metrics by default?

WKO uses PDC for iLevels above FTP, and I have some things to try however you can’t fit a square peg in a round hole. In other words, certain features in WKO are going to fail if you don’t feed the PDC model (estimated % VO2max being another). Garbage in, garbage out. I’m just going to ignore some of these things until moving out of traditional base.

Do you find Smart segments work? I am hit or miss - I understand that sometimes if GPS data not amazing it can miss the segment. Which I can understand, except Strava will somehow manage to capture that exact same segment data with no issue.
It’s no big deal, Smart Segments are a nice to have vs essential bit - but I would either it worked all the time, or never !

I think Smart Segments has the potential of significant value as many of us use outside terrain for interval training, to track progress on certain segments or for all-out (PR) efforts. For me, I have done a significant amount of this type of segment analysis over the last few years in TP Premium. It has fine-grain control over the segment start and end points. So when WKO5 introduced SS, I was pretty excited about that (i.e. not having to manually identify the same segment after each outdoor ride). However, I was disappointed to learn that WKO does not sync segments from TP Premium (I have since asked @TimWKO about this and am hoping it gets on the WKO roadmap). However, I was willing to “bite the bullet” and recreate the same “Smart Segments” in WKO. What I found is that, relative to TP Premium, the quality of the route map and the ability to zoom in and accurately define the start and end points of a segment in WKO5 (i.e. fine-grain control) is poor. As such, I am “guessing” that part of the problem that you may be encountering is the same issue I had (the intended smart segment is not accurately defined), and therefore, you aren’t really capturing the segment you are intending to.

1 Like

Same here. The suggestion from TP is use the lap button. I haven’t done a full side-to-side comparison, but in my limited experience it seems Golden Cheetah does a better job. But maybe it’s just disappointment over trying WKO5 smart segments on a crit and seeing poor results and confusing UI (all segments in RHE had same start time).

Perhaps useful for many situations, but not all. Try hitting the lap button while in the drops winding up for a full-on sprint and ditto when letting of the gas at the finish; not practical and pretty dangerous, particularly in group ride situations.

Exactly. I try and use the lap button on solo training rides, but even then I forgot sometimes. Next crit I’ll try and remember to use the Garmin auto-lap feature.

A few things. TP does not have smart segments so not sure what @bobmac means. Yes, you can drag over a segment and review the data but that does not save or allow for any analytics.

In WKO you can simply drag the section of the file you want and save it as a smart segment. I created a simple “segment” dashboard in my WKO Basic view and I just drag the graph. Here , I made a video to demo: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d1a7n6vqhh7wwdr/segments%20.mp4?dl=0


Hi Tim, I know that TP Premium does not have “smart segments” as WKO5 defines them. However, it does allow for user created segments. They are loaded with high quality analytical information. An example of a well known [ridiculously hard] SF Bay Area segment is below. Each time I do that, or the more infamous, Old La Honda, I need to create that segment in TP to analyze it with the kind of info that TP provides. “It would be nice” if, when syncing TP to WKO, that those user created segments are synced as Smart Segments in WKO (or available to be classified as Smart Segments after syncing). I hope this clarifies the request. Thanks.

1 Like

Bob, understood, thanks for clarifying. What you are creating is a “selection” in a workout of TrainingPeaks, that selection, once named is only saved to that workout. The saved selection is in that workout only and not saved across any workout that has that unique GPS track in it. The point you are making is you want that saved selection, in the individual workout “synced” into WKO5. Is that correct?

Smart Segments are similar to that but in WKO5 when you create a smart segment from a workout it WILL look at all the times you did complete that same exact GPS track and place them in the RHE list (can see in the end of the video), ranking by speed or power and allowing for in-depth comparison of each time you have completed the track ( not just the one time selection as in TrainingPeaks - that was my point about analytics, i meant ALL the times you have done the smart segment).

I know you know the above but clarifying as the feature I think you are requesting is you want the individual workout selection you saved in TrainingPeaks to transfer to WKO so you can save it as a smart segment. Is that correct?

For other following, the above is the key difference between selecting a selection in TrainingPeaks and a WKO5 Smart Segment. There is no need to hit a lap button, can just drag and save in file then every time you do that “finishing sprint” or “hard climb” where hitting the lap button could be dangerous, you can review the smart segment in WKO5.

…and yes I know I am basically repeating your post back to you but want to be clear

Tim thanks for posting here, much appreciated
I have used Smart Segments with some success (always via a lap)
Issue I have today is I created a lap and its saved on WK05 with full data
When I go to name it something it then appears on the smart segments tab but says I have done no rides yet - which by definition cant be true - there needs to be one at least
Not sure if I am doing something wrong?
Otherwise I am loving WKO5; and there is so much more to learn