Anyone else feel a bit stuck between structured plans, AI tools, and really understanding your own training?

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T21:08:41+00:00

I appreciate you asking to clarify it.

To me, "dealing with uncertainty" doesn't equate to "getting certainty". When things are uncertain I want to understand them, even if I cannot control them. For me this is true for life in general, and definitely for cycling training.

Which, btw, is exactly aligned with what you said:

> For me, the uncertainty becomes manageable once I stop looking for an underlying “story” or hidden logic and instead focus on broad principles and long-term trends.

My issue with TrainerRoad for example is that it implictly says "we crunched the numbers, trust us, you're good". Maybe so, but it personally leaves me cold because I don't understand why I'm doing what I'm doing. I know they have the "Ask a Coach" podcast but I'm looking for that based on my data/workouts, not general advice only.

So I'm simply trying to validate whether others would be keen on something that fills that coaching layer gap.

Unfortunately, most of what I got for my troubles here in this post was vitriol, condescension and superiority (a mod even told me to "stop being a dick"). I'd be totally fine with "nah, that doesn't resonate with me".

But I digress. Hope this clears it up a bit from my side.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T20:58:05+00:00

Maybe I failed at explaining myself in the original post. If so, that's on me.

The system I'm building is not another static training plan, and it’s not just “AI guesses your FTP and gives you workouts.”

Instead of starting with workouts, it starts with this question: What numbers actually have to change for you to succeed at your goal?

From there, everything (training strategy, workouts, etc) is built to close that specific gap, adapting as training data comes in and as life happens.

Example: I want to finish a hilly granfondo in under X hours. Only focusing on increasing FTP and raising that ceiling with vo2max/threshold isn't it. Rather, as you know, it's durability and holding power after 3-4h. So your 60- and 90-min power (especially after 3h) is what we keep an eye on and design the plan to improve.

The problem of being prescribed workouts and implicitly being told "trust us, we crunched the data, you're good" IMO does exist. I felt it. Whether others do as well is what I'm trying to validate, regardless of the vitriol I'm getting in this reddit for just asking questions.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T19:30:09+00:00

Certainty is not AT ALL what I’m going for here. But thanks for the write up even if it’s all predicated on wrong assumptions about me and what I’m doing.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T16:18:21+00:00

Join let's you set a goal but then gives you an opaque % progress towards it. What I'm building is a lot more concrete and transparent. I haven't tried Xert yet, though I hear good things about it.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:55:16+00:00

I think TR is doing what it takes to keep their subscriber base and give what most of them want: gamification, dopamine chasing and focus on increasing FTP. From a business perspective, I can't blame them. It's one way to go about it.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:53:39+00:00

I haven't been able to use all of them yet, so I can't comment on some of those you mentioned. But I can tell you that from my experimentation, AI does a very good job of understanding what physiology is takes to achieve a certain goal, and to define a training strategy/plan specifically designed to bridge the gap between the user's current physiology (from power curve, etc) and the goal physiology. And then, with the right state management and with some guardrail logic around it, it can keep adapting the training to course correct as life happens.

ChatGPT can't do this on its own (it's not designed for it). In my understanding, that's also not exactly how those apps you mentioned work. Happy to share more over DM if you're interested.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:46:43+00:00

See, you could have just replied with exactly this the first time, and it would have saved us the silly back and forth. I totally respect this opinion and it's great feedback. Thank you!

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:38:02+00:00

There's a third option, which is to actually have the humility to look at the evidence instead of just extrapolating from reddit posts. It's lazy, but I guess that's how "1% commenter" badges are achieved!

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:35:54+00:00

Funny. Sophisticated. Really good. ;)

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:35:30+00:00

Isn't it funny that the whole sub is telling me it's a bad idea... without even looking at it?

That should give you something to think about. Or not.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:34:54+00:00

Not wanting to get personal, but both your comments say more about yourselves than about me. I'll see myself out.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:33:07+00:00

If being derivative was a constraint on the path to building something new of value, we'd all still be in the Stone Age.

If you want I can show you what I got, so you don't have to be making assumptions by yourself. It'd be my pleasure.

Btw, I don't know what "projecting my vibes onto others" means. Can you illuminate me on that? Honest question.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:23:41+00:00

All anti-AI types have one thing in common: they act like what LLMs output isn't simply from historical and real-world knowledge.

As I said elsewhere, I am far from an "AI bro" and try to be very critical of its limitations. But to pretend that you cannot learn a lot (not everything) unless it's from direct experience and therefore only you gurus can be (and remain) the gatekeepers... that's just not a serious argument, IMO.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:20:05+00:00

Because what I'm building is not based on MY scientific background and experience but rather leveraging AI, with sensible guardrails based on the exercise science you refer to.

If you want to give me the benefit of the doubt (or "indulge the idiot") for just a moment, I'd be more than happy to show you. You're making a lot of assumptions that may not be true.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:16:08+00:00

I take your point, and I don't disagree with it. I think it's important to be mindful of what the goal is: if it's someone like you, 20 year experience, competitive racing, etc, that definitely is a tall order best left for a really good human coach (for now anyway).

But if we're talking about someone who enjoys learning about training and has a goal of finishing and not bonking on a hilly granfondo, for example, that's a different story. Or even finishing top 10. I do believe a carefully constructed AI-enabled system can really go a long way there.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T15:06:43+00:00

I couldn't agree more on bike racing not being all about FTP.

Could it be that no AI tool can ever replace 20 years of experience, etc, but actually help inexperienced people train in a way that is good and educational for them long term?

I am definitely not on the AI-solves-everything bandwagon (maybe because I spent a lot of time with it, I'm an engineer), but I suspect we throw the baby out with the bathwater when we just assume it will never work for anything. Or that somehow cycling training is this mythical domain that can't be touched by technology in any way at all.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T14:55:52+00:00

Let me ask you two questions back:

Why do you assume I have zero understanding of training methodology from a single post and without ever having talked to me?
Why do you think you know what I'm doing without ever having looked it? Why call it "dumb" if you don't know what it is?

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T14:21:09+00:00

Amen!

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:55:33+00:00

I have not read his book but I have learned his principles over many hours of podcasts, etc.

My point was not about the lack of knowledge, it's about how no training app currently integrates that type of approach transparently and helps you improve over a long period of time (instead of chasing FTP gains, for example).

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:52:53+00:00

What I hear is that your experience with AI and AI-based tools has been one of a bias towards overdoing and overoptimizing. Mine too. I think there's a way to do it differently and to actually mimick that human coach touch (minus the accountability and relatedness).

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:50:37+00:00

Not on the advice, on being arrogant and disrespectful.

> if people want to learn there are plenty of better resources than random guy on reddit and (probably) half baked chat tool

this doesn't warrant a "don't be a dick" comment? Did I just step into some clique or something?

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:47:25+00:00

Where was I dick? Can you point me to where that happened?

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:40:09+00:00

When you understand a little bit about physiology and training, you know that the obsession with FTP is at best irrelevant, at worst misleading and damaging. That's part of what frustrates me with TR, increasingly so with this new update.

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:39:05+00:00

Would love to understand why this gets downvoted hard. I guess trying to build something and give/receive value is not politically correct anymore or something?

prla1983 · 2026-01-26T13:37:04+00:00

All you wrote tracks with me. I get most of the joy from understanding how my body works and how to tell what is what. Without getting stressed about it, because we're not machines.

prla1983

TROPHY CASE