I'm excited by this concept and looking forward to giving Full Frontal a go after NOLA 70.3. I think the multi-dimensional analysis is really going to be useful to me in identifying where my strengths and weaknesses are on the bike and figuring out what to do about them to get faster.

If I tell someone I signed up for a 'full frontal' cycling profile, power numbers is not what will come to mind.

Reminds me of that Froome pic...

4dp is nothing new...back in 1999, Friel proposed essentially the same approach, but with (IIRC) eight "dimensions" (i.e., reference durations), spanning from just a few seconds out to many hours.

The problem with Friel's approach is that it is too cumbersome, and fails to recognize that muscular metabolic fitness (for which FTP is a surrogate) is the single most important physiological determinant of performance over any duration longer than a few minutes.

Because of the above, in 2000 I described training LEVELS that use FTP as an anchor point. As I emphasized at the time, and have pointed out numerous times since, such LEVELS (not zones) are meant to be primarily descriptive, not prescriptive.

Despite my efforts, many (including Sufferfest, at least up until now) have naively and mistakenly used my system to PRESCRIBE training, often via "canned" programs/workouts that don't entail direct input from a coach/direct interaction with the athlete.

Since FTP is a surrogate for the single most important physiological determinant of performance, this last approach still actually works, at least across most intensities/durations. However, issues can arise during supra-FTP efforts, since individuals can and do differ in their resistance to fatigue under such conditions.

To try to fix the problems created by their own initial, naive mistake, the folks at Sufferfest now claim that "FTP is dead" and that they have invented a novel approach that is better. In reality, however, all they have done is wind the clock back to the end of the previous century, prescribing workouts based on reference maximal efforts of the same durations I originally used to construct the power profiling tables. Not only is this a step backwards, it fails to fully recognize that, e.g., a maximal 1 min effort does not represent the same physiological strain for all individuals. (This is why iLevels, which provide individually-optimized targets for both power AND duration, were invented).

So...... Sufferfest people are just better at marketing than you?

---

Alex Arman

Strava

It seems like part of their effort with this is to help their users identify the style of rider they currently are, to determine how resistant to fatigue they are, for instance? At the very least it would be nice to have a better sense of how many matches you have to burn under certain conditions.

<sarcasm mode on>

Wow, now there's another novel idea. What *will* they come up with next?

<sarcasm mode off>

Marketing is for schmucks who care about money, and who lack the brains to come up with ideas that will stand on their own.

The next time you write a book, you should just release it and let it sit on the shelf with all the other books; no store appearances, no media junket, nothing on the internet. Nothing. Just let that book stand on its own.

---

https://markmcdermott.substack.com

That pretty well describes how much effort I ever put into writing and promoting our book. Yet, it is now available in (IIRC) eight languages, and is approaching close to 100,000 copies sold (thus making the publisher a bunch of money...the authors, not so much).

I suppose you could also look to the PMC as an example of how a good idea will always find a niche...there must be dozens of programs and training platform out there that have implemented it (and the applied sports science field has now belatedly "discovered" it), even though I only do this sort of shit for a hobby.

BTW, for anyone who naively believes Sufferfest's false claim that they have developed a novel approach, here is a link to Joe Friel's booklet from 1999, in which he proposed '8dp':

https://www.google.com/...dSWqCs3x9F0Zjftz3h1U

"It's an aerobic sport, dammit!" :-)

Yeah, the tagline "FTP is dead" had me literally LOL'ing...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

It had (and has) me questioning just how well Henderson actually understands exercise physiology. Saying "FTP is dead" makes about as much sense as saying "VO2max is dead." Yeah, you can choose to change how you describe/prescribe training, but that doesn't change how the body works.

I like where you’re going with this—but let’s suggest taking it one step further: don’t even write the book, right?. Rather than face publication issues and editing and all those appearances with people, a guy could just get angry, and then come online and write the same number of words needed for a book, but not worry about how shrill his responses would look on the printed page.

I take it that you haven't actually read the book? The parts that I contributed are practically all things that I had previously posted online, just polished up a bit (mostly by the editor) to create a better "flow" to the entire book. That's why Hunter gets much more of the authors' (minimal) share of the profits, and why there will never be another edition (i.e., I wasn't really that interested in writing the original, and am definitely not interested in doing even more work to produce an updated version).

I've got a copy within arm's reach of my desk, along with a couple from Friel. There's the real old Jeff Galloway book in there somewhere too.

I have a lot of respect for your work, especially as it's your hobby. Except maybe this recent paragraph:



My earlier point about discovering how many matches one has is this: A lot of us do endurance sport as our hobby. We get to 'race' a handful of times a year, without the kind of direct coaching that would help us know whether we're puncheurs, or just freds with too much cash and tummy and bike. We often don't have access to coaches with whom we can directly interact [whether a result of time, cash, or geography]---we have resources like your book, online articles, friends, and we have apps.

What Sufferfest is working at here is putting a system into the hands of the athletes a means by which to understand themselves as riders. Is 4DP a novel idea? Is FTP dead??! Nah, but the presentation in an easily accessible application is still potentially empowering. Might help users avoid some of the pitfalls of the canned workouts you mention.

Hi Everyone. David from The Sufferfest here. Thanks for your interest in what we're doing with 4DP. I hope you give it a go and, if you do, please let me know what you think. Happy to answer questions here, on our FB pages or via email on david@thesufferfest.com. IWBMATTKYT, David

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

I just did full frontal. Why are you such a sadist? That hurt more than any FTP test ever could.

Tim, We are not sadists. We're HEALERS. We just heal through Suffering. PS. FF is so, so tough. I've done it three times and I think I'm scarred for life now. ;)

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

I jest! That hurt more than any FTP test ever could.

Looking forward to ever-more-specific suffering.

What Sufferfest is "working at" is separating you from your money, by presenting the work of others (Friel's "8dp", my power profiling) as if it were their own. It is your money, so spend it as you see fit... just realize that you are as culpable of supporting unscrupulous behavior as someone who pays to watch a Harvey Weinstein movie.

Hello David. I have told you via email, Twitter and now I'll use ST: I hate you. And I hate you more everytime I complete any workout from The Sufferfest. If I ever see you I will whip you like a Sufferlandrian wildebeest. IWBMATTKYT.

Yes, it is pretty special. As a bit of background, and since you mentioned Full Frontal, you might be interested in Mac Cassin's (Coach and Physiologist at APEX Coaching) comment about Full Frontal on another forum: "The specific (FF) protocol created for the app is one that Neal spent years tweaking until the results from each specific effort match up with lab based results he carried out on thousands of different athletes of different abilities during his time as Director of Sports Science at the Boulder Center for Sports Medicine. Over the last 8 years Neal (and the other coaches at APEX) continued to utilize this specific testing protocol. Only after collecting an incredibly large amount of data correlating a riders results with their abilities in training were we able to determine how a riders results from this protocol correlate with what they are actually able to do in day to day training. This is why you cannot simply put in your best 5sec/1min/5min/20min values from different training days into the Sufferfest App. If you did that, many of the workouts would not be physically possible. This is also why we do not allow App users to access 4DP training until they have completed the FF fitness test. So while you are absolutely correct your 1min power at the end of our test will be lower than your fresh 1 min, that is very much intentional. For some individuals the difference is as little as 8%, for others it can be over 25%, which has a profound impact on their ability to carry out certain short high intensity efforts."

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

Thank you. When you do see me, you'll have to get in the queue to do that...the line is rather long of those with the same intention.

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

I have a question: please explain how your approach is novel, as you have explicitly claimed.

In particular, please explain why you believe it is ethical to use tests of 5 s, 1 min, 5 min, and 20 min power to determine what "type" of rider an athlete is, without acknowledging the original source of the idea.

I just want to say that I have greatly benefited from Coggan's work and McQuillan's. Although one has made me laugh and cry much more than the other.

So do you feel like you need to take a shower, like I did when the Weinstein story broke just a day or two after I had re-watched "Shakespeare in Love"?

I pirate those, too.

Then your chosen handle is appropriate, you worthless piece of shit. I am sure your mother is just as proud of you as David's (and Harvey's) is of him.

Are you accusing The Sufferfest of committing a crime?

I am far from an expert in business law, but they certainly seem to be skating close to the edge.

Regardless, it is clear that they are completely lacking in ethics.

No answers, David?

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

Dr Coggan,

Henderson’s results with Olympic athletes and hour record holders seems to indicate that he knows something about physiology.

I get your point about FTP. But I also think that the folks at Sufferfest have done a great job of moving the industry beyond the limitations of using FTP-based prescribed training methods.

As you noted earlier, 8dp, iLevels and now 4dp are available to adapt training for better results. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t iLevel based training only available in Training Peaks WKO4?

Frankly, that’s way out of my price range. Even Training Peaks was an expensive choice for a weekend warrior like myself. So what is an amateur cyclist supposed to use when we have to keep costs down?

That’s why Sufferfest is a game changer. Because it’s $10 a month and doesn’t require a degree in exercise physiology to understand.

I can take a 1 hour assessment test and then do improved “prescribed” training in an app that is also entertaining enough to keep me motivated. I’ve used the Sufferfest for 3 years. I’m still an amateur, but I’m healthier than I’ve ever been and at 52 years old, I’m also faster on my bike than when I started (5 years ago).

It’s not perfect, but it’s better than anything else that I can afford, and it’s working for me.

Could I point out that the Sufferfest indeed does acknowledge where they came up with the 4DP assessment test.

It is based off of a fitness exam developed by Apex coaching and verified by thousands of athletes.

It’s funny though that I’ve not heard any mention of Bannister’s work on this thread? Isn’t his work foundational to all modern physiological models? Couldn’t we claim that he hasn’t been given due credit?

Doctor Coggan, your work is legendary, well-respected and utilized by top athletes the world over. If you really want to move the industry toward iLevels, then make it affordable. Please!

Wow! I have read a lot of out there stuff on Slowtwitch, but this takes the cake. To use the Weinstein scandal to make your voice heard is bizarre and highly questionable behavior particular from an “academic” associated with a large university. As a father with a young daughter, the Weinstein scandal (tragedy) resonates deeply with me and to be confronted by such caviler comments on a triathlon forum is deeply unsettling, particularly by someone, whom before the aforementioned comments, I held in high regard. Regardless of the intellectual property dispute with Sufferfest, the path you have chosen to voice your opinion on this forum is disgusting.

Get over yourself. Some of your "breakthrough" ideas are just because you got there first, not because you are exceptionally clever. If it ain't trademarked or patented you need to simmer down.

Too far. Rape and sexual assault is not the same as what you feel Sufferfest have done with 4DP.

I use the sufferfest app, and think it is fantastic! I have looked at the FF video, and need to take quite a few brave pills before I attempt it! For the record I completed my knighthood this weekend, and I still get scared looking at it :D I have no doubt that 4dp will make me fitter, every time I have used sufferfest consistently, I get fitter!

Pretty much all exercise Science is iterations of what has gone before, the reason SF works for me is the humour mixed in with the pain!

As for linking this to allegations of non-consensual sex and sexual harrassment, have a word with yourself! It says alot more about your view of those crimes, than of what is going on here!

Hey, congrats on the Knighthood! That's awesome. As for FF -- you can crush it. I actually find it less mentally - although far more physically - demanding than Rubber Glove. Watch this for tips on how to approach and pace it to get the best result: https://vimeo.com/238020529

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

Well, that escalated quickly...

Since it was a direct attack by saying FTP is dead, I'm not surprised.

http://www.bikeradar.com/...-4dp-training-51020/

A direct attack? A direct attack at who? And I don't see the Sufferfest group making lewd and preposterous comparisons to/at anyone.

Does anyone "own" FTP? I honestly don't know. It seems like it's an industry standard measurement that I've never seen anyone cite when referring to it.

Perhaps NFL teams and scouts need to start giving credit to Paul Brown whenever they measure a player's 40-time. Instead of saying that a particular corner has a "4.3 second 40", they should say he's a "4.3 second Paul Brown short speed test guy".

Saying "FTP is dead" is just an attention grabbing headline to point out they are showing a new approach. Over the years, I've actually thought The Sufferfest seemed pretty deferential in citing Neal/Apex and other coaches in the development of their stuff.

If I'm using Training Peaks to measure TSS, should I be using the new FTP and threshold HR values that you've given me? Or the one that training peaks just did?

I suspect the answer is use the TP value since it's their system, though you guys just gave me HR threshold of 171 whereas TP gave a 165. I'm inclined for the higher #. (Plus i know that I can hold >165hr for an hour)

For me the values still matter as I use HR to measure TSS for my commutes. (Plus I need a standardized data place for that running and swimming nonsense)

Their 4dp includes a 20 minute segment. What they mean by that statement is that workout profiles based solely on FTP are dead. Is there any other cycling app available which offers a way to determine anaerobic power targets that doesn’t simply use a factor of FTP to do so?

After doing kitchen sink a couple weeks ago I def have unfinished business with you guys... You owe me a new pair of lungs as well as new stronger legs as I left my chicken legs on the trainer together with my now ruined shoes...

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

WKO4.

http://
In my book, anyone who condones either behavior is "disgusting."

Ya think? Banister's impulse-response model was first described in the early 1970s...why did it lay fallow for >30 y, until I watered it down to create the now-ubiquitous PMC? Why is the academic applied sports science world just now "discovering" acute and chronic training load, when cyclists have been using the approach for nearly 15 y? Why is normalized power unique? Etc.

Regardless, TP owns all the intellectual property rights now, so it is up to them to decide whether they want to try to go after Sufferfest. My guess is that they won't, in part because there are numerous end-runs around such issues (such as calling it "4dp" instead of "power profiling", even though that is exactly what it is).

1. This is how you acknowledge prior work, such as Banister's (note that the date on the article is incorrect):
https://www.trainingpeaks.com/...performance-manager/

2) I have never had any control over any financial decisions related to products that use my ideas - sorry.

Nice dodge.

Isn’t their protocol similar to the fatigue profile tests you have in your book? Sounds pretty unoriginal to me.

Indeed. I used to like Sufferfest as far as "entertaining funny bike videos" - it made for a change of the usual Netflix and I didn't mind paying the occasional 10$ for a video, but the day they switched to a subscription mode for their videos is the day I stopped caring about them.

Harvey Weinstein? If I have to pay to go see My Little Pony Movie with my daughters, how screwed am I???

^This. And the new ones don’t have sound tracks. My guess is that there is pressure to make money now, and thus there is a move away from video production and towards this 4dp stuff. And since the videos are set up with specific levels relative to “threshold” how does this new method translate into the onscreen values on the existing video library?

The durations are identical, as is using the results to describe a rider's "type."

The only way they differ in this context is in the exact test protocol, i.e., single-session "Full Frontal" on a trainer vs. Hunter's two-day outdoor protocol as described in our book.*

*My experience/exposure has always been with/to serious racing cyclists, who compete frequently enough that spontaneous efforts are sufficient to determine their power profile. I have therefore never developed/used/advocated a specific protocol. If I did, though, it wouldn't be trainer-based, since so many can't produce as much power on a trainer as outdoors.

Too bad the first thing a lot of us are hearing about WKO4 is in the midst of you —in response to my joke about pirating Weinstein movies—calling me a worthless piece of shit, and going back to edit your post to add a line about my mom. You could have apologized, that would have been cool.

Farewell, Trainingpeaks.

Piracy is theft. If you feel offended that I called you out on your stated behavior, you shouldn't have joked about it in the first place (just as Trump deserves all blow-back he receives about his famous interview, even if you believe his claim that it was only a joke).

As for WKO4 and TP, 1) if you're only now learning about the former, you must be quite new to power-based training, and 2) any actions you take regarding the latter have nothing to do with me. As I have pointed out before, I don't work for them (and never have). I also no longer receive licencing fees for their use of my ideas.

IOW, I, and I alone, am responsible for my comments here, and I stand by every word.

I can tell anyone out there from experience, because I've used the app and have applied the FDP theory, it is amazing stuff. The Sufferfest has made me who I am as a cyclist. My only regret is that Sir David is sharing this with the cycling world. So my competition is going to get as badass (well, almost) as I am.

This is brilliant!

Specific suffering. You nailed it with that statement.

Aren’t WKO4 and Sufferfest designed for different purposes? I’ve used Training Peaks and Golden Cheetah. I’m currently using Sport Tracks for my analytics. Sufferfest does not offer any analytics.

From what I can tell WKO4 also has nothing that allows me to generate a gpx file while on a trainer. No trainer pairing, virtual video & audio, etc.

So they serve entirely different purposes.

So Friel's model was based on assessing somebody's power profile, or rider "type", by testing across 8 different durations? And your system is based on 4 different durations?

Mr. Coggan your remarks about The Sufferfest are disrespectful, tacky and disgusting. I am astonished at the time and effort you are putting in to try and undermine these brilliant minds at The Sufferfest. I am new at this. 18 months since I have purchased a road bike and started using The Sufferfest. I know nothing about you. But I can tell you this. After your comments, I couldn't care less if you were able to make me the fastest cyclist on the face of the earth. I have zero respect for someone of your nature. Did you really call someone a worthless piece of shit? Really?

Here is what The Sufferfest has done for me. I am 51 years old. After using The Sufferfest for 10 months, I knew I was good enough to race. And win. I am racing against 20 year olds and beating them. I have been an athlete for 30 years. A damn good one. But The Sufferfest literally unlocked the beast in me. I can give 110% on any given day with any type of workout. And do well. The theory behind The Sufferfest has taken me beyond my limits. There's so much here you are missing. I have used and tested the 4DP THEIR way. With THEIR workouts. All I can say is wow. The gains are unreal!

You are entitled to an opinion. I just ask that you please speak your opinion in a respectful manner. Because these are my friends you are bashing. And we are a strong community. Nothing you can say will ever change my opinion of The Sufferfest. In fact, I think The Sufferfest is so good that if they increased their monthly fee 5x what I am paying now, I would still pay. Because it's worth it. Every cent.

You called someone a worthless piece of sh*t! At best I think you need to gain some perspective!

Also I am fairly new here, so I might be missing some of the subtleties of the forum, but you do come across as a bit of a cockwomble!

This is going to be another fitness cult CrossFit..Paleo..now this latest fad! If you’re a steady state rider like most are here on this forum then why buy into this?

Grunter, is that you?

:-)

What you say is true, Sufferfest and WKO4 serves different purposes, but the question you asked was:

"Is there any other cycling app available which offers a way to determine anaerobic power targets that doesn’t simply use a factor of FTP to do so?"

WKO4 does that and arguably in a more nuanced approach than Sufferfest's 4DP method, although as you correctly point out, you need to use something else to then utilise that data in a workout.

My decision to cut ties with TP came about solely because of you, regardless of your hand-waving here. I was pretty happy with them up until last night, but I'm not willing to put any money into a tool that has your name on it in any way.

As I indicated, no skin off my nose... you are just impacting yourself.

It appears that it already is.

Uh huh. I feel better already, it's like a long shower after watching "Shakespeare in Love" the second time.

No, I developed an anchor (i.e., FTP) based approach to simplify things.

My levels are also descriptive, whereas Joe's eight 'CP sub x' values were prescriptive.

Joe also never suggested 'profiling' an individual based on their power duration relationship.

Hello gantaliano and All,

https://groups.google.com/.../wattage/kKg-h5ajQQs

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

I think Xert uses something similar. It came pretty close to what I use as an FTP based on the ride data I uploaded. They also classify you based on what duration you are strongest at based on your data and have workouts targeted for what you want your strength to be. I don't think they have training plans though.

I know my all out short efforts when fresh are much higher than what my FTP would predict but at the end of a race they are much lower (I have been doing crits this year).

I am very interested in the new sufferfest plan but unfortunately it won't work with my computrainer. I wish there was some sort of workaround, maybe by using the PerfPro software as a go between?

No kidding! This wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I asked for, "thoughts". But I guess it's been informative in its own way.

A bit more level-headed conversation on wattage (which tends to be the case).

I get the anger regarding missed opportunities for attribution/citation here. SF could consider rectifying that if cooler heads were considered an important outcome. However, I think the hype over the "FTP is dead" advertising is a bit overblown -As previously mentioned, that's really marketing hyperbole to get people in the door.

As noted before both here and on wattage, for the average weekend warrior who can't/won't pay for full-time coaching, this is still probably a step in the right direction, regardless of how long ago the field, thanks to work by Dr. Coggan et al, already made that step. It's imperfect. But it still might be closer to true than FTP-only based levels, which is really how all of the popular erg-based apps are doing it today.

I'm still trying to understand exactly how this is operationalized in the Sufferfest app. For example, lets say you are doing Nine Hammers. There are effort numbers displayed during the workout, and usually a 7 or an 8 translates to what you entered as your "FTP". With this new system, that translation will change depending on your test results and where in the workout you are. By how much does this change?

In essence this is simply testing 4 power durations (:05, 1, 5, and 20) then establishing a power peofile, ID relative weakness, and prescribe a training plan. Nothing novel and for experienced athletes overly simplified. For novice cyclists new to power this is a great system to get them on the correct track.

If you have a lot of power data you can quickly id power issues simply based on your power curve and race performance.

Saying FTP is dead is clearly a marketing statement, but sometimes i do think people put way too much emphasis on their 20min FTP tests and neglect simply looking at general trends in their power data. This kind of data analysis allows for a clearer understanding of your strengths and weakness relative to your goals.

De-emphasizing 20 min power to triathletes must mean there is a use for 1 min maximal efforts in triathlon? Maybe this is the missing link?

I’m a cyclist, would likely drown or get passed by a running turtle. Having said that , I could see 1 minute power being helpful during the bike segment in hilly terrain.

That, and the fact that I’ve known triathletes who also compete in other cycling events. The Ride Across Wisconsin is one that comes to mind.

I'm curious to try it in order to get a sense of how many matches I have to burn in an event. Your big hill example is a good one, and I could think of a few others. How many times in 40k can I really push it for a minute and still be able to run?

Hey there Goodboyr: The numbers you're referring to are the ones you saw in our videos regarding RPE (not sure who we should thank and attribute that concept to, but I'm sure I'll find out). When we created the app, all those RPEs were mapped to percentages of FTP (like all other active training apps out there - e.g., us, TrainerRoad, Zwift, FulGaz, etc.). With 4DP, we've changed that. Neal and Mac and the team at APEX Coaching have gone through every one of our workouts and mapped each effort to the right intensity at the right time at the right percentage of that intensity. As you can imagine, that's a lot of work, specifically because it's not always a given that, say, a sprint in a workout gets mapped to your five second power. What an effort gets mapped to depends on where and when that effort comes within a workout and the goals of the effort and workout itself. This all happens behind-the-scenes in the app, so the workouts themselves don't change, but how well they match up to your personal capabilities does...in some cases dramatically and in other cases subtly. The result are workouts that are neither too hard nor too easy and provide the right training stimulus. Here's some more on that from Neal Henderson and Mac Cassin of APEX: https://vimeo.com/238127752

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

I am a very novice cyclist knowledge guy. I am a near expert marathoner. So please forgive my ignorance.

In a marathon I could not sprint for a minute or run significantly faster than my marathon pace for a decent amount of time without it very much negatively affecting my race. But it's very important as a marathoner to do sprint work all the time during training. And it's because doing all that kind of stuff makes running marathon pace easier.

Is it not the same in cycling? Wouldn't working some on 1 minute power and improving it also make the other stuff better?

---

https://markmcdermott.substack.com

Much respect Sufferfest.

What the key takeaway is workout specificity - though you could achieve the same thing without the video by having a large workout library (Trainer road). Though this way is much more interesting with the videos.

What I'm trying to figure out is now that I know my rider type (pursuiter) - what advantage does this give me if my focus is on 70.3/IM? Do I pick courses with 5 min hills? Or do I still focus on endurance workouts, which I would do anyway?

Could you show us two workouts using 4DP vs standard FTP to see how the targets have changed? I get the concept, would love to see how they are modified with the new inputs. My prior post was not meant to offend, just noting from a pure academic standpoint how someone could perceive the situation. That being said, it doesn't at all excuse some of the comments made, which have been over the top. Internet be internettin' the past 48h.

I've been a fan of sufferfest for a while, bought my first copy of Fight Club in 2012, ended up buying 10 more videos during that model. I have done a few Tours of Sufferlandria, etc. I finally got around to signing up for the app about a month ago. I took the new test last night and loved it, and am looking forward to seeing how it makes me suffer more specifically.

"the right training stimulus"...as determined and verified by what method? Just curious.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

The video seems to imply at certain points that they are setting the targets to improve your weaknesses. But then the example they use seems to imply that if you happen to have a higher number for say the 5 minute one, then you get a higher target.........not sure which it is....and whether such a difference actually does make a difference........Using WKO4 i can analyze and determine strengths and weaknesses in the power profile, and then do specific workouts to improve weaknesses. But thats a choice of a workout, not a particular target during a somewhat generic video workout.......

You must be referring to their drill vids, they don't have soundtracks, but they're not designed to always be used from front to back. The new vids released since the switch to subscription, and the ones upcoming, are like the old ones with soundtracks and all.

Far be it from me to tell anyone how to spend their money, but I have a bit of a different view of subscription models for software, considering I've worked in the industry. It's more of a win/win than it seems on its face, companies get a steady reliable stream of income, users get cheaper "upgrades" and generally better products and support (since the companies aren't as pressured to hit sales targets). In the case of The Sufferfest, aside from access to their entire library, you get access to their training plans and the app (which displays cadence/hr/power targets, and can control smart trainers, similar to other indoor training apps on the market). Subscription models are not for everyone, but I dig it.

There's a lot of vitriol being hurled around in this thread, but it's a bit shocking, and honestly, offensive, to see Dr. Coggan resort to comparing the Sufferfest to a serial sexual abuser. This is a huge part of the issue, that someone is willing to dumb down Weinstein's years of ABUSE of women to a comparison with a software product they have a grievance with. We're talking about a man who wielded his power to sexually assault women for years, and a software product you feel is ripping off (old) scientific methods for profit. That's such a disgusting comparison, those things aren't even on the same planet.

I can understand if you have issues with what they're doing, but you can easily bang out an email to them and the guys at APEX to voice your concerns, rather than resorting to disgusting attacks and mis-characterizations.

I have the same view as what PigBodine articulated earlier, that The Sufferfest is bringing a level of personalization to their workouts that cyclists wouldn't get from other immensely popular apps like Zwift or TrainerRoad. For the vast majority of cyclists, getting that from a $10 a month app is a far better deal than spending $350 a month for a coach prescribing the level of analysis Dr. Coggan is advocating.

Yes, if you have a particularly strong five minute power, then the app will set targets that are appropriate for that strength (where, previously based only upon a % of FTP, they might have been too low). Likewise, if your five minute power is low -- a weakness -- then the app will set appropriate targets to help you improve (where, previously based only upon a % of FTP, they might have been to high). This goes across all the metrics. Make sense?

Also, if you go to Passport > Profile, you'll see that the app recommends specific workouts to address your weaknesses as well as your strengths. (Note: We've found a bug in how some of that logic is working for some people and will have it fixed by this weekend.)

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

Piracy is theft only if the material is copyrighted or patented. I've read the entire thread and it appears you have neither elsewise it would be easy to find a lawyer to take your case on commission. Instead, it seems like you've gone bonkers simply because a software competitor didn't provide a proper citation as if their business were akin to an academic periodical. Would you have been fully placated if Sufferfest.com had a page that included a brief history of the science and training theories behind 4DP and mentioned your contributions? Is this all about vanity?

It doesn't change the video's workout focus, rather it changes the targets. Most of the cycling apps out there use % of FTP for their targets in their canned workouts, which it seems Dr. Coggan and The Sufferfest agree isn't great. For instance, my sprint power is WAY higher than any app would prescribe based on my FTP, so sprint efforts using the targets or my Kickr in ERG mode weren't all that effective. With 4DP, yea, it sucks pretty hard when the trainer clamps down for a sprint effort at the end of an interval.

Obviously if you have a coach or are an ace with tools like WKO4 you can toss the custom workouts into something Zwift, which I'm sure Mat Heyman did, but it's nice to see The Sufferfest tackle this issue for those of who don't or aren't.

hahaha

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

2 questions:

1. Do you have a list of the library of 4DP based workouts? Do you have complete plans from base - specialty, or are they more target-specific and not complete as say Trainer Road for example?

2. Is it safe to do a 5s max sprint on an indoor trainer? Surely the power will be much, much lower than outdoors, where you sway the bike and move without worry of things breaking when sprinting. I use a trainer, but can't imagine max sprints on it!

Hey Ghostwind. ALL of our workouts are now based on 4DP. If you download the app, you'll see them all there -- 41 sessions (and counting) over Base, Climbing, Endurance, Fitness Test, 'Mashup,', Racing, Speed, Style and Time Trial categories. Each workout has a specific purpose and you can dial intensity up or down as necessary. There are 14 training plans in the app. This is a section, however, we want to work on and will change our training plan approach dramatically in Q1 2018.

How safe it is to do a flat out sprint on your trainer depends on your bike and your trainer. We point this out in the Full Frontal video. If it IS safe and your trainer is capable of hitting the watts you're capable of, then you should get very close to what you can do outdoors. Some more on that is in this video: https://vimeo.com/238124644

Hope that helps?

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

Yes, Xert uses MMP as I remember

But to dprocket that questioned the when I said "direct attack"

I respectfully say that it is more than an attention grabbing headline, it's a sensational claim to draw people to their product by denouncing their competition.

That's my opinion and why I'm not surprised at the response.

I am in neither camp on this, but you must (or at least should) know that what you're advocating is an easy route to undermining nearly any work in human health, short of a vast scientific study. This isn't a case of riding on your home trainer to establish CRRs, human studies are expensive, time consuming processes. Low risk, small commercial ventures should not be expected to meet that standard. They're not treating cancer patients.

And when is hyperbole not apart of marketing?

A couple of R charts showing correlation based off a dataset the won't share will put them equal to A.C's work on the WKO4 method.

If you compare any training app to any analysis app, you will come up short. Comparing apples to oranges has that tendency. And you still need a trainer app.

Sufferfest is the best one out there right now. There’s nothing that says you have to stop using an analysis tool. But both together, suffering and results!

A note for anyone seeking to join the wattage group:

Keep in mind that join requests that don't answer the basic joining questions are automatically rejected outright as potential spambots. The questions are to prove your relevance as a member and that you are human.

---

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

Over the past 24 hours I have received a lot of messages and emails about this thread and finally read it over coffee this morning. I have not been keeping up with my forums lately and was pretty surprised by the depth of this so decided to reply. My name it Tim Cusick and I am the TrainingPeaks WKO4 product leader. I guided the project of developing WKO4 as a commercial project and worked with Dr. Coggan, Hunter Allen and Kevin Williams to bring it to life. At the core of WKO4 is a powerful model of human performance known as the Power Duration Curve Model (PDC). The PDC allows for the estimation of select physiological metrics (among other things) that give individual insights into changes in an athlete's physiology while tracking the response to exercise stimuli. To me this has been a game changer. The PDC was developed by Dr. Andy Coggan along with the idea of such metrics (in our language Pmax, FRC,mFTP, TTE and Stamina) to create a full 360 degree view of the individual athlete and expand beyond just the tracking of FTP. The team further developed the idea into more applied uses for coaches of which iLevels and Optimized Intervals were born (think sometimes Andy forgets my personal influence on the development of those two). That is my background, just clearly stating who I am and what our product does.
First off a fair amount of the messages accused Sufferfest / Apex of ripping off our ideas as moving beyond FTP has been preached time and time again in our webinar series. I want to answer that first. No, I do not believe they ripped off those ideas. This “premise” has been well known and utilized by good coaches for a while. As a matter of fact, in WKO4 one of the core “ideals” was based off just that; the utilization of the PDC science to go beyond just FTP to individualize training. Do I think Sufferfest and Apex applied some of the learning from TRWPM and WKO4 to develop their product? Probably, but to me this is the way things advance. We all learn from those that have gone before us and look to improve the usage knowledge in various ways. This is the way the “community” which is cycling coaching and training grows. That doesn’t mean every product “nails” the next step and gets it right but it does mean that people are pushing the boundaries, learning from others and trying to advance the ball. I do think that Sufferfest / Apex would should have cited or mentioned some of it influences though. Often this is the issue, new products and systems launch, using some ideas / intellectually property basis from the past but not giving credit unless forced to do so by a copyright. I think it is important in cycling we honor the community even when things like a copyright do not exist. Dr. Coggan and Hunter Allen invented the idea of power profile testing and published a book on it, if that influenced Sufferfest / Apex, would have been nice to mention. If the learning of PDC, iLevels and other items in WKO4 helped and were utilized, again, nice to mention. Why do I make that point? Cycling is a community, the more we recognize and respectfully build off learning the better we are. We can do so in a positive way that enhances our knowledge. Maybe it is the idealist in me, but that is simple the way I see the world.
Second, a lot of people asked me to stop Dr. Coggan and his replies. To be clear, Andy is not part of TrainingPeaks and I have no control. Even if I did, I would personally not look to sensor him in any way even though I disagree with both the vehemence and argumentative nature of his reply. I personally “wish” he would stop the level of aggressiveness as I hate this type of negativity in the cycling community. That being said, there is a part of me that is empathic and understands his massive frustration. I have worked on the WKO4 project with Andy and can honestly say he is brilliant and his intellectual capacity to solve problems is unrivaled. His commitment to accuracy and doing things right is unparalleled and his contribution to the world of cycling is massive. For so many years people have been using his ideas without even a nod of credit which I could image builds up over time. Those positive words stated, his online persona is aggressive and attacking and often whereas he is correct or right, his approach, in my opinion, demeans him and quality of his intellect. Personally, I do not condone his replies even though I believe in his right to reply as he sees fit and can only state he does not represent my opinion.
To lump in the final questions (that are more off topic of the thread) and comments into a few statements. Let me start with Sufferfest, like many online training programs it is a fine program and the people behind it should be proud. Apex coaching is a quality group and their palmares are top notch and think Sufferfest chose a great partner. For those that know me, I tend to have a common theme in things like this. Try it and formulate your own opinion. (I know the thread is about the IP in the product, but many asked me what I thought about the product.) Some asked me about the competition from Sufferfest with WKO4. My answer, there is none. We don't compete and the products do different things. As a matter of fact, they are complementary in my opinion. The funny thing is you can use the Sufferfest product to train and track the physiological response in WKO4 to BETTER help you determine if it is effective. Look at the promotion video, Neal has WKO4 on his computer screen in the video as he is a user I might bet he used it to test the validity of what he was building.

Here is a list of free recorded webinars that might help explain how they are complimentary: https://www.youtube.com/...H_fz5oO9UwwVm_KXsLQ3 (they are free, not selling anything)
Finally, this is my opinion. When it comes to forums I typically only post once and do not reply to other responses. Why? I simply respect your ability and right to develop your own opinion and do not need mine to dominate. If you agree, great...if you disagree, great. My only advice is stated above, try the product and make your own opinion. Further replies tend to result in me just trying to reinforce my opinion based on a response that disagrees. I fight that habit by not replying.

---

Tim Cusick
TrainingPeaks WKO4 Product Development Leader

Actually...all I'm asking for is for them to compare a random group of athletes who's training plan prescriptions are based on % of FTP vs. a group using the same training plans, but with the values based on their method. Which group on average improves the most? Is the difference statistically significant, and to what level? For a group that claims to have so many athletes under their purview, that shouldn't be hard, right?

Of course, that only gives an insight into which method is more effective, or not, as compared to the other...but it still doesn't say which method is "right". There may be another method that's even better ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

My 2c. I've been using Sufferfest for just about 7 years now on and off. I've witnessed their evolution from a handful of videos to much much more now. And I think they are doing great work. The videos are top quality, witty and keep me engaged (usually laughing or crying) whilst on my trainer (which is way less engaging than being outside). And their price is positioned well.

Good for you David and the rest of your team!

I just did FF yesterday and can't wait to begin working on my areas of need. And on November 1st I plan to attempt (read CRUSH) the KoS challenge. I recommend you to everyone I ride with and take your videos with me on all of my business trips.

Keep it up and Thanks!

J

---

---------------------------------------------------------------
My other car is a Felt. DFL>DNF>DNS.

"There will come a day you won't be able to do this, today is not that day."

@Tim, thank very much for clearing some things up and representing yourself and your platform well -- as opposed to some other representation I've seen here. You've cleared up a lot of things brought up here with class.

Dave @ SF, you mentioned revamping the training plans in q1 2018. It seems like the individual workouts are tuned for the cyclist's 4DP, but how about the training plans as they stand today? For example, if my 4DP says I need to work on my sprinting, but I'm in a base/winter mode (still time-crunched) without a goal event in site (just want to stay somewhat fit), does the 4DP prescription (sorry to use that word...) clash in some way with my own winter goals? Not saying that I can't work on NM power in the winter, but it may not be my main goal...

Thanks, and looking forward to hooking up with SF again!

i'm planning on giving it a go shortly. need a few days to recover before and get myself in the mental state i need. thanks for the pain David! as much as it hurts, your videos definitely entertain while beating me up. Glad that sufferfest is a part of my training regimen

Tim, Thanks for taking the "high road". It is a shame the others, one in particular, could not. Hopefully, we will evolve the the point where the "high road" is not the "road less traveled". [Footnote: I can't tell you who first came up with the term "high road", but it was not me. The "road less traveled" is a reference to "the one less traveled by" in the poem "The Road Not Taken" by Robert Frost. :) ]

For the rest - DC Rainmaker just posted a hands on review the 4DP workout. At the bottom of his review he added a nice "preemptive unique warning" about proper etiquette in posting any comments (without naming names or the reason he added it). Not a proud moment for the Slowtwitch community.

- Brian

How dare you bring rationality and maturity here? I wasn't done with my bag of schadenfreude popcorn yet!

to those who've been private messaging me about this thread: i've read every post. i decided to leave everything up and published because i felt it was a distillation of a lot of the crosstalk by a lot of the regulars who've been habitues of a half-dozen forums over the past decade and a half. to delete this record would be to obliterate what could be a teaching moment, if there are any teachable people left on the internet.

i think this is, or will be, or could be, a specifically proud moment for the slowtwitch community, if we can once and for all find a way forward by which elements of the cycling and tri community can talk to each other civilly. otherwise, whether on slowtwitch or elsewhere, this sort of dynamic will continue.

tim and i think alike. those inside this ecosystem ought not to eat each other. i do understand what it feels like to invent or conceive of something, and have others riff off of what i developed or introduced (not rip off, riff off, and there's a big difference between the two). i remember a bike company engineer calling me in 1990, saying, "we're going to be copying your bike." my reply was, "fine, but don't f**k it up. if you're going to do it, do it right or it will reflect badly on me." and we spoke about every 3 weeks for 6 months on the development of what would become my biggest competitor.

people routinely make new bike fit systems that riff of of mine, they appropriate the terms stack and reach which are terms i identified and coined. good! it just validates ideas that it turns out may have been good after all! tim is right. we move forward and we're all in this together.

sufferfest is a first rate, rock solid product that is riding the biggest wave in cycling today, which is the move to stationary. beginning pretty much now you'll all be seeing a huge emphasis on this site on what we're calling "stationary season" that will formally begin oct 22. sufferfest is a much loved part of that paradigm.

carry on...

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Excellent post! That should have ended the thread. Thanks.

Dan, As the nobody/lurker that orginally asked the question, I had no idea what was about to unfold. I am in the camp of amatuer triathlete who hasn't had the time or money to hire coaches or dig super deep into power based training. As a result, I've let TrainerRoad do that for me over the last 4 years. But I’ve oftentimes done the Sufferfest workouts with the purchased videos through Trainerroad. And I've had amazing results!

So I originally asked this question (with some apparent naivety, I'm now realizing) in order to get the opinion of those who were much more educated on power based training. My eyes have now been opened to a whole new world that I was never aware of. I really appreciate the perspective of Dr. Coggan. But I also see what Sufferfest is doing to try to bring smarter training at a reduced cost to athletes. Plug and play. It’s not perfect. It may not even be as innovative as it’s being marketed to be. (That part, I cannot speak intelligently on…)

Thanks Tim from Training Peaks for the soothing words on community. This is the kind of balanced response I was looking for. In the end, I don’t feel like my question was fully answered. But I guess what I’ve discovered is that time will tell on whether or not this system is more effective than an FTP-based system; my question can’t be answered yet.

But I do know this: across the last four years, I have ALWAYS been at my fastest when using Sufferfest videos in TrainerRoad. So I concur with Dan when he says that it’s a rock-solid product, just like TrainerRoad, taking advantage of indoor training needs… and I might just give this new product a go and see what happens!

Thanks so much for that Dan. The Slowtwitch community is an exceptional one. We're proud to be even a small part of it and look forward to positive and constructive conversations with you all. Thank you, David McQuillen, Chief Suffering Officer, The Sufferfest.

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

I sort of traipsed into your thread with a degree of enthusiasm about 4DP, and initially I was just little surprised by the vitriol that popped up. I responded sincerely early on. Then when it started to get weird, I amped it up a little. Not much, but a little. Even now, I believe my trolling about the tone that came up was pretty inocuous. Granted, my sense of humor isn’t for everyone and doesn’t carry into print all the time, but when the response got really ugly and there was no progress toward toning it down, I should have realized that there are probably some more profound isses at work. I am not proud of taunting someone—even in what I considered a cleary, obviously glib manner—�who is effectively defenseless not to respond with rage.

The one advantage I had at the time was my relative anonymity. I found myself questioning whether that anonymity made me less thoughtful about my responses. I’m ready to give that up in the interests of furthering just moving past this.

Thanks, Tim for taking the time to read this thread, digest it and offer such a considered response. We're proud to be a TrainingPeaks partner. We will continue to do our best to be ever better as a company and to deliver ever greater benefits to cyclists and triathletes. We can look to you and the TrainingPeaks family as great role models on how to do so. Thank you. - David McQuillen, Chief Suffering Officer.

PS. That must have been one big cup of coffee. :)

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

When is the half distance tri plan scheduled to be ready?

---

"see the world as it is not as you want it to be"

I was going to reply something to that effect, but then I realize not many people know the scientific method and even less understand why it it is important.
Either that or when it comes to this matter as well as aerodynamics, (rotational, lol) weight, people choose to put emotion over rationality.

i think most people here understand the scientific method very well, and they understand why it is important. they also understand when it is important.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Repeated measures anova as a mixed model would allow you to compare intraclass and interclass. But indeed, there might be something even better. Maybe using 2s, 3min27, and 18min31 would work better :-)

How does the approach differ to Skiba's CP and his W' concept? I haven't read yet about 4DP, just got some of its gist from this thread, so it may be a stupid question that was already addressed elsewhere.

That's just silly. What does TSF have to gain?

So, they do "something", then what? ST would NEVER be satisfied. Say that they put up some "study" as you suggest. Then ST rips it apart for its methods, sample size, sample selection, statistical analysis, and the conclusions drawn, the inherent bias in having conducted their own "study", and the fact that they haven't published enough of the "raw" data, and the fact that they never submitted it to the "right" peer reviewed journal.

Other than that, I'm sure it would be hugely useful!


To be clear, I'm not a customer, and have no intention to be. I hate indoor training, and would rather ride my 30x30/5x5/2x20/3x30/1x60 on black ice, in driving freezing rain, and 30mph wind.

You're having a difficult time separating the part of my comment that was serious, and the part that was obviously a joke...
Breathe, then try again :)

CP and W' are not really Skiba, they're old as the hills (Monod and Scherer).

But your Q is a good one, since to establish CP and W' athletes typically test at multiple durations but need to perform multiple tests to ensure they are fresh for each one. A fit is then done to estimate CP and W' parameters. This approach has been peer reviewed and built upon over the last 50 years, so we know the limits to its usefulness.

In 4DP there is a single test, so some of the efforts will be a little down, apparently this is accounted for by their tools. Quite how they determine how down on your best the results are is not known -- it would be really interesting to see that, I guess that is their secret sauce. We have to trust that it works since its not peer reviewed (same with Xert, WKO4 PDC).

Thanks!

Not really...more like I should have replied to Tom A, rather than you. I'm not all outraged or anything...no breathing exercises necessary. I probably should have put more of it in pink....or half-pink.

I just find it silly to suggest TSF should conduct a "study" to convince ST (or the community at-large) of anything. Especially for something that isn't even novel---its just a product based on old ideas with new marketing terms. Reminds me of a story: The Emperor Has No Clothes.

I agree. And I think they also understand when simple comparisons are important.

I'm not asking for a full-blown study though...just a simple comparison. They say they've made an improvement in how their workouts are prescribed based on power-profiling concepts first put in place by others. Logically, that makes some sense. Great...they say that it's "better" and gives more effective training. I'm just asking for some measure of what that improvement is in regards to training effect.

It would be like a bike manufacturer claiming its bike is lower drag than its previous model, but not revealing (or measuring) any drag data...and then saying "that old model is SLOW ("dead"), you can tell this is faster just by looking at it!" ;-)

For all we know, this may be a better way for their workout prescriptions...or, it may just be a bunch of "farting around" that doesn't change much in regards to training response. There's no way of knowing without some sort of comparison. So if they're going to claim one way is "right", then I'm going to ask to see some objective evidence before plopping down my hard-earned cash and investing the training time. That's all...

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

My concern would be that a "simple comparison" can be just as misleading/biased as the original marketing claim, however. If you are going to present some analytics demonstrating your method is superior, your analyses better be robust, or they will satisfy no one, especially in the ST circles arguing here. This would be some complex modeling and would likely require more than an ANOVA to adjust for the multitude of likely confounders when looking at real world data.

Thinking completely off the cuff, and a bit too sleep deprived and over caffeinated for this time of day, you might get closest to a trial-style analysis by comparing effects using TSF data collected pre-4DP and post-4DP, not within individual but over time across individuals, potentially utilizing propensity score matching for some subset of collected covariates at baseline (age, baseline metrics, weight) as well as compliance to the prescribed regimen to mimic comparison of like individuals. I struggle more with what the ideal outcome measure would be between the two systems, however.

The requests for peer-reviewed evidence are quite obviously rhetorical. They're merely pointing out that Sufferfest are making some bold claims in their marketing that are categorically not backed up by any evidence and in the eyes of any critical observer could very easily be demonstrated to be false.

To read between the lines for you, the implication is that they should merely stop making these claims until they have at least some form of evidence to back it up.

I don't want to pile on because I have no dog in this fight, but that's just my opinion as a scientist.

Exactly. The answer to "when it is important" is "whenever you want to backup claims you make on a method or product you're trying to sell".
Showing people improving with one method of training only proves that "training" works. And we've known that for millennia.

That's not how marketing works. Backing up a marketing claim with "evidence" only invites argument with the quality/accuracy of the evidence. From TSF's point of view, they have NOTHING to gain by following this line of thought. Its all way to fuzzy to be provably true or false. Customers will have success (because training does that), and their marketing material will be plastered with those "success stories" which swear that they spent years not making any progress, and "only" NOW (using TSF) have they seen major gains.

Besides, the predominant theme in this thread has not been that "it doesn't work", but rather that "its nothing new". Just recognize it for what it is, a new way to market and old idea---aka a Marketing Breakthrough.

I don't have a dog in the fight either...again, I'm not going to spend my winter on the trainer. If I'm going to suffer, I'm going to do it outside.

So, this is just my opinion as an Engineer, and product manager.

Piracy is even only piracy if there is a specific IP law broken (generally copyright). Copyright is out in this case, as the text of SF's material is all new. Trademark? 4DP is new (whether 8DP is trademarked I don't know, nor whether a court would declare that to be confusingly similar). That leaves patent; is SF infringing on a patented procedure? And it has to be very detailed, as different ways of accomplishing the same things are done all the time to get around patents. My suspicion is no, but let's see.

Coggan: You are accusing SF of "piracy". Please specify which IP of yours (you feel) they are infringing in which aspect of IP law. Provide as much detail as possible. It is not illegal to take someone else's idea and run with it if that idea is not covered by actual IP law. If you cannot identify with specificity, it could be argued you are very close to libel. At least, there would be more argument for that than "piracy" because you feel offended.

And repeatedly trying to paint them with the person-non-grata du jour doesn't make you come off as having a valid point.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

Hey there Dockt! Sorry for the late reply. We currently offer 14 different training plans in the app. They were designed to get the best improvement possible in various time periods (3-10 weeks) and volumes (Novice to Advanced). Now, with 4DP, each of the Sufferfest workouts we specify in those plans -- whether it's focused on sharpening your climbing, or sprinting or preparing for a gran fondo - will be even more effective than before when they were based only on FTP. (As an aside, we don't have a base/winter plan but will have a different twist on that idea early next year, which brings me to the next point.

At the moment, our plans are very detailed PDFs that you download and follow. In early 2018, we'll release a new training plan functionality in our app. The plans will be fully integrated into the app. This will allow you to choose a duration, volume, goal, etc, but to also have the plan adjust to your specific strengths and weaknesses as well as your rider type. We're working with APEX Coaching on the logic of this right now as it's fairly complicated. We'll also allow you to add our Yoga and Mental Training modules into the plan so you get even more benefit as a complete athlete.

Hope that all makes sense. Drop us a line on theminions@thesufferfest.com if I can help you further.

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest

Just google metabolic pathways and generality and specificity.

I’m signing up for Sufferfedt as a result of this thread!

You need to work on your reading comprehension. The piracy to which I referred was that of the individual to whom I replied, who stated that they pirated movies (then later said it was just "locker room talk").

You do know that one can (and some have) used statistical methods to identify such inflection points?

naaaaaaah you don’t say. I would have never guessed.

Actually, Tim, I don't. That is why if you go back and re-read any of my comments on iLevels, you will see that I don't take any personal credit, but merely point out that that WKO4 was (and still is) light-years ahead in this regard.

What is interesting (and satisfying) is how close to optimal the original power profiling durations turn out to be *on average.*

(BTW, how's life on soft money treating you these days? Ironically, now that I have moved to a hard money position I am experiencing an embarrassment of riches, and having to adjust my effort to stay under 12 person-months.)

So far so good. As long as my area is “hot” I’m fine. I have to say no to projects so that’s good. Things are brewing though. So we shall see soon.

Thank you!

---

David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest