Hi RR,
I’ll ignore the assumptions you’ve made in your post, (and the slightly condescending tone) and try to explain myself fully.
I really don’t want to do things differently, I think that’s the point.
I’m like many middle-aged people seeking better fitness, improved performance, all while being able to have fun.
I got a trainer at Christmas and since then I have been trying to get up to speed, taking in all the information and trying out all the available apps. It’s pretty dizzying, really, and given how new this world is, all the programs and apps are elbowing and scrambling to get a toe hold. At least that’s what it looks like to my eye. This is my off-season for work so I have had a ton of time to take it all in and try things out, and here are my thoughts after 9 weeks of pretty intensive “study”, if you care:
Zwift is the obvious big boy on the block, and frontrunner. But honestly, I have never come across a more infuriating User Interface in my life. It’s bizarre, bubbly, counter-intuitive, and awful. There are so many simple ways it could be improved, but from perusing the forums it’s clear that they don’t really care about feedback, or giving people the simple things they’ve been asking for, for years. (A simple entire route elevation profile for instance.) I also am not interested in the “social” aspect of it, nor do I love the Mario Kart-ization with power-ups, badges, special bikes and kits, beeps and boops etc, and all that other nonsense. The training programs/workouts aren’t great or are cookie-cutter as you suggest. What I did like about it was how stable the platform is, the competitive aspect, being able to race and have plenty of people at your fitness level to compete against. That for me is its big appeal. However, at $20/month (which is the number I’m willing to invest per month in trainer cycling) it doesn’t leave me any room to add a structured training program/app.
Enter RGT. RGT seems (at this point) to be the most likely alternative to Zwift’s domination. The UI is much better than Zwift’s, and the racing dynamics are more realistic. I can actually race for free at this point, although the platform isn’t very stable. But they are working hard, constantly updating things and listening to users. And for $10/month I can get access to everything. The big drawback is there aren’t that many people on it, so there aren’t that many people around my fitness level, which makes it less fun. To this point its core users seem to be amateur and competitive racers.
BKool seems alright, but for whatever reason it seemed to require more bandwidth, and my computer couldn’t deliver the frame rate. Weird, cause it’s fine on Zwift/RGT.
Which brings me to the more structured training focused apps.
Trainer Road seems to be the biggest, right now. Their podcast is very solid, slick, and they are, for the most part, good communicators. However, it feels very corporate… which is not to my liking. Truthfully, they don’t look or sound like the kind of dudes I’d want to hang around with. (Although the woman that shows up regularly seems cool.) They seem to focus their programs on “Sweet Spot” training, to give the most bang for your buck. What I mean is the science suggests the best training is 80/20, but most people don’t have time for that, so they push SS. In the end, TR feels like the Starbucks of training apps. Kind of corporate slick and gives lots of people what they want (without having to think too much) for twice what it’s really worth. I’m just not willing to spend $20/month on a dedicated training app, and contribute to making that douchey CEO guy rich.
Sufferfest or WahooSuff as it has been rebranded, was interesting. I really enjoyed their workout videos overlayed on racing footage. Very motivating. Decent UI for the most part. But culturally speaking, it was a bit too RAH RAH for me, appealing to a demographic I usually steer clear of. Also at $15/month it meant adding Zwift for racing was out. I could add free RGT Racing to it, but to be honest I was looking for a simpler, cleaner structured training option to pair with racing.
Enter Xert. At $10/month, that is a comfortable price point for me. I like the UI for the most part. It seems fairly intuitive. It’s an underdog to TR, which suits me. It seems to have Canadian people involved, which for me is appealing. I’m a “localist”. And I like the science-based/algorithm approach that wants to tailor things in “real time” to how fatigued you are. I like being able to upload my rides on RGT. That’s very simple and intuitive. There seem to be plenty of good workouts to choose from. The forum has been good, and people respond quickly, which I really appreciate. So for the most part, it’s been a really good experience.
However, there is bound to be some problems or limitations with metrics/algorithms. In some sense, Xert is only as valuable as it’s algorithms are effective. And so when I have chosen the lowest improvement setting and I get three straight days of 2 hour workout recommendations, and it is recommending I train even after I have adjusted the slider as far as possible to exhausted, my trust in the algorithm falters, and I wonder whether the value of what I am paying for is simply the SMART workouts available. Again, if the algorithms only work when I “allocate, select, focus, and adjust”, how effective is the algorithm? I gave it 6 weeks of .fit data to work with. What am I paying for? If it’s just the workouts, which I am responsible for choosing to effectively create my own training plan, then I can do that on Zwift or RGT, and get racing in the bargain. Heck, I can go on ZWOFactory and build my own simple workouts and upload them to Zwift or RGT and use Training Peaks or, gasp, a real physical calendar and write in all in by hand.
I’ve paid for a month of Xert, so I’m going to give it the old college try and see whether I can make it work for me. (BTW, the Xert podcast doesn’t work properly. All my other podcasts stream or download fine, but the Xert one either cuts out streaming constantly, or won’t download.)
But again, what I want is quite simple. A basic training plan at around 6 hours a week that allows me to “race” at least once a week. If things don’t work here, I’ll probably bite the bullet and buy Dylan Johnson’s 6 hour/week base program, and then his 6 hour/week build program, and use them in and alongside RGT. It’s more money than I want to spend, but they’re simple (largely four one hour blocks with a fifth two hour block per week), science-based, and Dylan is flat-out the best communicator in cycling training. His YouTube channel is pure gold. “Everything you need, and nothing you don’t”. Also, he seems like the kind of dude I’d wanna hang around with.
Anyways, I want Xert to work. There are many things I think it is doing well. I think it’s a great idea/approach to using technology and science to make training “SMART”. However, so far, it’s falling into the category I mentioned in another post… something I am wondering whether I can do better myself, for cheaper.
Peace out
P.S. There are many reasons to love smart trainers that don’t involve ERG or AUTO training modes. Yes, they’re valuable training tools, however riding in virtual worlds on virtual roads with great feel and getting total data feedback is definitely number one. Cadence drills in ERG mode is nice, but definitely down the list. Also I have done many recovery and endurance rides at varying cadences. Also spinup drills. But yes, at 6’2" my preferred cadence is between 75-85.
