Hi. I am a competitive Masters cyclist and finding Xert a useful tool to track training.
I was wondering if there is any reason or logic to changing any of the XPMC Settings in my profile to reflect masters cyclists? Observations and suggestions welcomed.
4 Likes
I’d be interested in this subject as well. I’ve noticed the last 18months I do need a bit more recovery.
3 Likes
Was there a response to this question that I missed? I too, being a masters athlete, am interested in how XATA would return accurate recommendations for masters athletes. Surely masters athletes, generally speaking, require more recovery than someone 25 yrs old. Would the Freshness slider be appropriate to be used to adjust for someone who generally has slower recoveries? I’m trying to see how XATA might fit into my training. I’m sold on the breakthroughs, as I can go for a breakthrough on any outdoor ride, if desired. I’m still evaluating XATA though.
2 Likes
Carmen. Thanks for your interest on this matter. I was very interested to see that Xert provided Masters cycling metrics (comparison against their datbase) but disappointed that their basic daily/weekly evaluations could not accomodate Masters cyclists physiology. I (regrettably) have paused my subscription.
Again, did I miss something? You were asking about changing those constants in XPMC settings, right? Did you get an answer that wasn’t posted in this thread?
Adjusting time constants unfortunately isn’t the best way to deal with this. Increasing the RL value lengthens recovery but decreases its influence. Best to adjust freshness feedback.
There aren’t any studies that can direct recovery demand by age universally so adjusting on an individual level is best. I, for one, can handle an Aggressive improvement rate for months at a time if I watch my training status very carefully and adjust for recovery when necessary.
On occasion, I’ve decreased freshness feedback to -5 to reflect additional recovery time that I need to account for.
2 Likes
Ok, so would you say that using the freshness slider is a good way to bias recovery to be slower for the masters athlete, or is it just a workaround, not an ideal fix, that misses the mark in some way? I ask, because I can’t wrap my head around how XATA works, and what biasing it for the masters athlete would actually do. Regarding those XPMC constants, what is the purpose of that section, that it allows the user to modify it?
Open the Fitness Planner and then open the Freshness Feedback slider and move it to see how your training status will be affected. Those changes are accounted for in XATA. For example, if you slide it left to a negative number, you’ll see more yellow days after a hard interval workout. This is how you’ll get more recovery.
Does Amarndo’s solution work for you?
CarmenV. It is an interesting suggestion and one I will explore if I resubscribe to Xert. Thanks for follow-up.
1 Like
IMO the whole “masters are different” is overblown. It’s called adaptive training for a reason. 
Following old-school pre-defined calendar based plans isn’t a good idea. But Xert is flexible, adaptive, and individualized by design. Doesn’t matter if you are an enthusiast or competing, or whether you are young or old, or a newbie or have decades of cycling experience.
Xert gives you the freedom and tools to adjust TL capacity however you’d like based on your individual requirements and capabilities.
Vary the intensity, hours, recovery, periodization, ramp rate, and adjust form feedback as necessary.
You are the master of your fate. 
4 Likes
I think it boils down to having the ability to vary all the levers of training and having a system make recommendations based on these. Other approaches have you constrained by a plan where changes or adding/missing workouts leave you thinking you’ve messed things up, with the changes being detrimental to your training.
I think you’re conflating flexibility with individualized, accurate recommendations. The op wasn’t making any point about Xert not having flexibility. He was wondering how XATA recommendations would be accurate for a masters athlete. XATA must assume some recovery rate, and the op assumed his recovery rate would probably be lower than that assumed recovery rate that XATA uses. That he can adjust Xert in 19 different ways wasn’t the issue. XATA purports to be able to make relevant and generally accurate recommendations. The op feels that recommendations for a masters athlete must be different. Yes, one can adjust the recommendation, but that begs the question, how does one know that XATA’s recommendation needs to be adjusted? That’s the question all of these systems attempt to answer: how much training is too much training. Some look to HRV to provide clues. Others look to resting heart rate. Trainerroad is doing something different it seems.
1 Like
I got the impression the OP didn’t actually put Xert to the test. They assumed the model wasn’t able to meet their needs as a “masters cyclist” so they never implemented a progression to prove otherwise.
BTW what is a masters cyclist? Only those over 35 who compete in sanctioned events or older cyclists at various levels of interest in fitness?
At what age does a masters cyclist become an old-person-on–bike?
Does nodding off between forum posts count? 
1 Like
I am the OP and I stopped using Xert simply because I subscribe to other systems at the moment. I am impressed with Xert and can see benefits to subscribing later. BTW @ridgerider2 will be old one day and be that “old-person-on–bike”. I am a national Hill Climb Champion FWIW
For your edification Ridgerider2 the general catch all definition for Masters Category is old, decrepit and cat 4 or better.
So with that said, this puts me firmly in the old person on bike category who sometimes falls asleep between…………zzzzzzzzz`
4 Likes