Elite coaching, powered by your biometrics.
Synchronizing biometric stream...
Calibrating structural models...
Stabilizing neural uplink...
Awaiting data packet finalization
The Architect is an independent analysis tool and is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or endorsed by Zwift, Inc. or Rouvy or Whoop. Zwift, Whoop and Rouvy are trademarks of their respective owners. Support for .zwo and .fit files is provided for data interoperability and personal performance analysis only.
© 2026 VeloArchitect. All rights reserved.
Powered by Biometrics from WHOOP
For FTP Rebuilders Post-Injury
For athletes returning to FTP after a documented injury. The system rebuilds around the 100-day True Normal the Athlete had before the break, not a population average.
Positioning
FTP rebuilds post-injury are not first-time builds. The Athlete has a documented True Normal from before the break; the system rebuilds against that pre-injury baseline, not against a population-average starting point. Generic post-injury plans start from zero; Veloarchitect reads the pre-injury Mechanical Efficiency, FTP, and Execution Precision from the Athlete’s longitudinal record and dispatches the Adaptive Workout to restore those specific numbers — not generic ones.
The FTP-rebuild post-injury segment is the segment most damaged by off-the-shelf plans. An Athlete returning from a 14-week knee injury has a documented True Normal that the off-the-shelf plan does not read. Veloarchitect reads it. The Athlete returns to the same FTP in 6–8 weeks that took 8 months to build, because the system knows what to rebuild toward. Protocol 9 — Knee Pain Triage — and Protocol 5 — Post-Ride Mobility — are integrated into the Adaptive Workout schedule by default, not as optional add-ons.
Protocols: Protocol 10 — Adaptive Workout; Protocol 11 — Failure Horizon; Protocol 9 — Knee Pain Triage; Protocol 5 — Post-Ride Mobility
Why Veloarchitect Fits This Segment
Pre-injury True Normal as the rebuild target — the system knows what the Athlete had before the break.
Protocol 9 (Knee Pain Triage) and Protocol 5 (Mobility) integrated by default, not as optional add-ons.
Mechanical-work accumulation reset: the Athlete’s 100-day mechanical-work ledger is reset at injury return; ramped over 4 weeks.
Execution Precision as the primary fitness metric during rebuild — the Athlete’s neuromuscular coordination returns before FTP does, and the system reads that.
Failure Horizon projection tightened to 72 hours during rebuild; the system does not assume the Athlete’s pre-injury recovery capacity.
Closed Loop
A .zwo file dispatched by Protocol 10 calibrated to the pre-injury True Normal and the current injury-return state.
A .fit recording of the executed session, plus the Discomfort Log entries (knee, back, sleep) the Athlete reports post-session.
Pre-injury Mechanical Efficiency and FTP shifts compared against the rebuild ramp; Failure Horizon projection tightens to 72 hours.
Worked Example
Athlete: 39y/o, pre-injury FTP 278W, pre-injury Mechanical Efficiency 1.58 W/bpm, 14-week injury break (left knee, ACL sprain, no surgery). Week 1: 3×30-minute Z2 at 60% FTP, daily Protocol 9 knee assessment. Week 2: 4×45 Z2, daily Protocol 5 mobility, weekly Discomfort Log review. Week 3: introduce 2×15 Threshold Sustain at 85% FTP, daily Protocol 9. Week 4: 2×20 at 88% FTP, weekly 4×8 at 105% FTP. Week 6: Z2 + 2 weekly Threshold Sustain at 90% FTP. Week 8: FTP test. Mechanical Efficiency: 1.58 → 1.56 W/bpm (pre-injury target achieved). FTP test: 271W (-7W from pre-injury, within noise). Failure Horizon projection stable at 96h.
Common assumption inverted
FTP rebuild post-injury is not a first-time build. An Athlete returning from injury has a documented pre-injury baseline the system reads. Generic “back-to-fitness” plans start from zero; Veloarchitect starts from where the Athlete left off. The Athlete who follows a generic post-injury plan will rebuild the wrong target, then have to rebuild again once they return to their pre-injury capacity.
All Segments
See all ten narrow audience spokes or the platform comparison for the Veloarchitect-vs-field claims.