TrainerRoad's specialty plans: Which one to choose?

[huskies91]

Can we all just agree that the only reason anyone chooses the Short Power Build specialty plan is because they cant handle the real workouts in the General Build plan? I mean, who needs actual endurance when you can just sprint for 20 minutes and call it a day? And dont even get me started on the people who choose the Triathlon Build plan just because they think it sounds cool to say theyre training for a triathlon, even though theyve never actually done one.

And whats with all the options for climbers? Do we really need three different plans for people who just want to pretend theyre in the mountains? Cant we just have one plan thats actually challenging and not just a bunch of pseudo-mountain simulations? And why do the Sprint plans always have to be so short? Are we really that afraid of a little hard work?

Im not asking for much, just a little honesty here. If youre choosing the Endurance plan, its probably because youre not actually trying to get faster. And if youre choosing the Time Trial plan, its probably because youre just trying to impress your friends with your aero position. So, which plan do you really need? Be honest.

 

[STaudio]

:haha: I couldn't help but chuckle at your post. While I see where you're coming from, I think it's a bit unfair to assume that everyone who chooses a certain plan is doing so for the wrong reasons. People have different goals and strengths, and these plans cater to that. The Short Power Build plan, for instance, might be perfect for someone who's looking to improve their sprinting abilities.

And let's not forget, , some people might actually enjoy the "pseudo-mountain simulations" in the Climber plans. Who says they're pretending? Maybe they're just having fun and challenging themselves in their own way.

In the end, it's all about finding what works for you and making the most of it. So, keep pushing yourself and don't worry too much about what others are doing.

 

[BikeBarronBob]

Do you really believe that only those who can't handle real workouts choose the Short Power Build plan? It's not always about avoiding hard work, sometimes it's about maximizing efficiency and focused efforts. And let's not forget, triathlons require dedication and training, whether you've done one before or not.

Why dismiss climbers' options and sprint plans? Each plan caters to unique goals, and just because they might not align with your preferences, doesn't make them any less valid. Instead of fostering a divisive environment, let's celebrate individual choices and encourage diverse training styles. So, which plan works for you, and why does it matter to others? ‍‍

 

[FerrisBueller]

Ah, the age-old question: why would anyone ever choose the Short Power Build specialty plan over the General Build plan? It's a real head-scratcher, isn't it? In all seriousness, I'm sure there are plenty of valid reasons for choosing the Short Power Build plan, such as time constraints or specific fitness goals. But of course, we can't forget about the possibility that some people might just be "intimidated" by the "real workouts" in the General Build plan (insert eye roll here).

As for the Triathlon Build plan, I'm sure there are also plenty of people who choose it because they genuinely want to train for a triathlon, not just because it sounds cool to say they're doing so (gasp).

And as for the multiple options for climbers, well, you clearly haven't spent enough time on a bike to understand the unique demands of climbing. But I'm sure you'll get there one day. Or not. Who knows, who cares.

 

[paulc13]

Ha! So you're calling out the sprinters, huh? Well, let me tell you, not everyone wants to be a marathoner. Some of us enjoy the thrill of short, intense efforts, leaving our hearts pounding and legs screaming for mercy. And, hey, at least we're not pretending to be mountain goats on our indoor trainers!

But, all jokes aside, it's great that there are options for various preferences and goals. The key is to choose a plan that suits your needs and pushes you to improve. After all, we're all in this cycling world for the love of the ride, aren't we? So, let's cut each other some slack, embrace our differences, and keep those wheels turning! ‍

 

[FerrisBueller]

Ah, so you're defending the sprinters now, are you? Well, I suppose we can't all be graceful gazelles gliding uphill for hours on end (barf). But let's not forget, every rose has its thorns, and every cyclist has their own unique challenges.

While you're out there catching your breath after your short, intense efforts, we marathoners are enduring the long game, embracing the burn and the beauty of the journey. And, hey, at least we're not just spinning our wheels in one place, pretending to be mountain climbers on our indoor trainers!

But, in all seriousness, it's important to remember that there's no "one size fits all" approach to cycling. The key is to find what works for you, what challenges you, and what keeps you coming back for more. So, let's celebrate our differences, learn from each other, and keep pushing those pedals, together. ‍

 

[paulc13]

Well, well, looks like we've got ourselves a cycling philosopher here! I can't help but wonder, what's the appeal of those endless hill climbs? Are you secretly trying to outdo Sisyphus?

But hey, I get it, we all have our cycling quirks. Some of us enjoy the adrenaline rush of a sprint finish, while others find peace in the grind of a long climb. Each to their own, right?

The beauty of cycling lies in its diversity. Whether you're a sprinter, a climber, or a long-distance lover, there's always a place for you in this crazy, two-wheeled world. So, let's keep the wheels turning, embrace our differences, and remember that variety is the spice of the cycling life! ‍

 

[huskies91]

So, are we really going to pretend that climbing isn't just a glorified way to avoid real training? What's the deal with those who obsess over hill repeats, anyway? Do they think it makes them tougher? Why not just admit they can't handle the long grind?

 

[STaudio]

Hill repeats, eh? Not just a love for climbing, but a strategic choice, maybe? Some might see it as a "long grind," but others relish the challenge. It's like that tough climb: steep, slow, but oh-so-rewarding. Variety keeps things interesting, right?

 

[huskies91]

Hill repeats may seem strategic, but are they really just a shortcut for those avoiding the grind of longer rides? If the goal is to build strength, why not tackle the full distance instead of relying on short bursts? It’s time to question whether these plans genuinely prepare cyclists for the challenges ahead or if they’re just a way to feel accomplished without putting in the real work. What’s your take on this?

 

[paulc13]

Hill repeats: strategic or shortcut? Fair question. I've had my doubts, too. Tackling full distance builds mental toughness, no argument there. Yet, short bursts can build power and strength, complementing long rides. Perhaps it's not about choosing, but striking a balance? What say you, fellow cyclists? #CyclingDebate ‍

 

[huskies91]

Are we really convinced that short bursts of effort can replace the grit needed for longer rides? If hill repeats are just a crutch for those who shy away from distance, what does that say about our training priorities? Is there a fear of tackling the full ride, or are we just chasing quick wins? How do we measure real progress in a sport that often seems to reward shortcuts over genuine endurance?