That depends on the athlete’s goals and e. g. timing of their races and what kind of races they do (e. g. road races in the summer and CX in the fall).
For most athletes, if your A race is in the summer, I reckon you want to complete a Base–Build–Specialty cycle before the A race. Then you might go back to Build and add a second, different Specialty phase. As @WindWarrior wrote, this depends also on the coach’s philosophy — and on the athlete I’d add.
E. g. if an athlete struggles with consistency, then I think the focus of training could be on something quite different from workout selection.
I can see that happen in certain phases or when you are dealing with a complete beginner. However, that shouldn’t be a permanent state of affairs.
But then with no structure it becomes go ride and enjoy yourself with no goals or further instruction than that. I suppose a coach could say that during a transition period between training seasons. Because the athlete might find it hard to break their addiction to structured training., But the rest of the time a coach saying just go ride? Hard to see the value if the coach in that scenario
There are many occasions where unstructured rides could be part of training:
During special weeks (e. g. you go on a vacation to Lake Garda to go mountain biking or you simply pick one or two weeks at random where you just enjoy yourself on the bike).
In between seasons.
But even something more permanent, someone like @The_Conductor who wrote that he trains but with no particular structure. I can see a coach prescribing (unstructured) TrainNow rides e. g. twice a week and add some other rides as coach and athlete see fit.
There is plenty of value. Most discussions on TR focus way too much on workout selection, so take away workout selection and it seems nothing is left. However, IMHO workout selection is only a small and not the most important part of coaching.
But there isn’t any of that as it is unstructured with no goal or purpose to the riding. A rider can do that without a coach. It’s what everyone does who doesn’t do structured training. Just go for a ride and do what you feel like.
Unstructured training ≠ no workouts. I regard someone using TrainNow twice a week as someone who doesn’t do structured training, for example. Yet, they are training and they are getting faster — just not as fast as with a structured training plan. (As luck would have it, I advised someone on another forum to do just that.)
Clearly, if your goal is to get as fast as possible, a training plan with a clear structure (= periodization, split into base, build and specialty phase, etc.) is the best option. However, not all athletes are after that goal or that goal is not a good fit for them at that particular moment, e. g. because an athlete’s family member is ill or because they are in charge of a super important project at work. Coaches can offer solutions here or help athletes fulfill goals that do not neatly fit into a standard training plan.
Train now has structure behind it. It doesn’t randomly suggest stuff like go for a 5 hour tempo ride or 30 mins recovery at same time.
No structure means the rides and sessions will be fairly random with a bit if everything thrown in with no plan as to what the sessions contain or what likely outcome might be.
Unstructured training may or may not make you faster. But why would you need a coach to randomly suggest stuff? You can do that yourself by going for a ride or picking a random workout by throwing a dice.
I think you’re misinterpreting what I wrote in the other thread. I periodize my training with easy weeks every 4-6 weeks, I have a different focus within each block, and I progress my targets in those blocks. I use Train Now (or search) for the specific details of each workout because the minutiae don’t matter–e.g., it’s easier for me to find a 4x20 min sweetspot workout in the TR library or by mashing refresh on Train Now than it is to use Workout Builder or Zwift to make it myself (=I can do the former while on the toilet).
Indeed, structured training doesn’t mean you need specific workouts. Just that there is a structure and plan and desired outcome to the types of workouts being undertaken.
Near enough. It allows you to choose whatever duration of ride you want, and to select the focus (from three broad groups) of that ride (albeit with a hint as to which of the three it would prefer). Mainly it just tries to keep you within reasonable limits for your abilities in the rides it suggests.
I don’t want to get caught up in semantics, but randomly selecting TrainNow workouts is not the same as a plan that is periodized, I. e. has regular rest days and rest weeks, etc., use progressive overload and be specific later. TrainNow satisfies one of these three criteria.
Because workout selection is but a small part of coaching someone. In my mind, workout selection is among the easiest tasks once you have all ducks in your row.
Sure so if it random , no thought on what suggestion to select and it could be 7 days a week or 1 day a week or none then we are getting unstructured. But if we see a pattern in two intensity days and easy riding rest of the time then we are seeing structure, a pattern.
Goal setting = specificity. Tapering and recovery are part of periodization. Training load is part of progressive overload. I did not include testing in my list, we can debate whether to add it separately. I’m not against that.
To answer your question: in my mind, yes, 2–4 are necessary, as is 5.
If you want, you can call it an unstructured training plan, which is fine by me. But structured training has a specific meaning. (And an unstructured training plan might be what is right for you, I’m not against them. To some structured training is too much.)
This was quite an interesting read. Did you implement this plan for any length of time?
I’ve got my second A-Race for the season coming up in about six weeks, and following illness and forced time off over Xmas/New Year I’m down about 5-10% on FTP. I’m tempted to follow something like that for a bit of a crash course. Given my XCM goals I wonder if it’s not the best use of energies.
Periodisation isn’t necessary for structured training, just traditional. You could do structured with progressive overload and recovery without periodisation.
Not sure where you think I am expressing my preferences either way. I was just picking up your comment that some coaches don’t do structured training. Which seemed odd to me. Then you seem to think you need a whole raft of specifics for something to be structured, rather than just the basics of structured without the optional elements.