Yeah, similar volume week to week, but off the top of my head; fewer outright rest weeks, just a small drop in volume instead, more tte work, introduction of low cadence work, more progressive overload, less challenging workouts overall, replace z2 rides with an endurance ride that allows me to push into low z3 for hills.
Well linked!
I do! It’s fun to crush the dreams of people who think things are real but aren’t. 
Can somebody with a zwift+ membership put a similar plan on both zwift and TR calendars so we can review the prescribed training?
Same here. TR’s AI for me is frustrating, unreliable and not realistic for my level (senior and an endurance athlete). (Insert Shrug emoji here.)
Oooh. That would be a fun experiment but I am positive it would be so drastically different
Some of the things you described (recovery, HRV, RHR) are offered by A Faster You. I’m entering my last week of the free trial period and will keep it. I’ve cancelled my TR subscription this week after 3-4 years of use. Let’s see.
Funny enough, I’m in a similar situation. I’ve been considering giving Zwift Plus a try, especially now that they’ve added coaching. Not quite ready to leave TrainerRoad, tho.
For test. I started An 8 week zwift endurance plan. I have 10h available time. It started with 4.45 hours for my first week? 
. Just slowly building…
I don’t think I will follow that approach.
I’ve seen a few people who can’t get it to give them much volume.
It seems happy increase my volume from 8 to 10 hours over the next 3 weeks and then gives me 10 hours a week for the rest of the plan and that ramps my CTL from 45 to 65 over 12 weeks.
What does Zwift think your current CTL is?
Yeah. Makes sense. Just started zwift again a few weeks ago so my CTL is very low, in zwift. But in reality it is 80+.
But that is not only build with cycling, but also swim and run. Somehow zwift needs to know some historic data.
My approach would be to do the volume you want and let Zwift Coach adapt over time. Same with TR or any other training app.
In theory, this should be no different than “when life gets in the way”. The training apps should adjust. If you know you can easily handle more volume and you do more volume it should be able to sort out based on your data that you CAN handle that volume.
In theory, that’s how it should work IMO but whether it does that well is different.
Yeah. Ideally that would work with any adaptive training app. Adaptive apps are pretty new and how well they adapt and work is still TBD (e.g. TR AI). In any case, with TR it’s possible to upload activity history to give it good starting point.
I think FasCat is about twice as expensive as TR, no? $400-ish a year for FC and $200-ish a year for TR. Not that it’s a bad service (I’ve never used it), but it’s not in the same price range.
If you purchase CoachCat via annual it is $210.
If you purchase 1:1 there is 1c difference between TR and Fascat (210 vs 209.99)
Though I would question somebodies math, there is 1c difference in the year, but divide that over the year and there is a 5c a month difference (hint 12 45 doesn’t come to a number that ends with 9 (12 times 17.45 = 209.40 not 209.99))
…
That’s prob the one good thing about it, but really, you don’t need a coach to tell you to go do a spin for an hour or so under LT1. I haven’t used TR for years, and won’t again, but this thread interested me as I’ve been on zwift for 10years. Their workouts have always been less than average and poorly thought out, focused more on catchy names than outcomes. I always suspected it was the PT’s dilemma - make it hard enough to see and feel some benefit, without being so hard the customer doesn’t come back. The recent AI suggestions of doing 34 min endurance rides does my head in. I have no faith this new iteration will be any better. I signed up to see, and my goal is ‘getting faster’ or something as that was closest to my race goals. Did it ask about durability, threshold, V02 or sprinting - nope. Can I adjust the days - nope. Can I measure performance from a baseline of relevant metrics - nope. Are workouts pegged to zFTP or based on individual physioloogy - who knows. It’s really not clear how the AI is working in the background or if people are working on it too. Just a massive fail from my perspective and perhaps a bit rushed or deliberately undercooked for a typical zwifter. If you are in a place where anything will lead to improvements, then this zwift coach will work. But so would doing anything else as well.
Fascat is rolling out an Auto FTP detection as well, whatever they mean by that. Regular ramp tests are a challenge and they aren’t even perfect at dialing in the workout levels. He said on his recent podcast that FTP changes all the time.
Is FTP best thought of as a PR that only ratchets up, or as a dynamic input for training levels that can rise and fall from day to day even as the overall trend is hopefully up?
The monthly ramp test and static plans insulate you from seeing that your body may not be expressing that ramp test ftp today, just you may notice that workout felt a little harder than usual, that you felt flat.