Structure of base 1 and 2

[Rizzi]

I think it’s a bug of plan builder being too rigid and trapped into combining the existing block structure from the static plans towards a fixed date (some A event).

Look that thread here (TR seems to argue that it „depends on the recovery needs of the athlete“):

Possible plan builder bug?

So that’s 5 work weeks 1 recovery week 6 work weeks @SarahLaverty Is plan builder really that rigid and trapped into combining the existing block structure from the static plans…especially with regards to those longish base plans? Do you think PB resulted in a good outcome here? I’m pretty sure most coaches would not structure 12 weeks that way but moreover use something like 3 work 1 recovery 3 work 1 recovery 3 work 1 recovery Doesn’t that look much better? BTW that would also fa…