Live
Powered by

Plan comparison: Gunnar (Plan A) vs Luca (Plan B), May 27 to June 5, 2026

  • Athlete: Sidney McGill
  • Review date: 2026-05-27
  • Reviewer role: independent, neutral comparative analyst
  • Window under review: 2026-05-27 through 2026-06-05 inclusive
  • Primary deliverable: evidence-based comparison and a justified verdict
  • Supersedes: athlete/context/2026-05-27-plan-comparison-gunnar-vs-luca-may-27-to-jun-01.md. The earlier report was written without live TrainingPeaks evidence. This report is built on the actual TP workout objects fetched into athlete/context/2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-trainingpeaks-workouts.md.

Executive verdict

Best-supported plan: a hybrid that uses Luca's rolling-3-day (Plan B, most recent) for May 28 to May 30, removes both coaches' high-risk neuromuscular and force work in the front half of the window, and then moves into a modified version of Luca's June 2 to June 5 calendar build only if the back stays clean. The hybrid is detailed in section 10.

The headline reasons:

  1. Sidney's May 27 has already been completed against Gunnar's plan, not Luca's. She rode 3:10:09, 83.5 km, hrIF 0.60, hrTSS 128, with 838 m of climbing, following Gunnar's "80 g/hr, no gogo squeeze/clif bars, drink mix/gel as in a race" prescription. That is direct evidence that Wednesday turned into a meaningful endurance day with fueling rehearsal, not the 1:00 to 1:15 protective check Luca planned. It also means the post-flare recovery cost of May 27 is higher than Luca's plan anticipated, and that the rest of the week must absorb a real Wednesday rather than a protective one.
  2. Gunnar's May 29 (heavy strength) and May 30 (Openers with 30 second bursts at 110 to 150% FTP) appear to be the unmodified pre-flare prescription, with only a single "No plyo jumps today" coach comment as visible flare-aware modification. The squat set still calls for 3 x 4 to 5 heavy reps, the split squat set still calls for 3 x 4 to 5 heavy reps, and the Openers session is a high neuromuscular and SI-loading day four days after Sidney's first symptom-free ride. This is the most concerning evidence in the window.
  3. Luca's plan is internally inconsistent across three layers. The rolling-3-day (last updated 2026-05-27 with TP evidence) is the most conservative and most recent. The rolling-7-day (last updated 2026-05-25) is conditional. The dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30 are the pre-flare aggressive prescription. Per the operator's framing rule, dated calendars are definitive at the day level; in practice, the most recent rolling-3-day represents Luca's current thinking and contradicts those dated files.
  4. For the back half of the window (June 2 to June 5), the two coaches diverge on philosophy, not just on safety. Gunnar prescribes a sprint-and-endurance week (ZIPP all-out sprints, strength, long endurance, rest). Luca prescribes a threshold-plus-gravel-specificity week (threshold 2 x 22, gravel tempo torque 3 x 20, VO2 5 x 3, with strength maintenance). For Ghost of the Gravel as the named B-priority race, Luca's June 2 to June 5 build is more event-aligned. For general cyclist development and protecting the longer cyclocross season without forcing race specificity, Gunnar's June 2 to June 5 is defensible but less Ghost-targeted.

Evidence reviewed

Direct evidence

  • Live TrainingPeaks workout objects for 2026-05-27 through 2026-06-05, captured in athlete/context/2026-05-27-to-2026-06-05-trainingpeaks-workouts.md. Twelve TP items in total: 10 planned and 1 completed (May 27), with 1 rest entry on May 28 and 1 on June 5. Completion metrics include only May 27, which has full ride file plus lap summary.
  • Luca's rolling-3-day, last updated 2026-05-27 with TP evidence integrated.
  • Luca's rolling-7-day, last updated 2026-05-25 (post-flare pivot).
  • Luca's rolling-3-week, last updated 2026-05-25 (pre-flare ambition).
  • Luca's dated calendar files for 2026-05-27 through 2026-06-05.
  • Athlete settings, profile, season goals, race calendar, travel schedule.
  • Power-zone reference.
  • Recent daily logs documenting the May 25 SI/back flare and May 27 morning gym circuit plus the long ride that followed.
  • Two prior independent reviews of Gunnar's April 11 to April 24 block.

Gaps still present

  • Planned TSS, planned IF, and structured-workout payloads are not visible for most of Gunnar's items. Only May 30 Openers has a planned TSS (81.8) and IF (64%) plus a structured payload. Most other Gunnar items are description-only.
  • No coach comments are present in the TP objects for the bike sessions in this window. The only coach comment captured is "No plyo jumps today" on the May 29 and June 3 strength sessions, which appears to be a recurring template note that was also present in the April 17 strength session.
  • No completed metrics are available for any session other than May 27.
  • HRV, sleep, and wellness data from Sidney are not present in the workspace for this window.

Three classes of inference used in this report

  • Direct evidence: the workout object exists as described, with the named structure or coach text. Used wherever the live TP file is the source.
  • Strong inference: a conclusion supported by multiple direct evidence points plus the most recent prior review pattern. Example: Gunnar's plan reads as a continuation of his April archetypes, modified toward higher neuromuscular content.
  • Weak inference and speculation: flagged in text. Example: whether Gunnar received the May 25 SI flare report.

What Gunnar appears to be doing

Block read

Block character: a controlled-volume, neuromuscular-emphasis week. Two long endurance rides per week (May 27, May 31, June 4, all 3-hour cycling endurance with 80 g/hr fueling notes), two short higher-stimulus sessions per week with a sprint and opener focus (May 30 Openers, June 2 ZIPP), one to two strength sessions per week (May 29 Strength Sidney, June 3 Strength Sidney with paired 2-hour endurance), and recovery anchors on May 28 and June 5.

This is materially different from the April 11 to 24 pattern documented in the prior reviews. The April pattern was tempo-centric, built around repeated 10-minute blocks at 70 to 85% FTP. The May 27 to June 5 pattern has no visible tempo block, no sweet spot, no threshold, and no long-pressure work. It has substituted high-end neuromuscular work (sprints and openers) in that place.

Likely intent

  • Aerobic rebuild and durability via duration: four planned 3-hour endurance rides in 10 days, all with 80 g/hr fueling notes that explicitly invoke race-pace nutrition. This is a real Ghost-relevant prescription on the fueling side.
  • High-end neuromuscular development: the Openers session (May 30) and the ZIPP session (June 2) are designed to recruit fast-twitch fibers and develop or maintain top-end power. The ZIPP description, "12X15s All out sprints spaced through the ride. Maximum quality. I want to see your max power," is the only direct first-person coach voice in the window.
  • Strength as a constant rather than a phase: strength is present twice per week and integrated rather than periodized away.
  • Fatigue containment via rest days: two true rest days in the window (May 28 and June 5), plus Active Recovery anchors on May 29 evening and June 1.

What Gunnar appears to believe about Sidney's readiness

  • He appears to be coaching Sidney as a healthy rider ready for a normal build week. The structural evidence does not show flare-aware modification beyond the "No plyo jumps today" coach comment, which is the same template comment from the April 17 strength session and therefore probably a default rather than a flare-specific intervention.
  • He appears to assume Sidney can tolerate heavy strength (squat 3 x 4-5 heavy, split squat 3 x 4-5 heavy) and high-output sprint work within 5 to 7 days of the flare's peak. That is a reasonable assumption for an otherwise healthy elite rider, but only if the flare evidence reached him.
  • The single completed file already confirms his aerobic prescription was on the safer side of his block: Sidney executed May 27 at hrIF 0.60, which is endurance, not threshold-adjacent. That part of the plan landed clean.

Is this high-performance individualized coaching, or competent endurance coaching?

This block is more aggressive and more athlete-shaped than the April window. The Openers and ZIPP sessions are not generic. They carry directive coach voice ("I want to see your max power") and structural specificity (the Openers session has three distinct burst formats with deliberately varying recovery ratios). This is closer to high-performance programming than the April pattern, which read as competent-but-conservative.

What is missing from a high-performance Ghost-build read:

  • No long gravel pressure ride at race duration. The longest planned session is 3:00, well under the 4:30 to 5:00 needed for a 118 km race with a 4:35:00 target.
  • No tempo block, no sweet spot block, no threshold session. The aerobic-pressure middle of the intensity curve is absent.
  • No gravel-surface session of any kind in the structured workouts visible.
  • No visible reference to the May 25 SI/back flare in any coach comment, description, or modification beyond the recurring "No plyo jumps today" template line.

The implication is that Gunnar appears to be building power and aerobic capacity broadly, while not building Ghost-specific sustained-pressure or gravel durability in this window.

What Luca appears to be doing

Block read

Block character: a symptom-protective front half followed by a Ghost-specific build back half, fragmented across three planning layers.

Front half (May 27 to June 1) per rolling-3-day (most recent):

  • May 28: rest day, or optional very short easy spin
  • May 29: easy endurance 1:00 to 1:30, no loaded strength
  • May 30: controlled endurance 2:00 to 2:45, no opener bursts

Front half per rolling-7-day (older but still in workspace):

  • May 27: easy back-check ride
  • May 28: endurance support 1:45 to 2:00
  • May 29: deferred Thursday decision on sweet spot
  • May 30: conditional endurance, no full gravel pressure
  • May 31: recovery endurance 1:30 to 2:00 with cadence resets
  • Jun 1: recovery day

Front half per dated calendar files (the operator-defined definitive source at day level):

  • May 27: easy back-check ride 1:00 to 1:15 + movement reset
  • May 28: endurance support 1:45 to 2:00 with 5 x 30 sec spin-ups
  • May 29: Sweet spot with 2 x 25 min at 88 to 92% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45, priority key (pre-flare prescription)
  • May 30: Long gravel pressure ride 4:30 to 5:00 with 3 x 25 min at 82 to 88% FTP, priority key (pre-flare prescription)
  • May 31: recovery endurance 1:30 to 2:00 with cadence resets
  • Jun 1: recovery day

Back half (June 2 to June 5) per dated calendar files only (no rolling-3-day or rolling-7-day reach this far):

  • Jun 2: threshold 2 x 22 min at 94 to 99% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45, priority key
  • Jun 3: endurance 2:00 to 2:15 with 4 x 1 min high cadence + strength maintenance 0:25 to 0:30
  • Jun 4: gravel tempo torque 3 x 20 min at 82 to 88% FTP on gravel, 2:45 to 3:00, priority key
  • Jun 5: VO2 ceiling support 5 x 3 min at 112 to 118% FTP, 1:45 to 2:00

Likely intent

  • Symptom containment first. Each layer of Luca's plan, as it was updated, became more conservative in response to athlete evidence. The rolling-3-day on May 27 is the most conservative version because it had the most evidence to absorb (May 25 flare report plus May 27 ride evidence).
  • Race specificity later in the block. The June 2 to June 5 calendar files are unambiguously Ghost-specific: threshold extension for sustained climbing pressure, gravel tempo torque for surface-specific force, and VO2 ceiling support for race-day surge response. This is the textbook structure of a gravel-race build week.
  • Fueling rehearsal as a constant. Carbohydrate-per-hour targets appear in every Luca file, including the symptom-protected days (45 to 60 g/hr easy, 75 to 90 g/hr threshold, 85 to 95 g/hr long gravel).
  • Decision gates as a method. Plan B repeatedly conditions later sessions on earlier symptom status. "If Thursday is calm." "If May 30 created lingering fatigue." "If gravel is unsafe, use road terrain." This is symptom-led coaching by design.

Is the rationale convincing?

The rationale in the dated calendar files is unusually explicit. Every session has an Objective, Goal, Reasoning, Workout plan, Structured workout, Fueling, Constraints, and Notes sections. The Reasoning fields read as coherent and athlete-specific. For example, the June 4 file states, "Ghost will not reward laboratory-smooth road power alone. Sidney needs the ability to hold pressure when the surface changes, traction varies, and posture fatigue accumulates." That is a real coaching argument tied to race demands.

The rolling-3-day rationale is also direct and evidence-led: "Sidney did not merely complete a short protective back-check ride. She completed 3:10 endurance, about 83.5 km, hrIF about 0.60, with 838 m climbing... That is useful evidence that low-intensity aerobic riding may be tolerable again, but it also raises the short-term recovery cost and does not justify force-based work, heavy strength, or sprint demand yet."

What Luca appears to believe about Sidney's readiness

  • The flare is past peak but not resolved. The rolling-3-day's primary watch items are "morning stiffness, trunk guarding, mid-back spread, or any return of radiating leg symptoms."
  • Wednesday's actual load was higher than planned, so Thursday must absorb rather than train. The rolling-3-day defaults Thursday to rest.
  • Force-based work is the highest-risk modality this week. Loaded squat, opener bursts, and sprints are all explicitly ruled out in the rolling-3-day.
  • Ghost specificity must wait until back stability is proven. The dated calendar files for June 2 onward assume that proof exists, which is an assumption the front half of the week must validate.

Internal consistency

Plan B has a known internal inconsistency on May 29 and May 30. The dated calendar files retain the pre-flare aggressive prescriptions while the rolling-3-day on May 27 has explicitly removed loaded strength, sweet spot, and gravel pressure. Per the operator's framing rule, the dated calendar files are definitive at the day level. In practical use, the rolling-3-day is the most recent coaching update and is the version Luca would defend if asked. This inconsistency is itself a planning quality problem that should be resolved by updating the dated calendar files to match the rolling-3-day for May 29 and May 30, or by updating the rolling-3-day to reaffirm the dated calendars.

For the rest of this report, the comparison uses the rolling-3-day as Luca's intent for May 28 to May 30, and the dated calendar files as Luca's intent for May 31 onward, while flagging the May 29 to May 30 inconsistency at every relevant point.

Day-by-day comparison, May 27 to June 5

2026-05-27 (Wednesday)

  • Gunnar session: 3.0HR Endurance, cycling. Planned 3:00, completed 3:10:09. Completed metrics: 83.5 km, 838 m climb, average HR 137 bpm, hrIF 0.60, hrTSS 128, 1576 kcal. Description: "80g/hr, No gogo squeeze/clif bars, Drink mix/gel (as you would in a race)." No planned TSS, no planned IF, no structured workout payload. The completed file confirms an endurance ride at race-pace fueling.
  • Luca session (dated calendar): Easy endurance back-check ride 1:00 to 1:15 plus movement reset only, Z1 to low Z2, RPE 2 to 3, structured warm-up 10 min plus easy endurance 50 min plus cool-down 10 min, 30 to 45 g carbohydrate if riding the full duration.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar prescribed a normal 3-hour aerobic ride with race-style fueling. Luca prescribed a 60 to 75 min symptom-protective ride with no loaded strength. Sidney executed Gunnar's plan, going 10 minutes longer than planned, at an intensity that fits an endurance day.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's session delivered a meaningful fueling rehearsal and confirmed aerobic tolerance, but it tripled the duration the Luca plan considered safe four days after first symptom-free riding. Luca's session would have produced less aerobic stimulus and no fueling rehearsal, but it would have left more recovery margin.
  • Preferred option for that day: Already executed. Retrospectively, Gunnar's prescription was vindicated on this single day because hrIF was endurance-only and Sidney completed it without reported symptom return as of the May 27 daily log. The morning gym circuit she added independently was the higher-risk element, not the bike work. Luca's plan was the safer prior, but Gunnar's plan was not the wrong outcome.

2026-05-28 (Thursday)

  • Gunnar session: Rest. TP workout type ID 7. No description, no duration, no comments.
  • Luca session (rolling-3-day, most recent): Rest day, optional 30 to 45 min very easy spin only if completely symptom-stable, off-bike default. Note: the dated calendar file for May 28 prescribes endurance support 1:45 to 2:00 with cadence spin-ups. The rolling-3-day, having absorbed the May 27 evidence, defaults to rest because Wednesday became a real endurance day.
  • Key contrast: Both coaches agree this is a recovery day. Gunnar's is a flat rest. Luca's most recent thinking is rest plus optional very light spin. The older dated calendar prescribed a meaningful 2-hour endurance support ride, which the rolling-3-day overrides because Wednesday's actual load was much higher than the rolling-7-day had anticipated.
  • Risk and benefit: Both are appropriate. Full rest is the conservative choice with the SI history in mind and a real Wednesday endurance ride to absorb. The Luca dated calendar's 2-hour support ride would now be too much.
  • Preferred option for that day: Either Gunnar's rest or Luca's rolling-3-day rest with optional very short easy spin. These are functionally equivalent. The Luca dated calendar should be ignored for this day in favor of the rolling-3-day.

2026-05-29 (Friday)

  • Gunnar sessions: (1) Strength Sidney, 1:00 planned, "No plyo jumps today" coach comment, full description with squat set 1 x 10 warm-up plus 1 x 6-8 half weight plus 3 x 4-5 heavy, plyo jumps after squats (cancelled by comment), split squat set 1 x 6-8 half weight plus 3 x 4-5 heavy, plyo jumps after split squats (cancelled by comment), core circuit 3 x with deadbug + single leg glute bridge + Pallof press + suitcase carry + ankle proprioception. (2) Active Recovery 1:00, description "Easy ride."
  • Luca session (rolling-3-day): Easy endurance reset 1:00 to 1:30, Z1 to low Z2, RPE 2 to 3, optional 4 x 1 min cadence lifts at 95 to 105 rpm only if the ride feels better as it goes, no loaded strength, no sweet spot, no seated torque, no climbing pressure, no plyometrics, no max lifting, no trunk-loading gym work. Note: the dated calendar file for May 29 prescribes Sweet spot with 2 x 25 min at 88 to 92% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45, priority key, total 70 to 85 km. That dated file is the pre-flare prescription and conflicts with the rolling-3-day.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar wants Sidney lifting heavy and riding easy. Luca's most recent thinking wants Sidney riding easy and not lifting at all. Luca's dated calendar (older) would have her doing a hard sweet spot session.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's strength session is the single highest-risk session of the week for the SI joint. Heavy squat and split squat sets at 3 x 4-5 are loaded movements through the hip and pelvis. The plyo-jump cancellation is the only flare-aware modification, and it is the same template note that was present in the April 17 strength session, which means it may not be a flare-specific intervention. Luca's rolling-3-day session is low-cost and low-risk. Luca's dated calendar sweet spot would carry meaningful sub-threshold cost but no force production above bike load.
  • Preferred option for that day: Luca's rolling-3-day easy endurance with cadence lifts optional. Gunnar's heavy strength is not appropriate here. Luca's dated calendar should be ignored for this day in favor of the rolling-3-day.

2026-05-30 (Saturday)

  • Gunnar session: Openers, 2:00 planned, planned TSS 81.8, planned IF 64%, description "80g/hr." Structured workout: 20-minute warm-up, four 1-minute ramp-ups from 60 to 100% FTP, 5-minute recovery, then 6 x (30 sec at 110-130% FTP + 15 sec at 30-50%), 15-minute recovery, then 6 x (30 sec at 110-140% FTP + 30 sec at 30-50%), 20-minute recovery, then 6 x (20 sec at 110-150% FTP + 40 sec at 30-50%), then 39:30 recovery to cool-down. This is a high-density neuromuscular session.
  • Luca session (rolling-3-day): Controlled endurance progression, 2:00 to 2:45, endurance only mostly 65 to 75% FTP, RPE 3 to 4. A few short cadence lifts are acceptable but this is not the day for opener bursts, all-out sprinting, or long pressure blocks. The goal is to prove that endurance duration can step upward without back or SI regression. Note: the dated calendar file for May 30 prescribes Long gravel pressure ride 4:30 to 5:00 with 3 x 25 min at 82 to 88% FTP, priority key. That dated file is again the pre-flare prescription and conflicts with the rolling-3-day.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar wants Sidney sprinting hard with short recoveries inside a 2-hour ride. Luca's most recent thinking wants Sidney extending endurance duration without any opener-style work. Luca's dated calendar would have her doing a 4.5-hour gravel ride with race-pressure blocks.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's Openers session is high-risk for the SI joint. Sprint bursts at 110 to 150% FTP almost always involve standing, hip extension at high torque, and trunk bracing. Five days after first symptom-free ride and four days after the morning gym circuit, this session is a meaningful re-aggravation candidate. Luca's rolling-3-day endurance is the lowest-risk option that still produces meaningful aerobic progression. Luca's dated calendar long gravel pressure ride is intermediate-risk but adds a real Ghost-specific stimulus.
  • Preferred option for that day: Luca's rolling-3-day controlled endurance progression at 2:00 to 2:30. Gunnar's Openers is the single highest-risk bike session of the window. Luca's dated calendar should be ignored for this day in favor of the rolling-3-day.

2026-05-31 (Sunday)

  • Gunnar session: 3.0HR Endurance, planned 3:00, description "3-4 if you feel good, 80g/hr." No structured payload, no planned TSS, no planned IF. The description gives Sidney permission to extend toward 4 hours if she feels strong, with the same race-fueling instruction.
  • Luca session (dated calendar): Recovery endurance with cadence resets, 1:30 to 2:00, easy endurance 60 to 72% FTP, with 6 x 45 sec cadence resets at 100 to 110 rpm only if legs improve through the ride. Priority support. The rationale notes adaptation comes from absorbing Saturday, not stacking another hard day.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar treats Sunday as an endurance volume day with optional extension. Luca treats Sunday as a recovery absorption day. This is a meaningful philosophical difference: Gunnar uses long endurance rides to build aerobic depth without an obligatory long ride day. Luca uses Sunday as the absorption anchor for the Saturday work.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's 3-hour endurance ride is appropriate if Saturday was endurance-only. It becomes inappropriate if Saturday was Gunnar's own Openers session (a hard day stacked under a long day). Luca's plan is more recovery-protective and assumes the previous day was harder.
  • Preferred option for that day: Conditional. If Saturday is executed per the hybrid recommendation (Luca's rolling-3-day controlled endurance 2:00 to 2:30), then a 2:30 to 3:00 endurance ride on Sunday at hrIF 0.6 to 0.65 is reasonable. If Saturday was Gunnar's Openers, Sunday should be reduced to Luca's recovery endurance. Default to a moderate 2:00 endurance ride with 80 g/hr fueling, between the two prescriptions.

2026-06-01 (Monday)

  • Gunnar session: Active Recovery, 1:00 planned, description "Easy ride."
  • Luca session (dated calendar): Recovery day, off-bike, optional 15 to 20 min movement reset only.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar is willing to recover with 1 hour easy on the bike. Luca treats Monday as a true off day. Same philosophical pattern as the April 14, 18, and 22 active recovery prescriptions: Gunnar's recovery instructions leave room for the ride to drift, which the April 18 file (1.48 hours, IF 0.59, TSS 57.83) demonstrated.
  • Risk and benefit: A clean 1-hour easy spin is fine for recovery. The risk is drift. Luca's true off day is the safer prescription if the back is still in the picture.
  • Preferred option for that day: Luca's recovery day default. If Sidney feels good and the back is clean, an optional 45 to 60 min very easy spin is acceptable, with a hard cap on power and duration to prevent drift.

2026-06-02 (Tuesday)

  • Gunnar session: ZIPP, 2:00 planned, description "12X15s All out sprints spaced through the ride. Maximum quality. I want to see your max power." No structured payload visible, no planned TSS or IF. The description is the only directive coach voice in the window.
  • Luca session (dated calendar): Threshold with 2 x 22 min at 94 to 99% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45, priority key. Structured: 40 min warm-up, 2 x (22 min threshold + 9 min recovery), 35 min endurance, 10 min cool-down. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr carbohydrate, 600 to 800 mg sodium per hour.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar prescribes the single most neuromuscular session in his block. Luca prescribes the single longest threshold session in his block. These are not the same stimulus.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's ZIPP session develops top-end power and recruits fast-twitch fibers. It is sprint-pattern force production, which loads the trunk and hip extensors hard during the sprints. For Ghost, top-end power is needed only to respond to surges; it is not the limiting capacity. Luca's threshold session directly trains the sustained pressure capacity that Ghost requires. Both are appropriate for healthy athletes; Luca's is more event-specific.
  • Preferred option for that day: Luca's threshold 2 x 22 min, executed only if the front half of the week stayed clean. If symptoms returned at any point, reduce to 2 x 16 to 18 min as the dated calendar's own contingency states. Gunnar's ZIPP session is not the right tool for Ghost and is also higher-risk for the back than the threshold session.

2026-06-03 (Wednesday)

  • Gunnar sessions: (1) Strength Sidney, 1:00 planned, same heavy squat + split squat + plyo + core template as May 29, same "No plyo jumps today" coach comment. (2) 2.0HR Endurance, 2:00 planned, no description, no structure.
  • Luca sessions (dated calendar): (1) Endurance ride, 2:00 to 2:15, structured warm-up 15 min plus 60 min endurance plus 4 x 1 min high cadence at 100 to 110 rpm plus 30 min endurance plus 10 min cool-down. Fueling 45 to 60 g/hr. (2) Strength maintenance, 0:25 to 0:30, after ride, trap bar deadlift 2 x 4 at 60 to 70% 1RM or RPE 6-7, step-up or split squat 2 x 5 each side at RPE 6-7, side plank 2 x 30-40 sec each side, calf raise 2 x 8 at RPE 6-7.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar pairs a heavy strength template with a 2-hour endurance ride. Luca pairs a light 25 to 30 min strength maintenance session with a 2-hour endurance ride. Total strength load is materially different: Gunnar's session at 3 x 4-5 heavy squat plus 3 x 4-5 heavy split squat is typically 60 to 80% of an athlete's weekly strength stimulus on its own. Luca's maintenance session is explicitly designed to "leave the gym feeling sharper, not loaded."
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's strength template is appropriate in a base build phase but heavy for a build week that already contains a threshold day and a key gravel day. Luca's strength maintenance is event-appropriate for a peaking build.
  • Preferred option for that day: Luca's endurance ride plus strength maintenance. Gunnar's full strength template is not the right load for a build week immediately preceding a key gravel session.

2026-06-04 (Thursday)

  • Gunnar session: 3.0HR Endurance, planned 3:00, description "3-4 if you feel good, 80g/hr." Same template as May 31, no structure.
  • Luca session (dated calendar): Gravel tempo torque, 2:45 to 3:00, structured 35 min warm-up plus 3 x (20 min at 82 to 88% FTP, mostly seated, 60 to 75 rpm + 10 min recovery) plus 35 min endurance plus 10 min cool-down. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr. Priority key. Surface gravel or mixed.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar prescribes a long aerobic ride. Luca prescribes the most Ghost-specific session of the entire block: sub-threshold sustained pressure on gravel surface with deliberate low-cadence torque, plus race-pace fueling.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's session is safe and aerobic but does not rehearse the actual demand of Ghost. Luca's session is the closest match in the window to what Sidney must do on race day: hold 82 to 88% FTP for 20 min blocks on imperfect surface while eating 75 to 90 g/hr. The risk side of Luca's session is the seated torque pattern, which loads the SI joint; the dated calendar's own contingency raises cadence and removes torque if the back tightens.
  • Preferred option for that day: Luca's gravel tempo torque, with the dated calendar's contingency in force. This is the most specific Ghost-build session in either plan and is the strongest individual session in the entire window.

2026-06-05 (Friday)

  • Gunnar session: Rest. TP workout type ID 7. No description.
  • Luca session (dated calendar): VO2 ceiling support, 1:45 to 2:00, structured 30 min warm-up plus 5 x (3 min at 112 to 118% FTP + 4 min recovery) plus 25 min endurance plus 10 min cool-down. Fueling 75 to 90 g/hr.
  • Key contrast: Gunnar takes a true rest day on the day before Saturday's long ride. Luca prescribes a VO2 session the day before what the rolling-3-week describes as the first full Ghost simulation.
  • Risk and benefit: Gunnar's rest is the simplest fatigue-management call: clear Friday, hit Saturday fresh. Luca's VO2 session adds high-end stimulus but adds fatigue immediately before a 5:00 to 5:30 simulation day; the dated calendar's own contingency replaces it with 75 to 90 min easy endurance and 3 x 1 min openers only if Thursday created fatigue. The rolling-3-week notes Saturday June 6 is a 5:00 to 5:30 simulation ride; that places Friday in an awkward fatigue position.
  • Preferred option for that day: Closer to Gunnar's rest. A short easy endurance ride with optional openers is a defensible middle ground. The dated calendar's full VO2 session is too much load the day before the planned simulation. Luca's own contingency captures this trade-off and should be the executed version.

Comparative strengths and weaknesses

Plan A (Gunnar) strengths

  • Strong race-fueling instruction across all long rides ("80 g/hr," "No gogo squeeze/clif bars," "Drink mix/gel as in a race"). This is the clearest single piece of Ghost-relevant coaching language in either plan.
  • Explicit aerobic volume backbone with three planned 3-hour rides.
  • One strong directive coach voice in the ZIPP description ("I want to see your max power"), which shows Gunnar is willing to push specificity when he chooses to.
  • Recovery anchors on May 28 and June 5 are unambiguous true rest days.
  • Strength integration is real and structured (full session template, not generic).
  • Plan reads as more athlete-shaped than the April pattern (Sidney-specific strength title, sprint sessions with named structure, "as you would in a race" fueling).

Plan A (Gunnar) weaknesses

  • No visible SI/back flare modification. The only same-day modification on the entire window is "No plyo jumps today," which is the same template note from the April 17 strength session. This is the most consequential weakness.
  • Heavy squat 3 x 4-5 reps and heavy split squat 3 x 4-5 reps prescribed on May 29, five days after radiating leg pain.
  • Openers session on May 30 includes 6 x 30 sec at 110 to 130% FTP, 6 x 30 sec at 110 to 140%, and 6 x 20 sec at 110 to 150%, six days after the first symptom-free ride.
  • ZIPP all-out sprint session on June 2 is similarly aggressive in neuromuscular load.
  • No tempo, no sweet spot, no threshold, no sub-threshold pressure work, and no long-gravel-pressure rehearsal in the entire 10-day window. The middle of the intensity distribution is absent.
  • No gravel-surface session of any kind visible in the structured workouts.
  • Longest single ride is 3:00, well under the duration needed to rehearse Ghost.
  • Active Recovery prescriptions are permissive ("Easy ride") and would allow drift, repeating the April pattern.
  • Most workouts lack planned TSS, planned IF, and structured payloads, which makes the prescription less precise and less auditable.
  • No coach comments on the bike sessions to indicate same-day or week-level rationale.

Plan B (Luca) strengths

  • Symptom-led modification visible across multiple revisions of the plan. The rolling-3-day on May 27 is the most recent and most evidence-informed version; it correctly downgraded Thursday to rest after observing Wednesday's actual ride.
  • Explicit per-session rationale in the dated calendar files. Each session has Objective, Goal, Reasoning, Workout plan, Structured workout, Fueling, Constraints, and Notes.
  • Each session has structured workout content visible.
  • Strong Ghost specificity in the back half of the window: threshold extension, gravel tempo torque on gravel surface, VO2 ceiling support, with all three intensity ranges (sub-threshold pressure, threshold, and ceiling) covered.
  • Fueling targets are explicit on every session, scaled to intensity and duration, with rehearsal logic that progresses through the block.
  • Decision gates are built in ("If Thursday is calm." "If gravel is unsafe." "If back is irritated.").
  • Strength prescription is appropriately scaled to the build phase: heavy was not present, maintenance is light, no plyo, no compromising hinge if back is irritated.

Plan B (Luca) weaknesses

  • Internal inconsistency across three planning layers. The dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30 retain the pre-flare aggressive prescriptions; the rolling-7-day softens them; the rolling-3-day removes them. This makes the executable plan ambiguous depending on which file is opened.
  • The dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30 have not been brought into alignment with the most recent coaching thinking. If executed as written, those days would be more aggressive than Gunnar's plan for the same days.
  • No coach comments are visible in the TP planning evidence for Luca's plan because Luca's prescriptions live in the workspace calendar files, not in TP. That is a separate communication problem for the athlete: the athlete's live calendar runs on TP, not on the workspace files.
  • The June 2 to June 5 block density is high (threshold key day, endurance plus strength, gravel tempo torque key day, VO2 session) for the week immediately after a flare. Even the contingencies require that the front half of the week run cleanly.
  • The plan is more demanding to execute correctly than Gunnar's because every day comes with conditions and gates.

Risk assessment

Gunnar plan, downside risk

  • High acute risk of SI re-aggravation if May 29 strength and May 30 Openers are executed as written. Heavy hinge-and-squat loading plus standing high-power sprint bursts is the worst-case combination for the SI joint history. June 2 ZIPP adds a second sprint stress.
  • Moderate risk that Ghost-specific durability is under-developed by race day, because the 10-day window contains no sustained-pressure rides longer than 3 hours and no gravel-surface session.
  • Low risk of Hashimoto's-related overreach. Total weekly bike volume reads roughly 13 hours plus two strength days, which is in line with a normal build week for an elite. Recovery days are present.
  • Worst-case scenario: May 29 to May 30 triggers a new SI flare that loses two to four weeks of training and damages the Ghost build outright.

Luca plan as rolling-3-day, downside risk

  • Lowest acute risk among the three available Luca versions. Threshold, force, plyo, and sprint work are all explicitly removed.
  • Highest risk of under-stimulus: a quiet front half plus a deferred Ghost-specific build pushes the high-quality work into the June 2 to June 5 block, which then has to be executed cleanly under tight conditions.
  • Worst-case scenario: the front half stays so quiet that the back half cannot recover the lost specificity, and Ghost performance is below target without an injury actually occurring.

Luca plan as dated calendar files, downside risk

  • Highest acute risk among the three available Luca versions. The May 29 sweet spot 2 x 25 min and the May 30 long gravel pressure ride 4:30 to 5:00 are the most aggressive 48-hour stack of any version of either plan.
  • Worst-case scenario: same as Gunnar's plan, except via sub-threshold sustained load instead of sprint and force load. The mechanism of injury is different but the outcome is similar.

Quantitative summary

Approximate planned weekly bike load by version, in hours, for May 27 to June 5:

Version Bike hours Strength sessions Key high-stimulus days
Gunnar TP as written ~13.0 2 (heavy template both times) May 30 Openers, Jun 2 ZIPP
Luca rolling-3-day (May 28 to May 30 only, then dated calendar) ~12.5 1 maintenance (Jun 3) Jun 2 threshold, Jun 4 gravel torque, Jun 5 VO2
Luca dated calendar files as written ~16.0 1 maintenance (Jun 3) May 29 sweet spot, May 30 long gravel, Jun 2 threshold, Jun 4 gravel torque, Jun 5 VO2

The Luca dated calendar version is the highest-volume and highest-density. The Luca rolling-3-day version is the closest to Gunnar's total volume but distributes intensity differently.

Best-supported plan

Justified hybrid, anchored on Luca's rolling-3-day for May 28 to May 30 and Luca's June 2 to June 5 dated calendar with modifications.

The verdict in one sentence: Luca's most recent coaching thinking is correct for the front half because it absorbed the May 27 ride evidence and removed all the highest-risk modalities; Luca's June 2 to June 5 calendar is correct in shape because it is the only Ghost-specific build in either plan; Gunnar's plan is wrong on the May 29 and May 30 high-risk days and is under-specific for Ghost in the back half of the window.

Why not Plan A:

  • The May 29 heavy strength plus May 30 Openers stack carries acute SI-flare risk that the operator should not accept five days after radiating leg pain. The plyo-jump cancellation is the same template note from April and does not appear to be a flare-specific intervention.
  • No tempo, sweet spot, threshold, or sustained sub-threshold pressure in 10 days does not build Ghost durability.
  • No long gravel ride and no gravel-surface session does not rehearse Ghost terrain or fueling at race duration.

Why not Plan B as dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30:

  • Same acute-flare risk, just through a different mechanism (sub-threshold sustained load and 4.5-hour gravel pressure instead of sprint and force).
  • Inconsistent with Luca's own most recent coaching thinking (rolling-3-day).

Why hybrid rather than Plan B rolling-3-day end-to-end:

  • The rolling-3-day stops at May 30. The dated calendar files take over from May 31 and are the right plan if the back stays clean.
  • The dated calendar June 2 to June 5 days are appropriate for a healthy rider building Ghost specificity, but each day's contingency must be honored.

Hybrid prescription, exact

The hybrid below uses Plan B (Luca rolling-3-day) for the front half and Plan B (Luca dated calendar files) for the back half, with two small Gunnar-style modifications. Each day lists the prescription and which file or plan it came from.

Hybrid by day

2026-05-27 (Wednesday) — done. Sidney already executed 3:10 endurance at hrIF 0.60. No further action. Track symptom response into Thursday morning.

2026-05-28 (Thursday) — Plan A rest, equivalently Plan B rolling-3-day rest. Off bike. Optional 30 min very easy spin only if completely symptom-stable. No gym. Three to four protein feedings, normal carbohydrate intake to absorb Wednesday.

2026-05-29 (Friday) — Plan B rolling-3-day. Easy endurance reset 1:00 to 1:30, Z1 to low Z2, optional 4 x 1 min cadence lifts at 95 to 105 rpm only if the ride feels better as it goes. No loaded strength. No sweet spot. Override Gunnar's heavy Strength Sidney session and override Luca's dated calendar Sweet spot 2 x 25 min.

2026-05-30 (Saturday) — Plan B rolling-3-day. Controlled endurance progression 2:00 to 2:30, mostly 65 to 75% FTP, RPE 3 to 4. A few short cadence lifts acceptable if the ride feels good. No opener bursts, no all-out sprinting, no long pressure blocks. Fuel at 60 to 80 g/hr carbohydrate. Override Gunnar's Openers session and override Luca's dated calendar Long gravel pressure ride.

2026-05-31 (Sunday) — modified between Plan A and Plan B. Endurance 2:00 to 2:30 at hrIF 0.60 to 0.65. Fuel at 75 to 80 g/hr as in Gunnar's prescription. This is a step between Luca's recovery endurance (1:30 to 2:00 at 60 to 72% FTP) and Gunnar's full 3:00 ride. The compromise preserves a real fueling rehearsal without stacking three hours onto a Saturday that was held at endurance.

2026-06-01 (Monday) — Plan B dated calendar. Off bike. Optional 15 to 20 min movement reset only. If Sidney wants a short easy spin, cap at 45 min at hrIF below 0.6.

2026-06-02 (Tuesday) — Plan B dated calendar. Threshold with 2 x 22 min at 94 to 99% FTP, 2:30 to 2:45. Fuel at 75 to 90 g/hr. Reduce to 2 x 16 to 18 min if Saturday or Sunday produced lingering fatigue. Override Gunnar's ZIPP session. Ghost requires sustained pressure, not all-out sprints.

2026-06-03 (Wednesday) — Plan B dated calendar. Endurance ride 2:00 to 2:15 with 4 x 1 min high cadence drills. Add Plan B strength maintenance 25 to 30 min: trap bar deadlift 2 x 4 at 60 to 70% 1RM or RPE 6-7, step-up or split squat 2 x 5 each side at RPE 6-7, side plank 2 x 30-40 sec each side, calf raise 2 x 8 at RPE 6-7. Override Gunnar's heavy Strength Sidney template. No plyo, no max lifting. Skip the loaded hinge if back is irritated.

2026-06-04 (Thursday) — Plan B dated calendar. Gravel tempo torque 2:45 to 3:00 with 3 x 20 min at 82 to 88% FTP on gravel or mixed terrain, mostly seated, 60 to 75 rpm where terrain allows. Fuel at 75 to 90 g/hr. If back tightens, raise cadence and remove torque. Override Gunnar's 3:00 endurance ride. This is the most Ghost-specific session in either plan and must be executed.

2026-06-05 (Friday) — modified Plan B dated calendar. Replace the full VO2 ceiling support session with the dated calendar's own contingency: 75 to 90 min easy endurance and 3 x 1 min openers only, fueled normally. This honors Plan A's instinct for a quieter day before a heavy Saturday and aligns with Plan B's own fatigue contingency.

Hybrid logic summary

  • Front half priority: protect the back. Override every Gunnar high-risk session and every Luca dated calendar high-risk session in favor of the rolling-3-day.
  • Sunday May 31: meet in the middle. Modify between the two coaches to preserve a real fueling rehearsal without overloading a still-fragile back.
  • Back half priority: build Ghost specificity. Override Gunnar's sprint and endurance sessions in favor of Luca's threshold, gravel torque, and ceiling work, with the dated calendar's own contingencies in force.
  • Strength: light maintenance only this week, not heavy template.
  • Fueling: race-pace targets on every meaningful ride, taken from whichever plan has the more aggressive number for that session.

Direct answers to the operator's primary questions

  1. What is Gunnar likely trying to do this week? Build a normal high-volume aerobic week with strong neuromuscular content (sprints and openers) and integrated heavy strength. Strong inference from the structured workouts and descriptions.
  2. What is Luca likely trying to do this week? Protect the SI/back recovery in the front half, then move into a Ghost-specific build in the back half once symptom stability is confirmed. Direct evidence from rolling-3-day, rolling-7-day, dated calendar files, and rolling-3-week.
  3. Day-by-day comparison: see section above.
  4. Which plan is more aligned with Sidney's actual short-term condition entering the week? Plan B in the rolling-3-day form. Plan A is the worst fit because it includes heavy strength, opener bursts, and all-out sprints without visible flare modification.
  5. Which plan is more aligned with the near-term Ghost of the Gravel objective? Plan B for June 2 to June 5. Plan A has the better fueling instruction but the wrong session structure (sprint and endurance only, no threshold or gravel specificity).
  6. Which plan better protects the larger cyclocross season? Plan B in the rolling-3-day form. Plan A is the highest-acute-risk version. Plan B in the dated calendar form for May 29 and May 30 is second-highest acute risk.
  7. Which plan is better justified by physiology, recovery logic, and sequencing? Plan B. The dated calendar files contain explicit Reasoning sections and per-day contingencies. Plan A has almost no written rationale in the TP layer.
  8. Which plan carries the higher downside risk? Plan A as written, because the May 29 strength session and the May 30 Openers session sit five and six days after radiating leg pain with no visible flare modification.
  9. What does Gunnar appear to believe about Sidney's readiness? That she is a healthy rider ready for a normal build week with sprint emphasis. He appears not to have incorporated the May 25 SI/back flare into the plan.
  10. What does Luca appear to believe about Sidney's readiness? That the flare is past peak but not resolved, that Wednesday's actual ride was higher load than planned, and that the next 24 to 72 hours of symptom response determine whether the back half of the block can be Ghost-specific.
  11. If Gunnar's written rationale is sparse, what do the session designs and weekly sequencing imply? A coach prioritizing power-profile development (sprints), aerobic depth (long endurance), and force transfer (heavy strength), with race fueling embedded but without race-specific sustained-pressure or gravel-surface work.
  12. If Luca's rationale is explicit in the dated calendar files, how convincing is that rationale relative to the athlete context and the intended race outcome? Convincing on the back half; explicit per-session reasoning that maps directly to Ghost's race demands; weakened on the front half by the inconsistency between the dated calendar files and the most recent rolling-3-day, which the operator should reconcile.

Coach-style observations

Gunnar's plan has changed character from April. The April window read as conservative and tempo-centric. This window reads as neuromuscular-emphasis and sprint-centric. The same generic workout titling style remains ("3.0HR Endurance"), but the directive content is richer ("I want to see your max power"), and the strength template is consistent. The shift is from "competent but conservative" toward "competent and assertive on the power side." It still falls short of "elite Ghost-specific build" because the middle of the intensity distribution is missing and there is no gravel-surface session.

Luca's plan has a planning quality problem distinct from the coaching quality. The coaching judgment expressed in the rolling-3-day is sound. The same coach's dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30 should have been updated to match. Operators who use multiple Luca files at the same time can read inconsistent prescriptions and execute the wrong one. This is the single most concrete improvement available to Luca's process this week.

Neither coach's plan is correct as written. Gunnar's is wrong on the safety side for the front half. Luca's is internally inconsistent and the dated calendar version for May 29 to May 30 is also wrong on the safety side. The hybrid in section 10 is the correct executable plan.

Key uncertainties and missing evidence

  • Whether Gunnar received the May 25 SI/back flare report. If he did and chose not to modify, that is a coaching judgment worth contesting. If he did not, that is a communication failure between Luca and Gunnar that should be fixed. Either resolution changes how Gunnar's plan should be read going forward.
  • Whether the May 27 morning gym circuit Sidney did was the trigger for any later symptom or whether it stayed quiet. The May 27 daily log raises this question; no evidence in the workspace resolves it as of this writing.
  • Planned TSS, IF, and structured payloads for most of Gunnar's bike sessions are not present in the TP objects available. That makes the load estimation for Gunnar's week directional rather than precise.
  • Completed metrics are present only for May 27. No completed evidence is available for Gunnar's later sessions because they have not happened yet.
  • HRV, sleep, RPE, and other wellness markers from Sidney are absent for this window. Symptom-led plans rely on those signals; without them, the rolling-3-day's gates depend on Sidney self-reporting.
  • Whether Luca will update the dated calendar files for May 29 and May 30 to match the rolling-3-day. The current state, where the dated files contradict the rolling-3-day, is the most concrete planning quality issue Luca can fix today.

Confidence

  • Plan A (Gunnar) assessment confidence: moderate to high. Direct evidence is now available for every day. Where coach intent is unclear, the inference is based on multiple visible structural cues plus the prior April pattern.
  • Plan B (Luca) assessment confidence: high. Direct evidence across three planning layers plus the dated calendar files.
  • Comparison confidence: high. The two plans differ enough at the day level that the comparison can be made cleanly. The only remaining ambiguity is which Luca file is treated as definitive, and that ambiguity is itself a feature of the comparison, not a bug.
  • Verdict confidence: high within the available evidence. The hybrid prescription is robust to all plausible Sidney symptom outcomes except a worsening flare, in which case both plans collapse to rest and clinical assessment.