Sidney McGill training results analysis: June 6-12, 2026
Scope note: the source review window runs June 6 to June 13, 2026. June 6 bike work was not Luca-tagged and is treated as context only. The June 13 Ghost simulation is completed in the data and is included here as the decisive anchor of the block. Totals that include June 13 are labelled June 6-13; the build-week subtotal is labelled June 6-12.
Executive summary
This was a productive week, and it supports Ghost preparation. The build delivered a coherent race-specific progression, and most importantly the June 13 Ghost simulation was completed almost exactly on plan: 4.97 h, 279.0 TSS, 135.2 km, 1579 m of climbing, NP 195 W, VI 1.06. That single session is the strongest readiness confirmation in the block and shows Sidney can carry Ghost's duration and workload with disciplined pacing.
The biggest coaching implication is not fitness, it is late-ride durability. On June 13 power fell while heart rate climbed: first hour 188 W at 146 bpm, final hour 165 W at 170 bpm, a large positive cardiac drift. The fitness box is largely checked. The next 14 days should absorb June 13 rather than build on it, protect freshness for a recovery-sensitive athlete, and convert the missing fuelling and subjective data into a confirmed race plan. Net verdict: proceed with small, clearly gated modifications.
Evidence reviewed
Primary source: planning/2026-06-06-to-2026-06-12-live-trainingpeaks-luca-workout-analysis.md, a live TrainingPeaks pull (athlete ID 1575220, Luca-tagged activities, window June 6-13).
Supporting context: rolling-7-day.md, rolling-3-week.md, context/season-goals.md, context/race-calendar.md, context/travel-schedule.md, and planning/2026-06-06-to-2026-06-15-plan-summary.md.
Evidence types available: workout duration, distance, elevation, TSS, IF, NP, average power, VI, mechanical work, approximate power distribution buckets, and best sampled powers for each completed Luca-tagged bike session; heart rate and cadence for June 13 only; planned-versus-actual comparison for every completed session; and partial fuelling notes for June 13 (breakfast, post-ride, evening meal).
Evidence missing or weak: heart rate for June 7-12; athlete and coach comments in the extracted summaries; same-morning subjective readiness (sleep, soreness, RPE, GI, back/SI, heaviness) on most days; on-bike fuelling detail for June 13 (carbohydrate, fluid, and sodium per hour, product timing, GI response); the reason June 11 finished short; and confirmation of any gym, core, or run-walk completion. Power zones use an assumed FTP of about 260 W and the distributions are reconstructions, not native TrainingPeaks peak charts, so treat band shares and best-power windows as strong approximations. These gaps limit confidence on internal load for the midweek rides and on fuelling readiness specifically.
Week overview
Day by day, the roles were respected with two exceptions. June 7 delivered the relocated long endurance ride but sat firmer than a pure recovery-friendly Z2. June 8 was meant to be the protective absorb day and instead ran hotter than prescribed. June 9 hit its short-power intent cleanly, June 10 was a model easy day, June 11 was a genuine but shortened gravel primer, June 12 was an appropriate pre-simulation spin, and June 13 executed the full rehearsal on target. The optional treadmill run-walk (June 10) and optional upper/core activation (June 12) were not completed or filed and are treated as skipped, which is the conservative and correct read this close to the race.
Load and intensity distribution
Build-week subtotal (June 6-12, six completed Luca-tagged bike sessions): about 11.35 h, 507.8 TSS, 305.3 km, 6427 kJ. Full window including the June 13 simulation (seven sessions): 16.32 h, 786.9 TSS, 440.5 km, 9688 kJ. Planned-versus-actual across the seven sessions was -1.01 h, driven almost entirely by June 11 (-0.91 h, -60.5 TSS). June 8 was the main overshoot (+0.29 h, +28.1 TSS). June 6 added non-Luca bike work (1.64 h, 69.6 TSS), a 25-minute run-walk, and about 1 h of core that are not in these totals but are real systemic load.
Hard and pressure days: three. Short power on June 9, gravel pressure on June 11, and the June 13 simulation. Spacing was sound: an easy or true-recovery day sat between each pressure touch, June 10 before the primer and June 12 before the simulation. June 7 was a firm endurance ride rather than a pressure day, and June 8 drifted from easy toward moderate, which slightly eroded the protective gap before June 9.
Endurance volume: the week was correctly endurance-led. On every day the majority of sampled power sat below 75% FTP, and the quality work was embedded inside aerobic rides rather than stacked as separate hard sessions. High-intensity work was limited and appropriate: June 9 carried the only true above-threshold content (about 9% of samples above 110% FTP, best 2 min about 344 W). The grey-zone share (75-86% FTP) was the only mild concern, at about 22% on June 7 and about 21% on June 13, consistent with terrain and sustained gravel pressure rather than a pacing error.
Recovery days: June 10 and June 12 were genuinely easy and did their job. June 8 should have been the third clearly easy day and was not.
Too light, appropriate, or too dense for June 27: appropriate, sitting at the upper edge of what a recovery-sensitive, Hashimoto's athlete should carry in one block. The block target was about 16-18 h on-bike; actual Luca bike volume was 16.32 h plus the June 6 off-bike load. The load clearly supported the June 13 simulation, which is the proof point: the rehearsal was completed on target, not survived. It also supports a clean taper provided June 13 is absorbed. The single density flag is June 8 plus a firm June 7, which together may have lowered pre-simulation freshness and contributed to the late drift on June 13.
Workout-by-workout coaching analysis
June 7, Endurance 3:00 (125.2 TSS, IF 0.647, NP 168 W, VI 1.06)
- Intended purpose: relocated long endurance ride, moved off the wet and fatigued June 6.
- Actual execution: 3.01 h on plan; about 22% of samples in 75-86% FTP; controlled variability.
- What went well: duration nailed, useful aerobic load after a disrupted June 6, sensible variability.
- Concern: not ultra-easy after June 6 fatigue, run-walk, and core; the upper-endurance share raised the day's cost.
- Coaching takeaway: productive and within the adjusted ceiling, but it raised the importance of a truly protective June 8.
- Changes next decision: not on its own; it set up the need to keep June 8 easy.
June 8, Easy endurance (74.6 TSS vs 46.5 planned, IF 0.700, NP 182 W)
- Intended purpose: absorb-and-protect, Z1 to low Z2, on an Amber readiness morning.
- Actual execution: 1.54 h vs 1.25 h, +28.1 TSS over plan, VI 1.04.
- What went well: still aerobic, no evidence of intensity spikes.
- Concern: the clearest case of execution running hotter than intent on a day meant to protect; added load before the June 9 control session and into the block.
- Coaching takeaway: the main small red flag of the week. If Sidney reports flat legs around June 13, June 8 is a likely contributor.
- Changes next decision: yes. It is the template to avoid on the June 17 cadence day and on every easy day in the taper. Reinforce firm ceilings on easy days.
June 9, Short power control (112.0 TSS, +7.3 vs plan, IF 0.715, VI 1.13)
- Intended purpose: short-power stimulus (4-5 x 2 min at 115-125% FTP) without the fatigue cost of bangers or Big 30s.
- Actual execution: 2.20 h; best 2 min about 344 W; about 9% of samples above 110% FTP; only +7.3 TSS over plan.
- What went well: a real short-power stimulus with minimal TSS overshoot; the extra time was mostly low intensity.
- Concern: cumulative load only, not the session itself.
- Coaching takeaway: model execution for an embedded quality day; short-power response is intact.
- Changes next decision: confirms the June 22 accelerations and June 26 openers are well within range; no change needed to short-power prescriptions.
June 10, Easy endurance 1:15 (49.7 TSS, +3.2 vs plan, IF 0.632)
- Intended purpose: true easy support between June 9 and the June 11 primer.
- Actual execution: 1.25 h on plan; about 79% of samples below 75% FTP.
- What went well: the cleanest support-day execution in the window, good restraint.
- Concern: none on the bike; the optional treadmill run-walk was not completed or filed, treat as skipped.
- Coaching takeaway: exactly how easy days should look in the taper.
- Changes next decision: confirms Sidney can hold a true easy day; use this as the standard for June 14, 18, and 20.
June 11, Gravel endurance primer (105.3 TSS vs 165.8 planned, IF 0.673, VI 1.11)
- Intended purpose: rehearse gravel surface, pacing, equipment, and fuelling; a primer, not a second long ride.
- Actual execution: 2.34 h vs 3.25 h, -60.5 TSS; best 20 min about 243 W, best 10 min about 250 W; about 25% in 86-110% FTP.
- What went well: real sustained gravel pressure was present, and the condensed primer likely reduced fatigue before the simulation.
- Concern: the 55-minute shortfall reason is unknown (choice, logistics, fatigue, back/SI, fuelling/GI, weather, or equipment), which matters for interpreting June 13.
- Coaching takeaway: keep as a useful but incomplete primer; do not backfill the missing volume.
- Changes next decision: yes, indirectly. Obtain the reason it ended short before finalizing June 16 and June 19. If fatigue or back/SI drove it, June 19 should be the lighter option.
June 12, Easy spin (41.0 TSS, +7.1 vs plan, IF 0.642, VI 1.03)
- Intended purpose: freshen before the simulation.
- Actual execution: 1.01 h on plan, stable aerobic spin.
- What went well: appropriate pre-simulation support; optional upper/core activation correctly left undone on unconfirmed readiness.
- Concern: the morning log was carb-light and the recommended pre-ride top-up is unconfirmed.
- Coaching takeaway: good freshening; nutrition timing is the watch item rolling into June 13.
- Changes next decision: reinforces that on-bike fuelling detail must be captured on June 19.
June 13, Ghost simulation 5:00 (279.0 TSS, +0.8 vs plan, IF 0.75, NP 195 W, VI 1.06)
- Intended purpose: full race rehearsal of duration, equipment, breakfast, fuelling, pacing, and final-hour decision-making.
- Actual execution: 4.97 h; 135.2 km within the 125-150 km target; 1579 m; avg HR 151 bpm, max HR 179 bpm, cadence 84 rpm; best 60 min about 221 W, 30 min about 240 W, 20 min about 245 W.
- What went well: on-target load and distance, substantial climbing, disciplined pacing (VI 1.06), and genuine sustained pressure; the best single readiness confirmation of the block.
- Concern: late durability. Power by third fell 198 to 190 to 164 W while HR rose 150 to 166 to 170 bpm; first hour 188 W at 146 bpm versus final hour 165 W at 170 bpm, roughly a 25% power-to-heart-rate decoupling. The cause is not isolable without subjective, heat, and fuelling data.
- Coaching takeaway: she owns the duration and workload; the limiter is late physiological cost, which is exactly the thing to solve before June 27.
- Changes next decision: yes, the central one. Absorb this ride, do not build on it; make June 16 and June 19 conditional; treat fuelling and hydration as the priority unknown.
Performance signals
- Aerobic durability: strong in total volume, but the June 13 decoupling (about 25%, first hour to final hour) shows durability under this specific load and conditions has a ceiling that appears late. Healthy long-ride decoupling is usually under about 5%, so this is a meaningful flag, with the caveat that it followed a full build block and the cause is multifactorial.
- Repeatability and short-power response: intact. June 9 produced a clean short-power day (best 2 min about 344 W, about 9% of samples above 110% FTP) with minimal overshoot.
- Threshold and tempo execution: sustained pressure of about 240-245 W for 20-30 min appeared on both June 11 and inside the June 13 simulation, so sub-threshold capacity is repeatable across days. Against an assumed FTP of about 260 W that is roughly 92-94% FTP held deep into long rides.
- Fatigue resistance: the relative weak point, defined by the late-ride power fade with rising HR rather than by any single workout failing.
- Pacing discipline: excellent. VI 1.06 over a five-hour gravel simulation is a clear strength and a good race indicator.
- Heart-rate response: only June 13 had HR. It confirmed rising internal cost late, with a final-hour average of 170 bpm at only 165 W. The absence of HR for June 7-12 means midweek internal load is inferred from power and TSS only.
- Freshness versus accumulating fatigue: objective data show a productive but loaded week. The June 8 overshoot, the firm June 7, and thin recovery confirmation point to mild accumulated fatigue going into June 13, which may have amplified the late drift. No objective sign of deep fatigue, but subjective confirmation is missing.
- Power, RPE, HR, and outcome mismatch: the clear one is June 13, where power and HR diverged sharply in the final hour. Without RPE we cannot confirm whether that felt like controlled pacing or genuine strain.
Recovery and risk assessment
- Hashimoto's recovery risk: this was a high-volume race-specific block finished with a 279 TSS simulation. For a recovery-sensitive thyroid athlete the priority now is absorption, not further stimulus. Watch sleep quality, appetite, persistent heaviness, cold intolerance, mood, and any unusually elevated resting heart rate or strain.
- Accumulated fatigue: present and plausibly mild based on objective data, but under-characterized because same-morning subjective feedback was largely missing.
- Under-recovery versus good absorption: cannot be confirmed either way without subjective and morning-readiness data. The June 13 completion suggests reasonable absorption through the week; the late decoupling is the one sign that cost was rising.
- Back/SI and running/core: no objective flag in the bike files. Conservative handling was appropriate, with the June 10 treadmill run-walk and the June 12 upper/core activation left undone and no loaded gym confirmed. This protects the recently resolved SI/back area, which is the right call this close to the race.
- Hold, reduce, or add: hold the taper structure and bias slightly toward reduction. Do not add load. June 13 is the ceiling for this block.
- Conservative-adjustment triggers (any two): persistent morning heaviness, poor sleep across two or more nights, appetite suppression, elevated resting heart rate or strain, GI fallout, or high RPE carryover from June 13. Any single radiating leg symptom is an immediate stop trigger for loaded work on its own.
Fuelling and hydration assessment
- Carbohydrate per hour: not recorded for any ride. This is the single most important missing piece. The June 13 prescription targeted about 85-90 g/hr carbohydrate; on-bike intake per hour is unknown.
- Breakfast and recovery: the June 13 breakfast provided about 170 g carbohydrate at 08:58, roughly 2 h before the 10:58 start. That is directionally strong but tighter than the planned 3-4 h race-breakfast window, which raises a gut-comfort risk we cannot yet confirm or rule out. The post-ride smoothie (about 111 g carbohydrate at 16:16) is a good immediate recovery signal, and the later mixed meal added protein and micronutrients.
- Hydration and sodium: not recorded. The prescription targeted 600-900 mg/hr sodium and the ride likely needed steady fluid; neither fluid nor sodium per hour is in the file.
- GI tolerance: unknown. No symptom note exists for the breakfast timing or the race-bottle concentration.
- Race relevance for Ghost: high. The late-ride HR rise on June 13 is consistent with several causes, and carbohydrate, fluid, or sodium shortfalls are among them. Until on-bike intake is captured, fuelling remains the most likely modifiable contributor to late-ride cost.
- To practise or confirm before June 27: exact on-bike carbohydrate, fluid, and sodium per hour with product timing and GI response, ideally captured on the June 19 final gravel ride; and a cleaner race-breakfast window, closer to 3 h, tested at least once before race day.
Implications for Ghost of the Gravel
- 4.5+ hour durability: confirmed at the gross level. She completed 4.97 h and 279 TSS on target. The qualifier is that durability cost rose in the final hour.
- Gravel pressure: handled. Sustained 240-245 W blocks on gravel on June 11 and June 13, with low variability, show she can apply race-relevant pressure on the surface.
- Climbing and sustained torque: 1579 m on June 13 at about 84 rpm with strong 20-30 min powers indicates sustained torque is in place.
- Final-hour response: the open question. Power fell and HR climbed in the last hour. At Ghost she will likely need to race that window against a strong North American field, so this is the limiter to close.
- Race-day fuelling: unproven in the data. The targets are clear (90-100 g/hr carbohydrate, 700-1000 mg/hr sodium, 600-800 mL/hr fluid), but on-bike execution has not been measured.
- Readiness to taper: yes. The fitness box is largely checked and the plan should now express fitness, not build it.
- Confidence markers: on-target simulation load and distance, VI 1.06 pacing discipline, intact short power, repeatable sub-threshold pressure, and conservative protection of back/SI.
- Remaining limiters: late-ride decoupling, unverified fuelling and hydration, thin subjective and recovery data, and the unexplained June 11 shortfall.
Recommendations for the next 7-14 days
What to preserve: the taper structure in the plan, the June 13 fitness gains, genuinely easy easy-days (June 10 is the model), VI discipline, and the conservative back/SI and gym approach.
What to reduce if fatigue appears: total volume first, then intensity. Cut density before cutting the sessions that matter (June 19, June 22, June 26). If two recovery triggers appear, drop the next pressure block to endurance only.
June 13 and the next key simulation: June 13 is complete and banked on target; do not attempt to repeat or top it. The next key session is the June 19 final gravel endurance. Proceed with June 19 only as a capped 3:00-3:15 ride, and primarily as the fuelling and hydration rehearsal that captures the missing on-bike data. Do not chase another 279 TSS effort.
Specific day calls:
- June 14: full rest or a maximum 30-45 min recovery spin. No strength. Do not backfill June 11.
- June 15: full rest. Prioritize carbohydrate repletion, protein, and sleep.
- June 16, threshold sharpening: conditional. If fatigue is normal, sleep good, no back/SI, and no GI fallout, start 2 x 10 min at 94-98% FTP and add a third rep only if power, RPE, cadence, and back/SI are clean. If there is heaviness, poor sleep, back/SI, GI fallout, or high RPE carryover from June 13, replace with 60-90 min endurance. If subjective data is missing, default to 2 x 10 min maximum.
- June 17, endurance with cadence: cap at 1:15-1:30, cadence 95-105 rpm, no power chasing. Do not let it become another June 8 overshoot.
- June 19, final gravel endurance: conditional. If June 13 and June 16 absorbed well, ride 3:00-3:15 with limited 90-95% FTP pressure and a full fuelling rehearsal, capped at 3:30. If absorption is poor or June 16 was reduced, ride 2:15-2:45 endurance only, or skip if symptoms persist. Remove the 90-95% efforts if back/SI or heaviness appears.
- June 22, threshold tune: if fresh, 2 x 5 min at 95-100% FTP plus short accelerations; if any fatigue, reduce to 1 x 5 min and 2 accelerations; if travel stress shows early, easy spin only.
- Race-week openers (June 24 gravel feel and June 26 openers): keep if fresh. June 26: 3 x 1 min at 100-105% FTP and 3 x 12 sec openers if fresh, reduced to 2 x 1 min and 2 x 12 sec if stale or travel-affected. No makeup volume.
What Sidney should report after key workouts, and retrospectively for June 13: RPE overall and for the final 30 min versus the first hour; on-bike carbohydrate, fluid, and sodium per hour with products and timing; any GI symptoms; back/SI, hip, foot, hand, or neck issues; morning sleep, heaviness, and appetite; and for June 13 specifically, whether the final-hour power drop was deliberate pacing, terrain, heat or fluid, or fatigue.
What not to chase: the missing June 11 volume, a second big simulation, any loaded gym, power records during the taper, or extending June 19 beyond the cap.
Athlete-facing feedback draft
Strong week, Sidney, and the session that matters most went well. The June 13 simulation landed almost exactly on plan: just under five hours, 135 km, 1579 m of climbing, right on the target load, with composed pacing throughout. That confirms you can carry Ghost's duration and workload and apply real pressure on gravel. The one thing to sharpen is the final hour, where your power eased while your heart rate climbed. That is the exact race-specific puzzle we want solved before June 27, and the fix is not more training. It is arriving fresher, fuelling earlier and more steadily, and keeping fluid and sodium consistent. The next two weeks are about absorbing this ride, locking in your on-bike fuelling, and staying fresh, not adding more. To set the next sessions well, tell me how the final 30 minutes felt compared with the first hour, exactly what you drank and ate on the bike each hour on June 13, and whether your back, gut, sleep, and appetite are all good. You are in a strong position heading into Ghost.
Open questions
- On-bike carbohydrate, fluid, and sodium per hour for June 13, with product timing and GI response.
- RPE for June 13 overall and for the final 30 min versus the first hour.
- Whether the June 13 final-hour power drop was pacing, terrain, heat or fluid, or fatigue.
- The reason June 11 finished about 55 min short.
- Sleep, morning heaviness, appetite, and any cold intolerance or mood change across June 6-13.
- Any back/SI, hip, foot, calf, hand, or neck symptoms during or after June 11 and June 13.
- Whether any gym, core, or treadmill run-walk was completed without a TrainingPeaks file, and any next-day soreness.
- HRV or resting heart rate trend, if tracked, through the block.
- Heat and conditions on June 13 (temperature, sun, wind).
Final coaching call
Proceed with small modifications. June 13 is a clear pass and the decisive readiness confirmation, so the plan moves into taper as written in structure, with two gates. First, make June 16 and June 19 explicitly conditional on subjective recovery and on the June 13 fuelling and decoupling follow-up, and default to the lighter option (2 x 10 min on June 16, capped endurance on June 19) whenever subjective data is missing. Second, treat the June 19 ride primarily as the fuelling and hydration rehearsal that captures the missing on-bike data. Reassess before June 16 and again before June 19. Reduce load if any two of these appear: persistent heaviness, two or more poor nights of sleep, appetite suppression, elevated resting heart rate or strain, GI fallout, or high RPE carryover from June 13; stop loaded work immediately on any radiating leg symptom. Do not add load, do not repeat the simulation, and do not backfill June 11.