There is no universal best cycling training plan. There is a format whose assumptions, support and terms fit a specific rider brief.
Roadman sells coached training plans through Not Done Yet, so this guide has a commercial conflict. Apply the same ten checks to the Roadman service, every marketplace plan, every app and every coach. Use the methodology guide if you first need to understand periodisation, intensity distribution and review rules.
Write one rider brief
Give every option the same information:
- target event, performance task or consistency goal and date;
- recent completed training rather than aspirational volume;
- weekly days and hours that can actually be protected;
- longest practical training window;
- training history, current zones and available equipment;
- relevant recovery, work, travel and family constraints;
- the type of support and accountability wanted.
If a seller cannot say whether the offer fits that brief, the comparison should stop there.
The ten checks
1. Intended rider, goal and prerequisites
The plan should state the discipline, experience level, starting volume, required equipment and goal it was built for. “Intermediate” is not enough if it never defines the term. Check whether the first week resembles training the rider has recently tolerated.
2. Weekly hours, days and longest session
Record the minimum and peak weekly hours, number of training days and longest session. An eight-hour plan is not merely a shortened twelve-hour plan: the placement of priority work and recovery can change with the available time.
3. Progression
Ask which variable progresses—duration, frequency, intensity, density or specificity—and over what review period. Reject fixed percentage rules presented as universal safety laws. Progression should be tied to recent load, athlete response and the goal.
4. Recovery
The plan should show where lower-load days or weeks appear and what could move them. A fixed three-to-one loading cycle can be useful for one athlete and wrong for another. Recovery is a planned variable, not empty calendar space.
5. Intensity and zone system
Confirm whether targets use power, heart rate, perceived exertion or a combination; how zones are set; and whether the model uses three, five or seven zones. Ask whether an “80/20” claim counts session goals or every minute in zone.
A 2025 individual-participant network meta-analysis found no overall difference between polarised and pyramidal interventions for VO2max or time-trial performance when intensity was calculated by heart-rate time in zone; results also differed by athlete level (Rosenblat et al., PubMed 39888556). A training-distribution label is therefore not a quality certificate.
6. Missed-session and modification rules
Ask what happens after missed work, illness, unusual fatigue, travel or a changed event date. “Make it up tomorrow” is not a decision rule. The plan should help the rider protect priority work without stacking incompatible sessions.
7. Delivery and data access
Record the platform, device compatibility, structured-workout support, offline access, export options and what happens to the plan if the subscription ends. For apps or coaching platforms, check who can view athlete data, retention and deletion controls.
8. Support and professional scope
For a supported plan, record:
- who answers questions;
- who reviews completed work;
- review and call cadence;
- included contact channels and response expectations;
- whether support is group, team-reviewed or named-coach one-to-one;
- what happens when an issue sits outside coaching scope.
A coach or plan is not automatically qualified to diagnose injury, prescribe therapeutic nutrition or provide mental-health treatment. Check referral boundaries.
9. Evidence and limits
Look for sources that match the claim. A systematic review, an expert interview, a named case study and a testimonial answer different questions.
A 2023 systematic review found only seven eligible studies of periodisation in trained road cyclists and no evidence favouring one model across eight-to-twelve-week interventions (Galán-Rioja et al., PubMed 36640771). Be cautious when a plan presents one phase sequence as settled science.
Testimonials can show that a person used the service and experienced an outcome. They do not forecast another rider's result. Guaranteed watts, guaranteed weight loss or guaranteed race outcomes are disqualifying claims.
10. Complete price and terms
Record currency, tax, billing interval, setup fee, minimum term, automatic renewal, pause, cancellation and refund conditions. A one-off template and an individually reviewed monthly service should not be compared as if they contain the same work.
Compare the four common formats
| Format | Useful when | Responsibility that remains with the rider |
|---|---|---|
| Static plan | The goal and schedule are predictable and low-cost structure is enough | Interpreting feedback and deciding when to modify the plan |
| Adaptive app | The rider wants automated delivery and defined schedule or target changes | Understanding the inputs, rules and override points |
| Self-coaching | The rider wants control and enjoys analysis | Objectivity, evidence appraisal and every training decision |
| Coached plan | A named human review loop, explanation or accountability is valuable | Honest feedback, execution and verifying the promised service |
No format is inherently the highest quality. A poor coached service can provide less useful review than a well-designed static plan; a good app can handle routine changes efficiently; a self-coached rider may understand their context unusually well.
A comparison sheet you can reuse
Create one row per option and record:
| Field | What to enter |
|---|---|
| Intended rider | Discipline, experience, starting volume and prerequisites |
| Goal | Event or adaptation the plan is designed around |
| Time | Average and peak hours, days and longest session |
| Progression | Variable changed and review interval |
| Recovery | Planned lower-load periods and change rules |
| Intensity | Metric, zone model and testing requirement |
| Modification | Missed-session, illness, travel and event-change rules |
| Delivery | Platform, device support, access and export |
| Human support | Reviewer, cadence, channels and response expectations |
| Scope | Strength, fuelling, skills and referral boundaries |
| Evidence | Sources, case context and limitations |
| Terms | Total price, billing, minimum term, renewal and cancellation |
Score only after the facts are complete. A polished sales page should not fill blank fields by implication.
Masters and time-crunched riders
Age alone does not determine a weekly template. Recent training, health, lifting history, sleep, work and individual response matter. A masters-specific plan should explain how it observes recovery and changes load; it should not simply reduce every target because of age or promise that one loading ratio suits everyone over 40.
Likewise, “time-crunched” needs a number. Confirm the actual weekly ceiling and longest session, then check whether the plan preserves the demands of the goal rather than compressing every missed hour into more intensity.
Red flags
- the intended rider and prerequisites are missing;
- guaranteed watts, weight or race outcomes;
- absolute claims that one intensity distribution is best for everyone;
- progression with no recovery or modification rules;
- a plan that requires more days or hours than the rider can protect;
- coaching language with no named reviewer or review cadence;
- testimonials with no context or limitations;
- health, injury or nutrition claims outside the provider's stated qualifications;
- unclear data access, renewal or cancellation terms;
- a monthly price that hides four-week billing or a minimum commitment.
The Roadman option
Roadman's current offer is a coached plan rather than a one-off download: a personalised 16-week TrainingPeaks plan for 6, 8, 10 or 12 hours per week, individual weekly review by the Roadman coaching team, live group coaching with Anthony Walsh, strength and general fuelling guidance, and a private rider community. The Roadman training-plan page owns the current price, trial and service facts.
That description is not proof that it fits your brief. Compare it with the same ten checks, read the terms shown during application and choose only if the promised review loop is the support you will use.