This comes up constantly in the Skool community — someone posts their training data, they're clearly putting the work in, but the results have flatlined. And the question is always: should I get a coach?
I've been on both sides of this. I self-coached for years, made decent progress, but looking back I left a lot on the table. When I eventually worked with someone, the biggest shift wasn't the sessions themselves — it was having somebody who could look at my data without the emotional attachment I had to it. I'd push through weeks I should have rested. I'd skip the gym because I "felt good on the bike." Classic self-coaching traps. A coach cuts through that noise because they don't care about your ego, they care about your output.
That said, hiring a coach isn't always the answer. If you're in your first couple of years of structured training, a solid plan from someone like Friel or Lorang will get you a long way. You don't need a coach to go from 2.5 to 3.5 watts per kilo — you need consistency and a plan you'll actually follow. Where coaching starts to pay for itself is when you've done that work, you're consistent, and the gains have slowed to a crawl. That's when someone who knows what they're looking at can find the two or three percent you're missing.
Key Takeaways
- A plateau lasting longer than one full training block is the clearest sign you'd benefit from a coach
- Self-coaching works brilliantly in the early years — a good plan and consistency will cover most of the ground
- The real value of a coach is load management and objectivity, not just writing workouts
- Before you hire, ask about communication style, rider level experience, and coaching philosophy — not just qualifications
Join the free Roadman community: https://www.skool.com/roadmancycling