FTP Test

[AngryScientist]

I'm doing my first FTP test, ever this week.

I'm using trainerroad and my tacx vortex smart. i see i have two options, the 8-minute test and the 20-minute test. leaning towards the 20.

any words of wisdom as to which to choose?

[earlfoss]

I'm a fan of the 20 min test at this time of year since most training goals have shifted towards building FTP. This means an emphasis on longer high-level aerobic work. I believe that the 20 min test number is more relevant in this situation.

As you approach the season, shifting to an FTP based off the 8 min number is not a bad idea.

Granted, the FTP determined by either method will be fairly accurate.

[dem]

Both work fine, more where you are mentally and your ability to put in a hard effort for the duration required.

Personally I find the trainer very difficult to maintain max effort on, so I'd probably do the 2x8.

For comparison, I did a 20m max and a 2x8 max a week apart (outside up a mountain):
20m - 305 * 95% = 290
2x8m - 328 ave * 90% = 295

[drewskey]

Once I did my first 2x8 I never went back to the 20 minutes in hell.

Good on you doing your first one! :beer:

[AngryScientist]

Personally I find the trainer very difficult to maintain max effort on,

for the roads i have regular access too, i would have a very hard time doing a max effort test outside. i just dont think i could feel safe burying myself in the pain cave with potential car traffic around me.

inside it has to be.

the good news is that i'm just using the number to coordinate indoor training, so it will be consistent, if not 100% accurate.

[nooneline]

What's the protocol for the 8-minute test?

I agree with earlfoss that they can have slightly different applications and value in different parts of a training cycle.

The other thing worth noting is that though either of them will produce a NUMBER, your actual threshold is a range, not a single value. So the two protocols, even if they produce a slightly different value, are likely to produce a range that has significant overlap.

[tv_vt]

Where did you find the protocols for these? Would be curious to read up on them. But do you need a power meter to do them, and for the followup training, or can HR monitor work for this?

[sandyrs]

What's the protocol for the 8-minute test?

I agree with earlfoss that they can have slightly different applications and value in different parts of a training cycle.

The other thing worth noting is that though either of them will produce a NUMBER, your actual threshold is a range, not a single value. So the two protocols, even if they produce a slightly different value, are likely to produce a range that has significant overlap.

The protocol is to do two 8-minute efforts, average their output, and multiply that by .9.

http://support.trainerroad.com/hc/en-us/articles/201993760-FTP-Testing-The-Cornerstone-of-Training

[dem]

http://support.trainerroad.com/hc/en-us/articles/201794984-20-Minute-vs-8-Minute-FTP-Test compares the 2 protocols a bit.

(the 2x8 protocol is also what Strava Training Plans/Carmichael/CTS/Time Crunched Cyclist programs use.)

You can certainly use your HR zones, and, if you don't really have a power/time goal in mind, I actually find HR more useful day-to-day (scandalous!)

Having used an HRM and Power for many years, through various levels of fitness & fatness.. my HR zones pretty much stay the same.

I know my LTHR is 93-94% of my max. Regardless of fitness or power. So that may be objectively 220 watts entirely untrained, or near 300 watts pretty well trained.

But from setting my zones/effort, I can go right off my HR and not even bother with power testing. The more specific your training goals are, the more valuable power data is.

[nooneline]

Having used an HRM and Power for many years, through various levels of fitness & fatness.. my HR zones pretty much stay the same.

that's pretty neat. so, you could use your HR zones to hit the right zones no matter where you are in a training cycle, but use power (and testing) to determine progress.

[Ti Designs]

Good timing, I find that most people do their dysfunctional threshold testing over Thanksgiving...

[ThasFACE]

for the roads i have regular access too, i would have a very hard time doing a max effort test outside. i just dont think i could feel safe burying myself in the pain cave with potential car traffic around me.

inside it has to be.

the good news is that i'm just using the number to coordinate indoor training, so it will be consistent, if not 100% accurate.

Just about the only place around here that I like for this kind of effort is CP _very_ early/late, and even that is still kind of sketchy.

[I prefer the 20min test]

[Nooch]

I've got a great 20 minute loop in Westwood/Rivervale if you ever want to do it outside.

We use it for small ring/high cadence paceline too, or at least used to, up until people (me, mainly) stopped climbing out of bed at 5am on tuesday mornings..

[MattTuck]

As was mentioned above, 20 minutes is a long time to focus if you haven't been practicing. I was training for a TT earlier in the fall. A lot of it was mental, and pushing your mind (just like pushing your body) does take practice.

Only if you feel good about the mental pain of a 20 minute effort, would do that. 8 minutes of pain seems much less dreadful honestly, purely from a mental agony standpoint.

[nooneline]

As was mentioned above, 20 minutes is a long time to focus if you haven't been practicing. I was training for a TT earlier in the fall. A lot of it was mental, and pushing your mind (just like pushing your body) does take practice.

Only if you feel good about the mental pain of a 20 minute effort, would do that. 8 minutes of pain seems much less dreadful honestly, purely from a mental agony standpoint.

20-min tests also take practice. if you start too high, it's quite possible that you'll crack and limp home, averaging less than you could do if it was a steady effort.

i see a lot of tips to schedule a 20-min test with negative splits - aiming to have the last 10 minutes at a higher average power output than the first 10 minutes. especially during the 'offseason,' i start aiming for 10-15w below my guesstimate/target-average. 5 minutes in, i lift it 5w. 10 min in, lift it another 5 watts. and so on, until by 15 minutes in i'm averaging what i've targeted, and i can really empty the tank in the last 5 minutes.

[coffeecake]

There is a lot of good advice in this thread. All i have to add is that from what I've read, the 8 minute approach is not an ideal one.

Efforts in the range of 8 minutes will likely involve some of your body's anaerobic energy systems, which will pollute the results of the threshold test.

Sure -- you decrease the "scaling factor" to 0.9 -- but the raw 8 minute average is not reflective of your aerobic power.

The 20 minute test is also less than ideal, but it is better than 8 minutes.

[drewskey]

Sure -- you decrease the "scaling factor" to 0.9 -- but the raw 8 minute average is not reflective of your aerobic power.

It's all theoretical anyways. I sure as hell don't want to push my FTP for an hour if I don't have to (mentally a wimp).

[berserk87]

Good timing, I find that most people do their dysfunctional threshold testing over Thanksgiving...

I do mine as one long interval that runs past Christmas. Still suffering as we speak.

[Lewis Moon]

I know you're stuck inside, but I find that having a pretty constant 3% grade works the best for me. Around here that means South Mountain from the bottom of San Juan to Telegraph Pass or so.

[11.4]

Age can be an issue in choosing FTP protocols. If you have a max heart rate under 180 or so, and especially under 160, doing a 20 min protocol is hard because you can't maintain the protocol as effectively without sandbagging it a bit. I usually encourage 60+ riders to do 8 min, 45-60 year old riders to consider both, and under 45 riders to think about the 20. The 20 is a bit more reproducible for younger riders if repeated several times over the course of a year or two, but for older riders, the 8 min version has worked better for us.

[nooneline]

There is a lot of good advice in this thread. All i have to add is that from what I've read, the 8 minute approach is not an ideal one.

Efforts in the range of 8 minutes will likely involve some of your body's anaerobic energy systems, which will pollute the results of the threshold test.

Sure -- you decrease the "scaling factor" to 0.9 -- but the raw 8 minute average is not reflective of your aerobic power.

The 20 minute test is also less than ideal, but it is better than 8 minutes.

Those protocols include a specific warmup protocol - those are usually designed to burn off some of your anaerobic energy so that when you start the test itself, it's just your aerobic system going.

So, the results of, say, the first 8 minute interval is likely to be less than your 8 minute personal best.

[thegunner]

for the roads i have regular access too, i would have a very hard time doing a max effort test outside. i just dont think i could feel safe burying myself in the pain cave with potential car traffic around me.

inside it has to be.

the good news is that i'm just using the number to coordinate indoor training, so it will be consistent, if not 100% accurate.

river road?

[ANAO]

Thanks for the reminder. Time to start some focused work.

[ANAO]

river road?

That's not 20 minutes. Hardly even 8, Nic!

[thegunner]

That's not 20 minutes. Hardly even 8, Nic!

from entry of the park to end? it takes you 8 mins to go up alpine? damn, you got slow :D

[ergott]

Bear Mountain is perfect and just about 20 minutes.

[ANAO]

from entry of the park to end? it takes you 8 mins to go up alpine? damn, you got slow :D

Oh but there's downhill so it messes you up.

It takes me about 6 minutes @ 300W to get up to the rangers station. Too many years sprinting, not enough climbing.

BR has me on breakaway workouts now, so I'll likely be closer to 77kg next year than 81.

[christian]

Bear Mountain is perfect and just about 20 minutes.Yup, start at the traffic circle at Hessian Lake parking lot and ride to the top of Perkins. 3.9 miles. If you get to the top in under 20 minutes, your FTPw is "Quite enough, thank you very much."

[makoti]

Knowing I had ANOTHER 8 minutes after that first set was harder for me than getting through one 20min set, so I do the 20. To each their own, though. They both work.

[carpediemracing]

It's all theoretical anyways. I sure as hell don't want to push my FTP for an hour if I don't have to (mentally a wimp).

By definition if anyone were to do FTP for an hour it would be the absolutely most devastating effort ever. Basically it's like going for your own Hour Record.

Nothing wimpy about that.

That's why FTP tests generally don't involve doing FTP for an hour. If you do a time trial that's an hour long, okay, fine, but it doesn't make it any easier.

[RobJ]

The bottom line to the test is repeatability. Similar conditions to test the number again and again throughout training. That's why a lot of the coaches recommend doing it indoors on a trainer. Plus if you are using a smart trainer there's no freewheeling. Even if you can find a 20 minute course with no traffic, no lights etc. weather conditions will always be different.

The 20 minute does require more concentration and avoiding going out too fast but more closely mimics what you are measuring; FTP - which is your power over a one hour sustained effort (think 40k TT). The 2x8 works, but you are breaking up the hard work into 2 8 minute segments with rest in between. Slightly different physiological characteristics supposedly occur in the two.

I have been using the TrainerRoad FTP 20 minute test and it gets you going pretty good before ramping into the 20 minute test, which alleviates starting out too strong.

[-dustin]

I'm doing my first FTP test, ever this week.

I'm using trainerroad and my tacx vortex smart. i see i have two options, the 8-minute test and the 20-minute test. leaning towards the 20.

any words of wisdom as to which to choose?
20. and be focused/ prepared. with lots of airflow going. every single little piece of crap detail will bug you till you're in 'it.' from where your sweat drops, to the tiniest little click in the trainer. i think that's why 20 was easier for me. 8mins wasn't enough for me to find my place.

[ergott]

Yup, start at the traffic circle at Hessian Lake parking lot and ride to the top of Perkins. 3.9 miles. If you get to the top in under 20 minutes, your FTPw is "Quite enough, thank you very much."

and starting from South Entrance Rd. makes it 4.5 miles. That in sub 20 is serious territory, but there are people in that bracket. QoM is just under 20 minutes.

[ANAO]

Yup, start at the traffic circle at Hessian Lake parking lot and ride to the top of Perkins. 3.9 miles. If you get to the top in under 20 minutes, your FTPw is "Quite enough, thank you very much."

Or the backwards Gate Hill climb is about 20 min. - also a good option:

https://www.strava.com/segments/7706039?filter=overall

[ANAO]

and starting from South Entrance Rd. makes it 4.5 miles. That in sub 20 is serious territory, but there are people in that bracket. QoM is just under 20 minutes.

Maragrita's well below.

[Joachim]

I use different approaches depending on the rider (mental strength), conditions of general training (indoors vs outdoors) etc. So far none of my methods have failed me. Nick, you are welcome to contact me via PM for advice.

[ergott]

20. and be focused/ prepared. with lots of airflow going. every single little piece of crap detail will bug you till you're in 'it.' from where your sweat drops, to the tiniest little click in the trainer. i think that's why 20 was easier for me. 8mins wasn't enough for me to find my place.

I think it also better prepares you for threshold work in general. If suffering for 20 minutes is too much for you...

[ergott]

Maragrita's well below.

Just talking about what's on Strava for reference.

[ANAO]

Just talking about what's on Strava for reference.
Surely he's on there. Link to the segment? Can't remember the last time I was on that road.

[ergott]

I said QoM. Men are in the 16s.

https://www.strava.com/segments/621602?filter=overall

[christian]

Surely he's on there. Link to the segment? Can't remember the last time I was on that road.

I think this is South Entrance Road to top of Perkins. 18 and change is ridiculous.

https://www.strava.com/segments/632171

[ANAO]

I think this is South Entrance Road to top of Perkins. 18 and change is ridiculous.

https://www.strava.com/segments/632171

Yeah Mike and Gavi are both right there (Gran Fondo 2015 when Mike was set to win and then missed a bottle hand-up).

Those guys are something else. I don't know anybody else on the list above them. Looks like one is a pro and the others ???

[shovelhd]

river road?

Funny, that's the name of the road I do my 20 minute tests on. It's a club TT course. Flat to slightly rolling with predictable wind. I greatly prefer 20 minute tests, and I'm old.

[kramnnim]

Do the full hour.

[ultraman6970]

Sorry for the geek and dumb comment/question... just dont want to look at google :D

When i read this I thought "people is still using FTP this days?, this guy mus have been testing his server or something" . For the ones that dont know FTP is file transfer protocol, so after the 1st line I realize....

What in world is FTP??? Clearly is not the FTP i know :)

[christian]

Functional threshold power. It's the power you can sustain for an hour TT, broadly speaking. It is also the basis of designing a training routine - as you can structure intervals and long efforts based on a percentage of your FTP.

[ultraman6970]

Thanks... good to know :)

[Tandem Rider]

I looked forward to test days, 5 minute effort, followed by a 20 minute effort, then do whatever I want! Just don't throw me in the briar patch. 25 minutes of effort ain't even half done on a normal interval day.

[ANAO]

This morning, I did 2x20 @ 275 goal power (actual power was 273 and 274, respectively). My heart rate didn't really go higher than 170 (168 and 166 averages, respectively). For context, I was at 190+ for the final 2 laps at states this past July.

I wonder what my FTP really is. Zwift is estimating 261. Sounds low.

[unterhausen]

I just started using trainerroad. My thread about how I can't make myself hurt on the bike anymore will give you a strong hint about which test I chose. With trainerroad, every workout is scaled to your ftp, so it's pretty important. I ran into a lot of problems with my setup on this test, so I punted and just guessed for now. There is one workout where you do intervals at FTP, and I think if it was any higher I might not have made it through the first interval. They got progressively easier, so I'm thinking I need to warm up more before I go into the workout. They schedule a test every 2 weeks. The other workouts seem fairly effective for me, so I'm reasonably happy with my guess. Although I think I would be happier if the warm up and cool down power levels were higher.

I'm glad I subscribed to it because it's giving me much needed motivation. Although I have goals I want to meet that will require me to get a lot faster, they are a little far off and amorphous to really get me working.

[laupsi]

This morning, I did 2x20 @ 275 goal power (actual power was 273 and 274, respectively). My heart rate didn't really go higher than 170 (168 and 166 averages, respectively). For context, I was at 190+ for the final 2 laps at states this past July.

I wonder what my FTP really is. Zwift is estimating 261. Sounds low.

Two things;
1. Indoor FTP will differ from outdoor, meaning outdoor should be higher.
2. Two efforts at 20' is not really a test and given you could achieve a higher wattage I would say Zwift is underestimating unless its estimating your 60' FTP.

[ANAO]

Two things;
1. Indoor FTP will differ from outdoor, meaning outdoor should be higher.
2. Two efforts at 20' is not really a test and given you could achieve a higher wattage I would say Zwift is underestimating unless its estimating your 60' FTP.

Why would one 20' interval be more of a test?

I did a 15 minute warm up, 2 min. easy, 2 min. @ 285, 2 min. easy, 20 on, 10 off, 20 on, 10 cooldown.

I didn't hold back, if that's what you mean, but I set the trainer to erg mode and selected "275", so that's where I rode.

[nooneline]

Why would one 20' interval be more of a test?

I did a 15 minute warm up, 2 min. easy, 2 min. @ 285, 2 min. easy, 20 on, 10 off, 20 on, 10 cooldown.

I didn't hold back, if that's what you mean, but I set the trainer to erg mode and selected "275", so that's where I rode.

A 20-minute FTP test usually refers to a specific protocol that includes a certain warmup - I forget what it is off the top of my head - followed by the 20-min test, and then multiplying the result by .95 to get your FTP.

You can certainly estimate FTP from any 20-minute effort, but if you want precise results that are cross-comparable, you do them under the same conditions.

[ANAO]

A 20-minute FTP test usually refers to a specific protocol that includes a certain warmup - I forget what it is off the top of my head - followed by the 20-min test, and then multiplying the result by .95 to get your FTP.

You can certainly estimate FTP from any 20-minute effort, but if you want precise results that are cross-comparable, you do them under the same conditions.

What if my FTP test produces 270 and this workout yields 275?

Is the 270 more accurate?

I don't subscribe to that train of thought. Best 20 minutes (or 60 minutes, or 8 minutes, or whatever) is best 20 minutes.

[laupsi]

What if my FTP test produces 270 and this workout yields 275?

Is the 270 more accurate?

I don't subscribe to that train of thought. Best 20 minutes (or 60 minutes, or 8 minutes, or whatever) is best 20 minutes.

The idea is to work to exhaustion at the end of 20' for a true FTP, that is if you're aiming for that 60' power threshold estimate. Doing a 2nd 20' at a comparable wattage indicates you left a lot in the tank!

[ANAO]

The idea is to work to exhaustion at the end of 20' for a true FTP, that is if you're aiming for that 60' power threshold estimate. Doing a 2nd 20' at a comparable wattage indicates you left a lot in the tank!

Exactly! That's the only problem with erg mode. Can't go harder if it's set too low. Otherwise, it's like a miracle. My post-workout power graph has never looked so horizontally level!

Maybe next time I'll go out @ 285. I definitely wasn't in the red for much if any of the interval.

[MattTuck]

Isn't it strange how the optimal duration for determining this mythical number is exactly 60 minutes? I mean, it could (in theory) be any number of minutes. 120, 53.2, 12..... but it is exactly 60 minutes. How convenient it is that it ended up coinciding precisely with the arbitrary interval created by dividing the length of one rotation of earth into 24 (why 24? I guess to make FTP tests easier) equal parts.

[RobJ]

You have to make sure the trainer is set to the proper mode. On the Kickr that means Slope/Resistance mode. You don't want it in ERG mode for those very reasons. TrainerRoad takes it out of ERG mode during the FTP test.

http://support.trainerroad.com/hc/en-us/articles/201869584-Testing-on-an-ERG-Trainer


Exactly! That's the only problem with erg mode. Can't go harder if it's set too low. Otherwise, it's like a miracle. My post-workout power graph has never looked so horizontally level!

Maybe next time I'll go out @ 285. I definitely wasn't in the red for much if any of the interval.

[carpediemracing]

What if my FTP test produces 270 and this workout yields 275?

Is the 270 more accurate?

I don't subscribe to that train of thought. Best 20 minutes (or 60 minutes, or 8 minutes, or whatever) is best 20 minutes.

You do need to exhaust your anaerobic engine before doing the 20 min effort. I recall something along the lines of a pretty massive 5 min effort before the 20 minute test.

I recall that because usually I quit my (self supervised) FTP tests during the 5 min pre-test effort.

If you don't do the pre-test effort then the first few minutes of your 20 minute effort will allow you to use anaeorbic engine stuff when your goal is to test only your aerobic engine. You'll do a better 20 minute effort without the pre-test effort.

285w for 2 min doesn't sound like a massive load if you're holding 275w for 2x20. I could do about 260w for 5 min, but my FTP was under 220w at the time. The pre-test is basically a max effort for 5 minutes.

Also, unless you're taking a long break off the bike (a day?) if you can repeat a 20 min effort at about the same level you're going way too easy. The 20 minute effort should leave you absolutely spent. The only reason why 20 min is easier than the 60 minute test is that it's easier mentally to go all out for 20 min vs 60 min. However you'll be pretty wrecked at the end of 20 min. If you're not you didn't go hard enough. At the end of my 20 minutes I'm usually incapable of pedaling more than about 20-40w, and often I'm unable to hit 20 min, I might have to stop 5-10 seconds early. I see people who do efforts and then immediately do 150-200w to "cool down". I always think that if they have that left in their legs they obviously didn't use everything in their "effort".

You really have to be absolutely blown at the end of 20 min. Otherwise it's not a full on effort, by definition. And FTP, by definition, is what you're capable of, not what's comfortable.

I'm not versed on the technical terms but that's the gist of it.

[ergott]

Isn't it strange how the optimal duration for determining this mythical number is exactly 60 minutes? I mean, it could (in theory) be any number of minutes. 120, 53.2, 12..... but it is exactly 60 minutes. How convenient it is that it ended up coinciding precisely with the arbitrary interval created by dividing the length of one rotation of earth into 24 (why 24? I guess to make FTP tests easier) equal parts.

It's only one measure. The best measure of someone's abilities is looking at their critical power curve over a series of different length max efforts. This is explained in the Coggan book. People tend to take away only the 20 and 60 minute effort part of equation for simplicity/brevity.

It would be better to design your interval efforts around improving actual recorded efforts and it's not hard to do after a season or two of data. The real magic of structured training comes after a full season of recording rides with different demands on the rider until a bigger picture is painted.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Randoms/i-S4xg5wf/0/XL/Critical%20Power%20curve-XL.jpg

[ergott]

You do need to exhaust your anaerobic engine before doing the 20 min effort. I recall something along the lines of a pretty massive 5 min effort before the 20 minute test.

I recall that because usually I quit my (self supervised) FTP tests during the 5 min pre-test effort.

If you don't do the pre-test effort then the first few minutes of your 20 minute effort will allow you to use anaeorbic engine stuff when your goal is to test only your aerobic engine. You'll do a better 20 minute effort without the pre-test effort.

285w for 2 min doesn't sound like a massive load if you're holding 275w for 2x20. I could do about 260w for 5 min, but my FTP was under 220w at the time. The pre-test is basically a max effort for 5 minutes.

Also, unless you're taking a long break off the bike (a day?) if you can repeat a 20 min effort at about the same level you're going way too easy. The 20 minute effort should leave you absolutely spent. The only reason why 20 min is easier than the 60 minute test is that it's easier mentally to go all out for 20 min vs 60 min. However you'll be pretty wrecked at the end of 20 min. If you're not you didn't go hard enough. At the end of my 20 minutes I'm usually incapable of pedaling more than about 20-40w, and often I'm unable to hit 20 min, I might have to stop 5-10 seconds early. I see people who do efforts and then immediately do 150-200w to "cool down". I always think that if they have that left in their legs they obviously didn't use everything in their "effort".

You really have to be absolutely blown at the end of 20 min. Otherwise it's not a full on effort, by definition. And FTP, by definition, is what you're capable of, not what's comfortable.

I'm not versed on the technical terms but that's the gist of it.

Good points. FTP tests are about total exhaustion. Zwift (and I believe Strava) look at your 60 minute efforts to "estimate" FTP, but few people have actually ridden that timeframe at full gas. I know I haven't and that's way my estimated FTP is typically lower than what I can base intervals on.

[ANAO]

You do need to exhaust your anaerobic engine before doing the 20 min effort. I recall something along the lines of a pretty massive 5 min effort before the 20 minute test.

I recall that because usually I quit my (self supervised) FTP tests during the 5 min pre-test effort.

If you don't do the pre-test effort then the first few minutes of your 20 minute effort will allow you to use anaeorbic engine stuff when your goal is to test only your aerobic engine. You'll do a better 20 minute effort without the pre-test effort.

285w for 2 min doesn't sound like a massive load if you're holding 275w for 2x20. I could do about 260w for 5 min, but my FTP was under 220w at the time. The pre-test is basically a max effort for 5 minutes.

Also, unless you're taking a long break off the bike (a day?) if you can repeat a 20 min effort at about the same level you're going way too easy. The 20 minute effort should leave you absolutely spent. The only reason why 20 min is easier than the 60 minute test is that it's easier mentally to go all out for 20 min vs 60 min. However you'll be pretty wrecked at the end of 20 min. If you're not you didn't go hard enough. At the end of my 20 minutes I'm usually incapable of pedaling more than about 20-40w, and often I'm unable to hit 20 min, I might have to stop 5-10 seconds early. I see people who do efforts and then immediately do 150-200w to "cool down". I always think that if they have that left in their legs they obviously didn't use everything in their "effort".

You really have to be absolutely blown at the end of 20 min. Otherwise it's not a full on effort, by definition. And FTP, by definition, is what you're capable of, not what's comfortable.

I'm not versed on the technical terms but that's the gist of it.
Guess I was just doing an aerobic ceiling workout then!

[AngryScientist]

lot of good information in this thread. thanks fellas.

hopefully tomorrow. going for the 20-min test.

[nooneline]

What if my FTP test produces 270 and this workout yields 275?

Is the 270 more accurate?

I don't subscribe to that train of thought. Best 20 minutes (or 60 minutes, or 8 minutes, or whatever) is best 20 minutes.

the point of the FTP test isn't to produce a best 20-minute effort. It's to do a repeatable protocol that produces a reliable estimate of your functional threshold power - your 60-min abilities. The FTP protocol is pretty well calibrated to produce a reliable estimate of your functional threshold power. So, yes - the FTP tests producing 270 is more accurate.

Your 2x20 sounds like a good workout, and is likely to produce a number that's pretty close to that of an FTP test. but that doesn't mean that it's a good estimate of your functional threshold power. It's probably not a *bad* estimate. But probably not the best one out there.

[ANAO]

the point of the FTP test isn't to produce a best 20-minute effort. It's to do a repeatable protocol that produces a reliable estimate of your functional threshold power - your 60-min abilities. The FTP protocol is pretty well calibrated to produce a reliable estimate of your functional threshold power. So, yes - the FTP tests producing 270 is more accurate.

Your 2x20 sounds like a good workout, and is likely to produce a number that's pretty close to that of an FTP test. but that doesn't mean that it's a good estimate of your functional threshold power. It's probably not a *bad* estimate. But probably not the best one out there.

That's crazy. If I can ride @ 275 for 20 minutes, Aki's telling me that this is drawing from my anaerobic stores, at least partially, and that the number is falsely inflated?

If I were to simulate the conditions of the 275 ride, and simply lengthen the ride to 60 minutes, I would (possibly) arrive at 95%, while still drawing on the same anaerobic stores. So what's the problem?

[MattTuck]

It's only one measure. The best measure of someone's abilities is looking at their critical power curve over a series of different length max efforts. This is explained in the Coggan book. People tend to take away only the 20 and 60 minute effort part of equation for simplicity/brevity.

It would be better to design your interval efforts around improving actual recorded efforts and it's not hard to do after a season or two of data. The real magic of structured training comes after a full season of recording rides with different demands on the rider until a bigger picture is painted.



Absolutely. I just see people get caught up in this idea of FTP testing, and base all their training around this number that is derived from the intensity you can handle for a 60 minute block. I don't keep up with the training literature, but that seems like the kind of assumption that is based on people liking a round number. Are there studies that show different outcomes if you follow a plan based on FTP calculated based on 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70 minute efforts? and that basing FTP on 60 minutes does indeed lead to the best outcomes... I have no idea if such a study exists. Same could be said for other lengths of intervals. Why do a 4, 5, 8, 12 minute intervals? Perhaps 12 minutes and 15 seconds would be a superior intervention, or maybe 11:45... There are so many 'round numbers' in training, that it feels more like approximations than optimizations. Hours, minutes, seconds are a human invention of measurement (like inches or meters), there's no reason our physiology should happen to prefer round numbers.

[Wayne77]

Love this thread.

FTP tests are sheer, ugly, miserable, gut wrenching affairs that make me question everything I believe in. I hate em, but I love em. The pain is overwhelming but it feels amazing when you finally see 1 minute to go and somehow you dig a little deeper to finish strong...then look up and see an improved FTP. That feels really good.

I do an FTP test each time I complete a 6 week block of training. This is part of a coached off-season Computrainer program (1 hr sessions 3x a week at 5:30AM with the rest of my team). http://www.breakawayec.com/

There's something about doing an FTP test with 8 other like-minded souls who are going as deep into their own pain caves as you are that makes it slightly more bearable...there's a competitive/motivational element doing it that way as well - we all want to see each other's FTP go up and none of us wants to be that person whose FTP went down. Nothing like finishing it all at the same time with everyone draped over their bikes like dead meat, hoarse ragged breathing, puddles of sweat on the floor, carnage everywhere...

I can't look at the timer during an FTP test. It messes with my brain...and the time goes REALLY slow. I just go until I hear the 1 minute to go timer go off

Here's what I do...works for me at least: Even though I'm hooked into a Computrainer and all my real time numbers are on the screen in front of me, I set up my Garmin separately to display one and only one number on its screen: Cadence. That's all I care about during an FTP test. Immediately after the test starts I look at the Computrainer data to determine what gear at 90-95 RPM keeps me about 10-15% above my target FTP. Then I put my head down and only watch my cadence, nothing else. I know that all I have to do is maintain that cadence...or if I'm feeling stronger I can bump it up to 100, etc. I try not to glance up at elapsed time, current FTP, at all...until the test is done.

The other thing that works is I have some high end ear buds that are noise isolating...cue up some of my favorite metal tunes (I'm not a metal head by any means but I love that stuff for an FTP test) and think to myself...ok I can keep going for one more song...

I've done the occasional FTP test outdoors. Its worked ok, but there's nothing worse than miscalculating your route and 18 minutes into the test you have to stop for a car, pedestrian, or mechanical for some reason...

Last year a really fast guy on my team was doing his test and was on track for a significant gain...then his rear wheel flatted on the computrainer with 3 minutes to go. He was not happy! :-) 6 weeks later for the next FTP test he actually brought a spare wheel :-)

[Wayne77]

It's only one measure. The best measure of someone's abilities is looking at their critical power curve over a series of different length max efforts. This is explained in the Coggan book. People tend to take away only the 20 and 60 minute effort part of equation for simplicity/brevity.

It would be better to design your interval efforts around improving actual recorded efforts and it's not hard to do after a season or two of data. The real magic of structured training comes after a full season of recording rides with different demands on the rider until a bigger picture is painted.
[/IMG]

Good advice - I'm still learning and this perspective helps. With my off-season training program we structure the workouts around FTP, but during the season we also track our 5 second, 1 min, 5 min peak power and how it improves over time. I send my power profiles from rides and races back to the coach during the season so he can generate new peak power numbers for those different types of intervals - I guess he uses this to determine which types of intervals to focus on...ie maybe my 5 min power compared to my colleagues looks good but my 5 second power needs help..that sort of thing. Is that accomplishing the same thing? ..I'm still learning... During the season our coach also tracks our TSS (training stress score) to track the overall physical "drain" that occurs during build phases, how to manage that for upcoming races so we're not "overtrained" etc.

On another note...I tried my friends Concept2 rower the other day. I'm in love. I wonder if those generate an FTP number? Do competitive rowers track FTP? Are there any other sports that track FTP? Cross country skiing? I imagine it would have to be a sport where some type of mechanical interface is used to measure it... So maybe with running that isn't possible...

[John H.]

People get too caught up in FTP-
It is not the end all-
FTP is nothing but a theoretical number used to set up training zones.

People forget that you should train zones- and that zones are a range, not an absolute.

You don't have to always hit your best power to have a successful workout.

Successful training is about doing consistent training over a long period of time- not hitting it out of the park and trying to best your best numbers every time out-

So take a 20 minute test- use that to set up your zones. Train with the zones.
Don't 2nd guess yourself and try to up the numbers all the time- remember that zones are a range.

Have fun!

[ltwtsculler91]

On another note...I tried my friends Concept2 rower the other day. I'm in love. I wonder if those generate an FTP number? Do competitive rowers track FTP? Are there any other sports that track FTP? Cross country skiing? I imagine it would have to be a sport where some type of mechanical interface is used to measure it... So maybe with running that isn't possible...

For rowing everything on the C2 everything is based around a 2000m score and a 6000m (or in some places 5K) score for training. More advanced programs will lactate test for steady state to keep longer pieces (think 2x45' or other long rows) under 2.0mmol

Since rowing racing is based around 2000m performance, which is a mix of anaerobic and aerobic training ends up looking more like mile/1500m mid distance runner rather than a cyclist who's looking to maintain big efforts at threshold


Also, all of us rowers think y'all who love the C2 are nuts! That thing is a torture device (that I use for 2-3 hours a day in the winter)

[Mzilliox]

Do the full hour.

thats what i as thinking, my last ftp test was 40 minutes of torture followed by the 20 minute ftp test. i figured the 40 minutes just armed me up and got the bloodd flowing, some little pushes to remind the legs how to work, then 20 minutes of trying to put out the same power. one has to guess a bit then hope to hold it. at 15 minutes im sure im never gonna make it. at 18 minutes i find a final burst of energy to carry me to the finish.:banana:

[shovelhd]

That's crazy. If I can ride @ 275 for 20 minutes, Aki's telling me that this is drawing from my anaerobic stores, at least partially, and that the number is falsely inflated?

If I were to simulate the conditions of the 275 ride, and simply lengthen the ride to 60 minutes, I would (possibly) arrive at 95%, while still drawing on the same anaerobic stores. So what's the problem?

The problem is that you are using a 20 minute erg mode workout as the basis for your FTP. You need to do an all out paced 20 minute effort after a hard warmup. Then you need to do the math to work estimate your FTP. It is not the average power of your test. After my tests my body is so shot it has taken me an hour to ride the five miles back to my car (I always tested outside).

Then again, you can do whatever you want and test however you want, and believe whatever you want.

[nooneline]

That's crazy. If I can ride @ 275 for 20 minutes, Aki's telling me that this is drawing from my anaerobic stores, at least partially, and that the number is falsely inflated?

If I were to simulate the conditions of the 275 ride, and simply lengthen the ride to 60 minutes, I would (possibly) arrive at 95%, while still drawing on the same anaerobic stores. So what's the problem?

The problem is what I bolded. Here's why:

An FTP differs from a hard best-20-min-effort.

An FTP test has a warmup protocol designed to burn anaerobic energy.
The FTP is designed so that (20-min Result) x .95 = FTP.
It is pretty well demonstrated.

You think, but you do not know, that your (hard 20-min) x .95 = FTP.
In reality, the variable might be .9. Or .85. Or .8. You don't know (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_yilOh4COQ).

If you'd like to test, I welcome you to try and report the results!

[carpediemracing]

That's crazy. If I can ride @ 275 for 20 minutes, Aki's telling me that this is drawing from my anaerobic stores, at least partially, and that the number is falsely inflated?

If I were to simulate the conditions of the 275 ride, and simply lengthen the ride to 60 minutes, I would (possibly) arrive at 95%, while still drawing on the same anaerobic stores. So what's the problem?

A bit of clarification.

If you do 20 min without a massive preload effort, you'll skew your first few minutes up a bit. It may be 30 or 50 watts at your power for a few minutes, I don't know, but it seems like I can hold a higher wattage if I don't do the pretest. Your 20 minute test will be slightly higher but it won't put you in a different world. It might skew it by 5 or 10 watts.

One workout people do is 2x20, I think the standard protocol is to do 90% FTP or something. It sounds like doing 275w for those is well within your capability. That means that your FTP is closer to 300w, just based on your numbers. That means you'd target 315w for a 20 minute effort, for example. That might be wildly optimistic but maybe not.

Someone said that a very rough estimation is if you do a massive anaerobic effort to exhaustion then whatever you can do after is your FTP. Sort of makes sense since at that point you have zero anaerobic reserves left. So if I do a massive sprint effort for, say, 60 seconds, whatever I can hold after is about FTP-ish. Might be off by a significant factor but for me it might be 200-250w. At least it gives me a ballpark number. It's not 150w, it's not 300w.

I'm not super versed in training so some or all of this may be totally inaccurate.

[ANAO]

The problem is what I bolded. Here's why:

An FTP differs from a hard best-20-min-effort.

An FTP test has a warmup protocol designed to burn anaerobic energy.
The FTP is designed so that (20-min Result) x .95 = FTP.
It is pretty well demonstrated.

You think, but you do not know, that your (hard 20-min) x .95 = FTP.
In reality, the variable might be .9. Or .85. Or .8. You don't know (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_yilOh4COQ).

If you'd like to test, I welcome you to try and report the results!

Ha! I love that show.

I think I understand the gist of it. Essentially, if I don't test, I could be stressing the wrong engines, under-utilizing my strengths at the wrong times and over-stressing my weaknesses at the wrong times (in the seasonic cycle).

Maybe I will have to test at some point. After this morning's workout, my coach is confident at leaving estimated FTP @ 290 (where we set it september 11th, one month before a 2 week break) for now. I do not know if he plans to have me test or not.
I hope not, everybody's posts on the experience sound God-awful.

[Ti Designs]

`I do an FTP test each time I complete a 6 week block of training. This is part of a coached off-season Computrainer program (1 hr sessions 3x a week at 5:30AM with the rest of my team). http://www.breakawayec.com/

I'm really trying to understand training by power. I've read the book about a dozen times, talked to Hunter about some of the math used, and looked over tons of power data to try to make sense of it. I come out with more questions than answers...

Let's see if I have the basics right: You do an FTP test to establish your power zones. You then train at or near your FTP for longer intervals, or above your FTP for shorter intervals. Your total training workload can be expressed by your TSS...

So how do you gauge improvement? Retesting every 6 weeks doesn't do it. If my gas gauge updated my tank's status every 6 weeks, I would be sitting at the side of the road a lot... More to the point, how do you gauge the effectiveness of shorter interval workouts? Power is a leading indicator, it's not telling you anything about your state of recovery.

I'm looking at using power in my coaching, I'm just not seeing a lot of ways that I can point at and say it's a method of improvement. it's valid data to be sure, when my riders train for Mt Washington they need to learn how to produce a certain amount of watts for a certain time - it's wonderful for testing. My question is how do the workouts based off FTP get you there?

[ANAO]

I'm really trying to understand training by power. I've read the book about a dozen times, talked to Hunter about some of the math used, and looked over tons of power data to try to make sense of it. I come out with more questions than answers...

Let's see if I have the basics right: You do an FTP test to establish your power zones. You then train at or near your FTP for longer intervals, or above your FTP for shorter intervals. Your total training workload can be expressed by your TSS...

So how do you gauge improvement? Retesting every 6 weeks doesn't do it. If my gas gauge updated my tank's status every 6 weeks, I would be sitting at the side of the road a lot... More to the point, how do you gauge the effectiveness of shorter interval workouts? Power is a leading indicator, it's not telling you anything about your state of recovery.

I'm looking at using power in my coaching, I'm just not seeing a lot of ways that I can point at and say it's a method of improvement. it's valid data to be sure, when my riders train for Mt Washington they need to learn how to produce a certain amount of watts for a certain time - it's wonderful for testing. My question is how do the workouts based off FTP get you there?

If you're already using GoldenCheetah, there's a function on the "Trends" tab that allows you to see your chronic stress as well as the next point in time you will be fresh.

Tell your coached athletes to go out and ride hard when they're on form and you'll witness the progress.

[makoti]

People get too caught up in FTP-
It is not the end all-
FTP is nothing but a theoretical number used to set up training zones.

People forget that you should train zones- and that zones are a range, not an absolute.

You don't have to always hit your best power to have a successful workout.

Successful training is about doing consistent training over a long period of time- not hitting it out of the park and trying to best your best numbers every time out-

So take a 20 minute test- use that to set up your zones. Train with the zones.
Don't 2nd guess yourself and try to up the numbers all the time- remember that zones are a range.

Have fun!

This is very true. You still need to do the test to figure out what that number is so you can get your range, but yes, it is a range. Between x & x+30 watts. On the road, I doubt anyone can consistently hold exactly whatever their number is.

[shovelhd]

Ha! I love that show.

I think I understand the gist of it. Essentially, if I don't test, I could be stressing the wrong engines, under-utilizing my strengths at the wrong times and over-stressing my weaknesses at the wrong times (in the seasonic cycle).

Maybe I will have to test at some point. After this morning's workout, my coach is confident at leaving estimated FTP @ 290 (where we set it september 11th, one month before a 2 week break) for now. I do not know if he plans to have me test or not.
I hope not, everybody's posts on the experience sound God-awful.

So your coach is ok with you setting your zones by a 20 minute erg workout?

[ANAO]

So your coach is ok with you setting your zones by a 20 minute erg workout?
No. We extrapolated from previous rides.

[shovelhd]

I'm really trying to understand training by power. I've read the book about a dozen times, talked to Hunter about some of the math used, and looked over tons of power data to try to make sense of it. I come out with more questions than answers...

Let's see if I have the basics right: You do an FTP test to establish your power zones. You then train at or near your FTP for longer intervals, or above your FTP for shorter intervals. Your total training workload can be expressed by your TSS...

So how do you gauge improvement? Retesting every 6 weeks doesn't do it. If my gas gauge updated my tank's status every 6 weeks, I would be sitting at the side of the road a lot... More to the point, how do you gauge the effectiveness of shorter interval workouts? Power is a leading indicator, it's not telling you anything about your state of recovery.

I'm looking at using power in my coaching, I'm just not seeing a lot of ways that I can point at and say it's a method of improvement. it's valid data to be sure, when my riders train for Mt Washington they need to learn how to produce a certain amount of watts for a certain time - it's wonderful for testing. My question is how do the workouts based off FTP get you there?

I could write a few pages on this but I don't have time. I hardly ever did 2x20's, which should be done at FTP and not at 0.9, because that is sweet spot. I did a ton of over unders and stepped drills. FTP is used to set the power targets. If I could complete every set consistently, then it's time to bump the FTP by 5w until the next test. If I'm struggling to finish the last set and power is dropping off a bit, then that's perfect. Stay there until it gets too easy then bump.

[-dustin]

I could write a few pages on this but I don't have time. I hardly ever did 2x20's, which should be done at FTP and not at 0.9, because that is sweet spot. I did a ton of over unders and stepped drills. FTP is used to set the power targets. If I could complete every set consistently, then it's time to bump the FTP by 5w until the next test. If I'm struggling to finish the last set and power is dropping off a bit, then that's perfect. Stay there until it gets too easy then bump.
pretty well summed it up.

[Tandem Rider]

I could write a few pages on this but I don't have time. I hardly ever did 2x20's, which should be done at FTP and not at 0.9, because that is sweet spot. I did a ton of over unders and stepped drills. FTP is used to set the power targets. If I could complete every set consistently, then it's time to bump the FTP by 5w until the next test. If I'm struggling to finish the last set and power is dropping off a bit, then that's perfect. Stay there until it gets too easy then bump.

Bingo. Testing is just a starting point, intervals are where the rubber meets the road. Don't be afraid to monitor, and adjust as weeks go on, don't wait until next month's "test day" to take advantage of your improvement.

You can also do most of this with a HR monitor, the feedback is not instantaneous, but that's not always important. Old school is RPE and a watch but you have to be brutally honest with yourself, and willing to suffer without feedback, I'm not anymore.

[Ti Designs]

I could write a few pages on this but I don't have time. I hardly ever did 2x20's, which should be done at FTP and not at 0.9, because that is sweet spot. I did a ton of over unders and stepped drills. FTP is used to set the power targets. If I could complete every set consistently, then it's time to bump the FTP by 5w until the next test. If I'm struggling to finish the last set and power is dropping off a bit, then that's perfect. Stay there until it gets too easy then bump.

When you get the time... just kidding!

Ok, so let's take the over unders as an example of the type of power meter based workout. You have wattage numbers for both over and under, based on percentage of your FTP, and need a power meter to hit those numbers - HR is a trailing indicator, it doesn't work. Assuming you have your percentage numbers correct - over high enough to cause the body to adapt, under low or long enough to finish the workout, you have a true sweet spot workout. That in itself is a pretty big assumption. The gains are mostly fitness based, so they'll be slow - maybe a 5w adjustment every once in a while. Good days or bad days can throw off that data too...Using TSS to weed out the bad days, I can see how you could track fitness this way. The results just seem slow by comparison.

[ergott]

The results just seem slow by comparison.

I'm impressed with how many times I can ignore what I perceive to be bad days based on how I feel and still hit power targets. If I rode some of those efforts with my gut instinct I wouldn't have pushed as hard because I didn't feel I had it in my legs and would pop.

Using power to track long term stress is a huge benefit and great help in planning around specific events. I came into each ride I wanted to do well on with solid legs without worrying about under training. There are some great articles on Training Peeks and some great videos if you look up Golden Cheetah on youtube and vimeo.

It's really not that difficult. I think someone like you would come to love it after a season or two of data.

[zank]

Slow compared to what?

[makoti]

Slow compared to what?

My thoughts as well.

[Ti Designs]

Slow compared to what?

I look at a specific thing I want to work on, break it down to its component parts, and work on each one. A month ago I was as fat and slow as I'm gonna get (I spend October eating bacon). In two weeks I'm going to Florida - I need flat speed. Flat speed for me is all about using the quads to accelerate the pedals over the top. If I were doing an FTP test I would be 80% glutes - much larger muscle group, so that number is invalid. I've been to the gym doing long sets on the leg extension machine, I've already seen significant gains in quad strength and endurance (this is nothing new, every fall I get back into the gym and start out at 20% of what I was doing the winter before. Within a few weeks I'm back up to 80%.) I've worked on the timing of my pedal stroke, so I'm using the quad where it's effective, and I've done a few long road rides, doing flat speed intervals. If I wanted to do this more accurately, I would be on the trainer going by the power numbers - I'll give the power meter that, it tells you were you are. My point is that it's not all fitness based, it couldn't be given the amount of time. I'm now faster on the flats than I could have been with just a power meter based program (I hope - tell you in 3 weeks). What's more, training is far more interesting if you see constant progress on multiple fronts.

[ergott]

I'm sorry, but the idea that you can't use glutes on the flats is just wrong. I have done plenty of hard, fast efforts on flat terrain either chasing or breaking away. I absolutely feel the lactic build up in my ass when I let up. I'm talking about cadence above 95 and producing more than 400W.

Here's a file of me messing around with a nice tail wind. My quads were involved, but that kind of power came from my glutes. I just don't subscribe to the idea that you can only use the glutes climbing in a relatively low gear.

https://www.strava.com/activities/782832305/analysis/721/1249

[Ti Designs]

I'm sorry, but the idea that you can't use glutes on the flats is just wrong. I have done plenty of hard, fast efforts on flat terrain either chasing or breaking away. I absolutely feel the lactic build up in my ass when I let up. I'm talking about cadence above 95 and producing more than 400W

Not saying I don't use both, but given the time and knowing the type of ride, I went for big gains with the quads.

[ergott]

If I were doing an FTP test I would be 80% glutes

You always seem to separate the tasks they can perform.

[makoti]

Flat speed for me is all about using the quads to accelerate the pedals over the top. If I were doing an FTP test I would be 80% glutes - much larger muscle group, so that number is invalid.

No. As has been pointed out before, it does not matter what muscles you use, how you pedal, how fast a cadence you use. What matters is you put out everything you can for the entire test. How you do that is completely up to you. You will be more efficient one way or another, I'm sure. The test is not to measure efficiency.

[11.4]

I come at this a little differently. First of all, the FTP test is like taking your blindfold off and telling you which wall the dart board is one. The calculation is reasonable but it's also arbitrary and additionally is only as good as your ability to determine when you really are at 90% or wherever. I find that most people undershoot their FTP considerably because it's not a pleasant test, and that's pretty much what the folks at Colorado Springs even find with elite athletes as well.

Second, I wouldn't use FTP to tune my progression, or to tune my particular strength areas. I want to see my maximal heart rate decrease on a particular workout, see my elapsed time decrease, see wattage go up, perhaps see cadence go up with a higher or a lower gear, whatever. I'll track those real-time, against the metrics that really matter, such as speed. If I can't get faster, I'll start asking why and that's when I'll be exploring some of the same issues that TiD does. But it's so I can solve the problem of not advancing for a period of time, or always being relatively weak in a particular type of output (short steep rises, long hills, fast tempo, whatever). But I'm still measuring those metrics according to power, heart rate, speed, Strava records, whatever I want. The bottom line is that we measure cycling, when it all comes down to it, by speed. (Actually there's bike handling and descending and other skills, but the one we're training with FTP is, plain and simply, speed.) So I don't get too fancy about FTP. I recommend to older riders that they do the 8 min FTP simply because 20 minutes is horrible and older riders often don't have to do 20 min at that intensity as often as thirty-somethings who are trying to race at 32 mph in some crit.

Just think of the FTP as something that gets you into the ballpark and lets you set a training regimen. If you have to break out your data (like TiD loves to do), I'd be doing lactate testing, blood phosphate levels, VO2max testing, and always be measuring speed. A power meter on the bike can give us some indication of power applied to the bike, which is really the output parameter of our legs, but it isn't actually telling us how hard the legs are really working. Heart rate can be a bit more indicative of that, but even there, it's subject to daily swings due to environmental issues such as stress, fatigue, weather, sleep, and so on. If you want the quantitative end nailed, go with all the blood and lung testing because they give you some pretty good metrics, even if you have to bleed or take a plug of muscle to get them. But ultimately it seems we're trying to find an analytic that makes us faster, and the only real way to do that is to figure out how our body responds not just on one test ride but day after day, riding hard to ride faster.

[wasfast]

Lots of interesting and varied comments. As others have said, it takes a while to get the pacing right to get a "true" measurement. It's also a circular set of events. Your first test may well not be 100% correct but it's the best guideline you have at the time. Once you begin doing workouts structured around that value, you'll quickly know if it's bogus or not.

Not to worry. The goal is to have a reference point. You will definitely retest but how often is variable. You need some time to get workouts in and get more used to using the PM.

It should also be pointed out that the 20MP or 60MP is more about longer steady state efforts. Those values are very different for shorter, high intensity efforts. Coggan's charts have independent testing values for 30 sec 1 min, 5min. etc.

I say that because it's not clear what the purpose is of all this for you. If it's crits, cross and sprinting, that's a different beast than TT's or road racing. If it's to know when you're going in the red in the Saturday World's that's interesting but not a deal breaker.

Good luck.

[echappist]

Second, I wouldn't use FTP to tune my progression, or to tune my particular strength areas. I want to see my maximal heart rate decrease on a particular workout, see my elapsed time decrease, see wattage go up, perhaps see cadence go up with a higher or a lower gear, whatever.


I had fantastic power to HR ratios when i was over reaching. Power of 260W with HR in the high 140s. Except i can't go anywhere north of 260W.



I'll track those real-time, against the metrics that really matter, such as speed.



that's the one that actually doesn't matter (when it comes to designing training). What's faster, 300W in 32F with 10mph wind (while bundled up) or 280W in 70F with minimal wind (while wearing short sleeves)?



Just think of the FTP as something that gets you into the ballpark and lets you set a training regimen. If you have to break out your data (like TiD loves to do), I'd be doing lactate testing, blood phosphate levels, VO2max testing, and always be measuring speed.

how exactly do lactate testing and Vo2max help determine training?


A power meter on the bike can give us some indication of power applied to the bike, which is really the output parameter of our legs, but it isn't actually telling us how hard the legs are really working. Heart rate can be a bit more indicative of that, but even there, it's subject to daily swings due to environmental issues such as stress, fatigue, weather, sleep, and so on. If you want the quantitative end nailed, go with all the blood and lung testing because they give you some pretty good metrics, even if you have to bleed or take a plug of muscle to get them. But ultimately it seems we're trying to find an analytic that makes us faster, and the only real way to do that is to figure out how our body responds not just on one test ride but day after day, riding hard to ride faster.

so how would you measure this "how hard legs are working?" And let's assume one can know instantly what the blood lactate level is, how would this help with training? How is riding at a lactate level different from riding at a certain power?

Assume one knows MLSS, how would this help someone train? Also, using blood lactate as the independent variable at low intensity is bad, do you know why?

[Ti Designs]

You always seem to separate the tasks they can perform.

Why wouldn't I at this point in the season? That's what I don't get about most power meter based programs, you've got two large muscle groups producing 99% of the power, and you're never sure how well either of them is working. I break down the activity into it's component parts and work each component in isolation so I know how well they work. The time for putting it all together is months from now...

[11.4]

that's the one that actually doesn't matter (when it comes to designing training). What's faster, 300W in 32F with 10mph wind (while bundled up) or 280W in 70F with minimal wind (while wearing short sleeves)?


Of course you can throw variables into the equation. That's really irrelevant to the point here. When I'm talking about speed I'm talking about who crosses the line first. Or who is strongest in a long paceline ride. Or who is fastest in a triathlon. Who rides to go slow?

[11.4]

Why wouldn't I at this point in the season? That's what I don't get about most power meter based programs, you've got two large muscle groups producing 99% of the power, and you're never sure how well either of them is working. I break down the activity into it's component parts and work each component in isolation so I know how well they work. The time for putting it all together is months from now...

How do you know that you are really isolating one muscle group from the other? Or that you aren't cheating on the numbers because your kinesthetic sense is measuring tension and pain in one muscle but not necessarily output? Suppose you are still providing 40% of your power via your glutes and your quads are simply hurting because they can't manage more than 60% of the rest?

[makoti]

Why wouldn't I at this point in the season? That's what I don't get about most power meter based programs, you've got two large muscle groups producing 99% of the power, and you're never sure how well either of them is working. I break down the activity into it's component parts and work each component in isolation so I know how well they work. The time for putting it all together is months from now...

So your point of coming into a thread about FTP testing is to, once again, go on about how your way is better?

[echappist]

Of course you can throw variables into the equation. That's really irrelevant to the point here. When I'm talking about speed I'm talking about who crosses the line first. Or who is strongest in a long paceline ride. Or who is fastest in a triathlon. Who rides to go slow?

your original assertion was that there are better indicators for tracking performance, among which are VO2max, blood lactate, and speed. I'm merely quoting what you wrote.

Second, I wouldn't use FTP to tune my progression, or to tune my particular strength areas. I want to see my maximal heart rate decrease on a particular workout, see my elapsed time decrease, see wattage go up, perhaps see cadence go up with a higher or a lower gear, whatever. I'll track those real-time, against the metrics that really matter, such as speed. If I can't get faster, I'll start asking why and that's when I'll be exploring some of the same issues that TiD does. But it's so I can solve the problem of not advancing for a period of time, or always being relatively weak in a particular type of output (short steep rises, long hills, fast tempo, whatever). But I'm still measuring those metrics according to power, heart rate, speed, Strava records, whatever I want. The bottom line is that we measure cycling, when it all comes down to it, by speed.

[Ti Designs]

How do you know that you are really isolating one muscle group from the other? Or that you aren't cheating on the numbers because your kinesthetic sense is measuring tension and pain in one muscle but not necessarily output? Suppose you are still providing 40% of your power via your glutes and your quads are simply hurting because they can't manage more than 60% of the rest?

I cheated, I started my training program by nearly paralyzing myself. I started by remapping the muscles with a TENS unit, then using machines at the gym to isolate the muscle group. The leg extension machine within a certain range has to use the VL. I formed active skill sets by using major muscle groups. To this day I have very poor balance because smaller muscle groups were an afterthought.

I don't ask that my clients paralyze themselves - I've gone soft... instead I have them do exercises that are based on extension of one pivot - gluts extend from the hip, quads extend from the knee. On the bike the trick is to burn one muscle group then shift to the other. I like to start with the quads pushing over the top at high cadence. At that speed the glutes can't contract fast enough, so they stay out of the action. With the quads nearing muscle failure I shift into a much harder gear and shift to just the quads.

There are signs that one or both muscle groups are being used, it's called vector addition. At any point within the pedal stroke the force vector measured at the pedal is the sum of all forces generated. Extension from the knee yields a different force angle than extension from the hip. A force vector pointing almost straight down at 3:00 means there's very little quad in the mix.

[Ti Designs]

So your point of coming into a thread about FTP testing is to, once again, go on about how your way is better?

Does that annoy you?

[makoti]

Does that annoy you?

Trolling always does

[ergott]

Hey did you know that in the fine print on all power meters there's a clause? States that you can't do any gym work off the bike to reinforce your training. You can only ride your bike and create workouts based on FTP.

:butt:

Shame on me for thinking you would bring anything new to the conversation.

[AngryScientist]

I do appreciate all the conversation here, and am taking it all in.

Folks like TiDesigns and 11.4 come to the table with experience working with and training dedicated athletes, with a major goal to maximize performance on the bike, and have the requisite time and energy to dedicate to such pursuits.

I think it's important to differentiate the audience sometimes though. Me, for example - I'm just a working stiff dad who places some priority on physical fitness. i run, row, surf, paddleboard and chase my kids around a playground.

i'm not "training" for anything in particular, only to maintain a high level of fitness and make gains where i can. I think a fairly simple program based on FTP is perfect for me. in the off season i go to the gym, run and row a lot. i am not dedicating my winter to bike specific training by any stretch, so some structure is good for me, and better than just haphazardly tootling around on the bike as i generally would do.

not a criticism to anyone here, just adding some perspective.

[ANAO]

I do appreciate all the conversation here, and am taking it all in.

Folks like TiDesigns and 11.4 come to the table with experience working with and training dedicated athletes, with a major goal to maximize performance on the bike, and have the requisite time and energy to dedicate to such pursuits.

I think it's important to differentiate the audience sometimes though. Me, for example - I'm just a working stiff dad who places some priority on physical fitness. i run, row, surf, paddleboard and chase my kids around a playground.

i'm not "training" for anything in particular, only to maintain a high level of fitness and make gains where i can. I think a fairly simple program based on FTP is perfect for me. in the off season i go to the gym, run and row a lot. i am not dedicating my winter to bike specific training by any stretch, so some structure is good for me, and better than just haphazardly tootling around on the bike as i generally would do.

not a criticism to anyone here, just adding some perspective.

Well there's your problem - you're prioritizing wrong.

You need to focus on racing.

There, fixed it for you.

[AngryScientist]

Well there's your problem - you're prioritizing wrong.

You need to focus on racing.

There, fixed it for you.

excellent point. consider it done. i should be on the podium by april :banana:

[ANAO]

excellent point. consider it done. i should be on the podium by april :banana:

If you train through March/April, you should have enough points to race the 3 race in Somerville in the end of May. That's a great race - I took second there in '14. :bike:

Get moving.

[nooneline]

I'm impressed with how many times I can ignore what I perceive to be bad days based on how I feel and still hit power targets. If I rode some of those efforts with my gut instinct I wouldn't have pushed as hard because I didn't feel I had it in my legs and would pop.

Man, ain't that the truth.

In my time as a bike racer I've spent maaaaybe 10% of it training with power and the other 90% training by feel - and learning to feel.

Early on I learned, to my surprise, that sometimes the times I felt the worst (and was sure I was riding horribly), that I was riding very well. I remember angrily going for a "recovery ride" the day after I botched a big race and spent half of it chasing and riding myself into the ground. Instead of sticking to my recovery loop I wound up riding toward my test climb. My legs and lungs felt awful even on the way there, but I wound up taking a full minute off my previous best time. What?!

But even knowing this, and even regular use of a stopwatch, is misleading. There are so many other variables. A PM helps bring some more signal to the noise. I can figure out when I feel awful but am going well - and when I feel awful and am not going well, and need to can it.

TiDesigns can rail against it, and sure, people who are slaves to zone-based workouts can miss out on the broader picture. But I think that anybody who's done a bit of reading on the subject, and any decent coach, knows how to put power training in a broader context: incorporate skills and technique and use the information wisely.

[zank]

The biggest eye opener for me when I started training with power was how I really had to concentrate to keep the power up during an interval after cresting a hill. That probably had the nost profound impact on my training. I never would have fixed that with HR and perceived exertion alone, and I had been riding and racing for 16 years at that point.

[Wayne77]

So your point of coming into a thread about FTP testing is to, once again, go on about how your way is better?

The way I see it, there's a wealth of good information in this thread. Obviously the different approaches work or people like Ti Designs, 11.4, etc wouldn't be taking the time to thoughtfully write down what works for them and those they work with. Some very different approaches but at least for me, it's enlightening and gives me some ideas to implement across the board.

Anyway, I'll speak for myself here... I agree FTP based training isn't the be all end all, but it works for me during the off-season especially. When I started the off-season Computrainer workouts with my team 2 years ago I was 195 lbs with an FTP of 202. I got dropped on the first climb of every race and rarely finished with the Cat5 pack. I was lazy and fat. Now my FTP is 285, I weigh 168 and half way to Cat3...lots of top 10 finishes and I'm shooting for some podiums this year. There are Zanconato guys waaaaay faster than me on my team but at least I can say I am actually "racing" (ie I like to be able to say I had some impact on the outcome...protecting our fast guys..being a good domestique, etc) ...rather than doing the event just to finish.

I have a power meter on my bike too and during the season I mainly use it to guide my intervals but I use it significantly less during races. When I'm at my max during a race my IQ plummets and I rarely have the presence of mind to make any meaningful sense of what my PM is telling me. I have a very close friend on my team who is always saying things like "I was with the group during big surge in that last climb and I saw that my power was not sustainable at that pace to survive the rest of the race so I just had to back off...and I got dropped". I just don't think that way during a race. I either hang on or I don't. I dig as deep as I can to hang on to a break and it works sometimes and sometimes not. Long story short Inthibk it is possible to be overly reliant on numbers...especially during a race. Froomey would probably disagree with me though... :-)

Somewhat along the lines of Ti's thoughts, the other thing that has been huge for me is focused weight training of certain muscle groups. For me it's just a Crossfit class once and sometimes twice a week. The trainers know what they're doing and they point out everything Im doing wrong and they are very good at explaining how each muscle group should be engaged. Weighted squats especially have been key.

[ergott]

When you start working with W' you can really tap into what your power meter can do and how having a good idea of your FTP helps. Look up "w prime" for videos explaining it. There's even a Garmin app that will give you a screen to check in on. It has to do with burning matches and the intensity and recovery time from match to match. I have found it great to understand how deep I can dig in on longer rides while not burning out at the end of the ride.

[Wayne77]

The biggest eye opener for me when I started training with power was how I really had to concentrate to keep the power up during an interval after cresting a hill. That probably had the nost profound impact on my training. I never would have fixed that with HR and perceived exertion alone, and I had been riding and racing for 16 years at that point.

I find that training and racing on a MAX steel Zank is a great way to enhance power-based training. It's free watts...at least 10 watts extra :-) :-) :-)

[zank]

Ha! I wish I could guarantee that for everybody, Wayne! :beer:

And congrats on that huge increase in FTP. That's so awesome!

[nooneline]

When you start working with W' you can really tap into what your power meter can do and how having a good idea of your FTP helps. Look up "w prime" for videos explaining it. There's even a Garmin app that will give you a screen to check in on. It has to do with burning matches and the intensity and recovery time from match to match. I have found it great to understand how deep I can dig in on longer rides while not burning out at the end of the ride.

Yep yep yep. Even though W' is just an estimate/model, it's really helpful as a visual indicator of the above-or-below threshold trends in a dynamic effort like a race.

It REALLY helps tell the story in your data. Where power can look really noisy, W' bal helps interpret a signal.

[makoti]

Hey did you know that in the fine print on all power meters there's a clause? States that you can't do any gym work off the bike to reinforce your training. You can only ride your bike and create workouts based on FTP.

:butt:

Shame on me for thinking you would bring anything new to the conversation.

Need a like button....

[earlfoss]

By the time you all get to the bottom of the original question, this thread will be 50 pages long, and it will be April 2017.

[ANAO]

When you start working with W' you can really tap into what your power meter can do and how having a good idea of your FTP helps. Look up "w prime" for videos explaining it. There's even a Garmin app that will give you a screen to check in on. It has to do with burning matches and the intensity and recovery time from match to match. I have found it great to understand how deep I can dig in on longer rides while not burning out at the end of the ride.

I found this article. I'm more confused than before :(

http://cyclingcenterdallas.com/blog/2015/09/14/what-is-w-prime-and-how-can-it-make-me-a-stronger-cyclist

[ergott]

This is the video I first watched explaining W'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Sw3vOCq9U

[ANAO]

This is the video I first watched explaining W'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Sw3vOCq9U

Thanks, I'll watch it. Appreciate all of the constructive helps in this thread, probably as much as Nic.

[AngryScientist]

yes, that vid was very simple and helpful.

what then is the relationship between "critical power" and FTP?

[carpediemracing]

I think it's important to differentiate the audience sometimes though. Me, for example - I'm just a dad who places some priority on physical fitness. i chase my kid around a playground.

i'm not "training" for anything in particular

I trimmed/changed some stuff to reflect me.

My only goal is to be somewhat competitive in the races I enter. I'd rather finish them, of course, and if I can contest a field sprint that's great (meaning I can actually partake in the sprint rather than sitting up as it starts). After that it's all gravy, placing or whatever. Cat 3s.

For that kind of stuff I don't think power is important. It is a great diary, so you can get some sanity check readings over the year or years. "Oh, wow, I avg 170w for an hour today? Usually I do only 150w on that loop." Stuff like that.

Intervals and all that, whatever. I'll do them if I feel like I want to be a bit more competitive. I did them for real once in the last 30 years, 6 weeks, 2 days per week. One half hearted effort (3 days), and other than that it's JRA.

As far as riding outside, I don't care how fast I ride outside except when I'm chasing a truck or sprinting away from a corner. The rest of the time I'm typically going 12-17 mph and that's fine by me.

I understand where I belong in the cycling world and I'm good with that.

[AngryScientist]

I understand where I belong in the cycling world and I'm good with that.

:beer::beer:

[echappist]

yes, that vid was very simple and helpful.

what then is the relationship between "critical power" and FTP?

FTP (watts) = CP (watts) + W/3600 (Joule/s, or W)

note that the definitions others have for CP is different and may refer to max power for a duration.

[ANAO]

yes, that vid was very simple and helpful.

what then is the relationship between "critical power" and FTP?
Yes but now how do I get more w'? I want to be able to drill it in a break for 10 minutes and THEN be fully depleted.

[AngryScientist]

Yes but now how do I get more w'? I want to be able to drill it in a break for 10 minutes and THEN be fully depleted.

agreed, that video leaves the viewer with some critical questions. How do we make the battery storage capacity bigger.

this is sort of fascinating stuff, lots to read.

[ANAO]

agreed, that video leaves the viewer with some critical questions. How do we make the battery storage capacity bigger.

this is sort of fascinating stuff, lots to read.

Also, Goldencheetah is FAR too robust for me to be familiar with all of the features. BUT. I imagine there is some sort of w' calculator/trend predictor in there somewhere.

[nooneline]

Yes but now how do I get more w'? I want to be able to drill it in a break for 10 minutes and THEN be fully depleted.

that's a complicated question. W' bal is an estimate, a model. If I recall correctly it's calculated from your FTP, and from PB 3 or 5-min power outputs. So if you want to be able to make more watts, then train to increase those areas.

You can work to increase your power output for short-term/anaerobic durations; you can train your recovery from those efforts (repeatability). but basically you're talking about boosting anaerobic power, and putting out power in combination anaerobic/aerobic situations (aka zone 5/vo2max durations of 3-8 minutes).

Since it's a model, it's fallible - it's a rough estimate but it can be rendered inaccurate by other variables if you don't put them into the model. In the pre-season, I find myself well depleted when my data files still show I've got W' balance left 'in the tank.' But during race season I often have races where my W' balance gets negative (indicating that the model underestimates my FTP, my available W' balance, or my recovery rate.

[shovelhd]

Yes but now how do I get more w'? I want to be able to drill it in a break for 10 minutes and THEN be fully depleted.

That's how I won most of my races. Get away clean in the last ten minutes and solo for the win. Others may disagree but I believe part of this is genetic. The rest is a combination of training and pain tolerance. I can't describe to you how much it hurts to dig that deep for that long. I can't compare it to anything else I've experienced off the bike. As for the training piece I did a ton of over unders and race winning intervals to build recovery, and some 5-6 minute flat out drills to simulate something close to the objective.

[ANAO]

That's how I won most of my races. Get away clean in the last ten minutes and solo for the win. Others may disagree but I believe part of this is genetic. The rest is a combination of training and pain tolerance. I can't describe to you how much it hurts to dig that deep for that long. I can't compare it to anything else I've experienced off the bike. As for the training piece I did a ton of over unders and race winning intervals to build recovery, and some 5-6 minute flat out drills to simulate something close to the objective.

I've had 2 very memorable podiums in the last 3 years - 1 of them was a win that clinched the local thursday night series (yellow jersey is hanging in my living room) and the other was 2nd at somerville - local race on the NCC calendar where Adam Myerson took 4th in the pro race that year and 6 UHC guys crashed out with 2 laps to go.

In the first race, I attacked half way through the last lap and drilled it all out for 1.5 minutes. I finished fresh.
In the second race, the wheel I was following opened up the sprint about 500m out but was moving too slowly and I almost rode into him. I veered around him and let 'er rip. I was passed with about 20 meters to go but held on for second.

I like longer sprints but am finding that now, with a child, I'm taking far less risks in the sprint. I think it's time to transition to the "3 lap move", or the 10 minute break as you call it. More 8 minute intervals @, what, 125% FTP?

My coach will know what to do. I just ride.

[laupsi]

That's how I won most of my races. Get away clean in the last ten minutes and solo for the win. Others may disagree but I believe part of this is genetic. The rest is a combination of training and pain tolerance. I can't describe to you how much it hurts to dig that deep for that long. I can't compare it to anything else I've experienced off the bike. As for the training piece I did a ton of over unders and race winning intervals to build recovery, and some 5-6 minute flat out drills to simulate something close to the objective.

That's very impressive. regardless of the training plan, most of us never contemplate what it might take to win or create and sustain the winning break, let alone actually doing it! Nice!!!

[wasfast]

I have a power meter on my bike too and during the season I mainly use it to guide my intervals but I use it significantly less during races. When I'm at my max during a race my IQ plummets and I rarely have the presence of mind to make any meaningful sense of what my PM is telling me.

This is another important thing. All the numbers are exactly that, numbers to provide a framework. For TT's, the PM is great. For dynamic races like crits and road racing, I'm with you that you do what you have to/can. Setting brickwall limits like your friend did is silly.

PM's get used many ways but my own takeaway after 6 years is it's really useful to provide measureable comparisons year over year, especially if you have test roads or courses to compare with. You may feel like crap in March, check the previous 2 years data and at least have a sanity check. How we feel isn't often the best gage.

Like all electronics measurements (power, HR, speed, vertical ascended, distance etc), it's just data. What you do or don't do with it is another story. Data isn't riding your bike, it's the result of riding your bike.

[shovelhd]

Somerville and I have a bad juju. I was OTF at the start with eight riders, which me and another strong rider from NYC whittled down to just us in two laps. We took all the primes. With three to go he started to fade and I had to take the pulls on both long sides of the course, resting only on the short sides as the gap started to fall. Coming out of turn four I looked back to see the field coming into turn three. I had no choice but to sprint the whole front stretch alone. I got caught at 150m. It was the most heart wrenching loss of my career.

[zank]

Did a 40 min test today. Definitely felt different than the 20 min test. 1 x 40 is the new 2 x 20. It should be anyway :D

[Tony T]

60° Today.
Been doing the TrainerRoad Mid Volume II Sweet Spot Base for 2 weeks, and I really noticed a difference. Felt great out on the road today.

[onekgguy]

Did a 40 min test today. Definitely felt different than the 20 min test. 1 x 40 is the new 2 x 20. It should be anyway :D

I did the 20 minute test on Zwift last week. I felt the program did a nice job of getting me warmed up although I wish I could somehow tell it that I already had to do 10 minutes on my CompuTrainer to calibrate it before the test. Anyway, I was pleased with the results and intend to do the test at least once every 2 to 3 weeks to check my progress.

Kevin g

[nooneline]

Good god - don't do it every 2-3 weeks to check your progress. Give yourself 4-6.

Spend more time making progress and less time checking it. You get faster with progressive cycles of overload and rest. If you're testing every 2-3 weeks, you're not giving yourself time to do that.

[makoti]

Anyway, I was pleased with the results and intend to do the test at least once every 2 to 3 weeks to check my progress.

Kevin g

2-3 weeks? Don't do that. That's way too often. You'll fry yourself. 2-3 months, maybe.

[nate2351]

2-3 weeks? Don't do that. That's way too often. You'll fry yourself. 2-3 months, maybe.

I second that. It takes 2-3 weeks for your body to process hard training.

[onekgguy]

Roger that! I'll give it at least 6 weeks before attempting it again. Thanks!

Kevin g

[Wayne77]

2-3 weeks? Don't do that. That's way too often. You'll fry yourself. 2-3 months, maybe.

It shouldn't take more than 3-4 days to recover from an FTP test. I think the point is it doesn't benefit you much to do it that often, in terms of allowing sufficient build time to see meaningful progress for the next FTP test. Maybe that's what you meant... 6 week training blocks seems to be a popular training phase between FTP tests. That's what my coach uses anyway...and it seems to work for my team.

[Wayne77]

Did a 40 min test today. Definitely felt different than the 20 min test. 1 x 40 is the new 2 x 20. It should be anyway :D

The thought of staying in that pain cave for twice as long makes me want to curl up in the corner with a blanket, hoping the world will be a better place when I wake up. :-)

[JOrange]

Every 2-3 weeks is often? Jesus I must be doing it wrong D: (Been doing one at the end of every week!)

[Macadamia]

just add a 2x20 to your interval schedule, if it felt too easy at whatever wattage, add a few watts to your ftp

[zank]

I would do longer intervals before adding watts.

[Macadamia]

I wouldn't!

[zank]

Why not?

[Tandem Rider]

Depends on your goals, physiology, and where you are in your fitness program.

[Macadamia]

Who is a 20 minute threshold interval not long to? I don't think I've ever seen someone advocating anything beyond a 2x30.

Maybe this is what's been holding me back, no 3x75min threshold intervals!

[zank]

Tim Cusick from Training Peaks for one. He's found in his research on Time To Exhaustion that riders are getting really good at 20 min efforts and then crack mentally when the efforts get much longer. There is no physiological benefit of breaking up 40-60 minutes of FTP or SST work into shorter intervals. But there could be much to be gained if you go longer.

[Macadamia]

Tim Cusick from Training Peaks for one. He's found in his research on Time To Exhaustion that riders are getting really good at 20 min efforts and then crack mentally when the efforts get much longer. There is no physiological benefit of breaking up 40-60 minutes of FTP or SST work into shorter intervals. But there could be much to be gained if you go longer.

I don't agree with that at all. Where do you stop at? Sure my ftp would be lower if I was trying to hold it for an entire hour without any breaks. And it would be lower if my ftp test was 2 hours long with no breaks, or 3 hours...

Should your functional threshold power be your average at the end of your longest average ride? That's the wattage you did over all however many hours after all.

[Tandem Rider]

Actually, by definition, FTP is what you can hold for an hour, that's why your 20 minute number gets derated.

I find a lot of benefit from longer intervals as part of a seasonal training plan, although 40 minutes is about my limit. After that it gets close to a 40k and I only have 1 of those in me in a month. :)

[AngryScientist]

Sure my ftp would be lower if I was trying to hold it for an entire hour without any breaks.

i have only done one FTP test and am a novice at all of this training with power stuff, but i dont think what you're saying is correct - at least according to the theory of FTP testing.

when you do an FTP test, whether 8 minute or 20 minute, the number is corrected to 1-hour-power. I think the 20 minute test that trainer road uses has an algorithm that calculates FTP as 20-min power x 0.95 = FTP or similar. theoretically, your 20 minute calculated FTP should be the same as your 1 hour full gas effort; as long as you dont crack mentally.

also - keep in mind we're just having a discussion here, i'm by no means trying to be argumentative...:beer:

[zank]

One thing to keep in mind is that these tests are only estimates because the degradation (95% for a 20 minute test for instance) from your FTP is based on averages. Some riders may be able to put out a higher 20 minute power relative to their FTP compared to other riders because they are able to recruit more of their anaerobic system during the 20 min effort. So their actual FTP may only be 90% of their 20 minute power because the anaerobic component eventually gives way and their aerobic system can't sustain that power.

I think far too many athletes overestimate their FTP.

[woodworker]

Having done these tests a number of times, I have to agree with the comment immediately above. When I finish the 20 minute test, typically going all out on a climb for that duration, I'm pretty certain that I couldn't do 95% of that effort for a full hour. Just based on experience, I think that the 20 minute test, even performed correctly, will tend to overestimate ftp. Perhaps 90% or 85% would be more accurate. Some of the power experts out there suggest using .9 rather than .95 btw.

Also, it's not just doing 20 minutes all out. There is a protocol, which is intended to ensure that you burn off some of your anaerobic reserves, I think, so that your numbers aren't skewed upward.

[MattTuck]

There's probably a difference between a test and in competition observations. When you pin a number on, you seem to push much harder than in a test situation.

[zank]

It's generally always better to underestimate than overestimate. If you are doing 2x20 or 3x20, you shouldn't see degradation in your numbers on your second or third interval. If you are, your FTP is set too high because in theory you should be able to do that level of effort without a rest.

[mtechnica]

One thing to keep in mind is that these tests are only estimates because the degradation (95% for a 20 minute test for instance) from your FTP is based on averages. Some riders may be able to put out a higher 20 minute power relative to their FTP compared to other riders because they are able to recruit more of their anaerobic system during the 20 min effort. So their actual FTP may only be 90% of their 20 minute power because the anaerobic component eventually gives way and their aerobic system can't sustain that power.

I think far too many athletes overestimate their FTP.

I think this is the case for me, after using the power meter I'm pretty sure my 1hr power would be less than my .95*20 power, maybe if I did the 20 minutes at an 8 or 9... I've decided not to do an ftp test and just guess after I've ridden outside some more and have some data.

[ergott]

I see so many "strong" riders that crack after 30-40 miles. If all you do is work on short intervals (under 30 minutes), you are missing out on a lot of excellent riding. My best 20 minutes was halfway through a hilly century.

[Joachim]

I do an outdoor lactate test on all my local riders that I coach and compare it with their predicted ftp from a 20min test. The 20min test overestimates the lactate "ftp" by about 7-10% in about 80% of the riders. Let's assume that ftp = the point in lactate where we see that massive jump in lactate (Im oversimplying lactate physiology now since there are different approaches out there when it comes to lactate and exercise). A 30min peak power test x .95 comes a lot closer to the lactate value. Just my observations.

[echappist]

I do an outdoor lactate test on all my local riders that I coach and compare it with their predicted ftp from a 20min test. The 20min test overestimates the lactate "ftp" by about 7-10% in about 80% of the riders. Let's assume that ftp = the point in lactate where we see that massive jump in lactate (Im oversimplying lactate physiology now since there are different approaches out there when it comes to lactate and exercise). A 30min peak power test x .95 comes a lot closer to the lactate value. Just my observations.

then again, FTP is closer to maximal lactate steady state, which is above the inflection point to which you alluded above

[Tandem Rider]

Having done these tests a number of times, I have to agree with the comment immediately above. When I finish the 20 minute test, typically going all out on a climb for that duration, I'm pretty certain that I couldn't do 95% of that effort for a full hour. Just based on experience, I think that the 20 minute test, even performed correctly, will tend to overestimate ftp. Perhaps 90% or 85% would be more accurate. Some of the power experts out there suggest using .9 rather than .95 btw.

Also, it's not just doing 20 minutes all out. There is a protocol, which is intended to ensure that you burn off some of your anaerobic reserves, I think, so that your numbers aren't skewed upward.

The point of doing the entire test is to discover the numbers that set your training levels. It is important to follow protocol. Setting out to simply ride 20 minutes as hard as possible without all the steps in front of it is going to give you an artificially inflated number. Overtraining isn't just caused by too much volume, it can also be caused by too high intensity when the volume is correct.

I have only raced with HR, but trained with both HR and power. Locally, we had a monthly 10 mile TT series. My average HR would be noticeably higher in the race that in testing. Part of that is probably due to having a number pinned on, most is probably because I warmed up instead of following the test protocol.

[Joachim]

then again, FTP is closer to maximal lactate steady state, which is above the inflection point to which you alluded above

The 'lactate' ftp I mentioned is MLSS. Since the majority of people on this board associates lactate threshold with ftp and not MLSS, I used the terminology of 'lactate' ftp to make it more understandable. If we want to split hears over correct terminology, the true lactate threshold is the first rise of lactate (can be sharp rise or not) but what I am talking about is MLSS. MLSS as determined by the lactate test is lower than the predicted ftp by the 20min test.

[nooneline]

Tim Cusick from Training Peaks for one. He's found in his research on Time To Exhaustion that riders are getting really good at 20 min efforts and then crack mentally when the efforts get much longer. There is no physiological benefit of breaking up 40-60 minutes of FTP or SST work into shorter intervals. But there could be much to be gained if you go longer.

Yeah, that TTE webinar was really good.

[zank]

It really is worth the hour. Though it may blow people's minds that FTP may not be an hour. :D

https://youtu.be/Y_lM_h_eSKE

[zank]

I was helping a buddy looking at his data in WKO4. He was convinced his FTP was 310 watts because of his twenty minute test. He hadn't done an effort over 300 watts for 30 minutes in 2016. His mFTP was 266 watts. But he was pretty good at 20 minute efforts (pretty solid at 325-330 watts). But the data wasn't there to support the 310 watt FTP.

I think the tests in zwift and trainer road are great. But I think calling them FTP tests is a little misleading.

[Joachim]

Training according to lactate zones seems to yield more improvement for my riders than according to zones derived from peak power tests. However, training according to zones in general has yielded larger improvements that just riding along. Just another observation.

[zank]

Joachim, do you get all of your athletes in the lab? Or do you do blood lactate tests with a meter out on the road?

[Joachim]

Joachim, do you get all of your athletes in the lab? Or do you do blood lactate tests with a meter out on the road?

I do 95% of my testing outdoors a la Dr. ferrari.

[echappist]

The 'lactate' ftp I mentioned is MLSS. Since the majority of people on this board associates lactate threshold with ftp and not MLSS, I used the terminology of 'lactate' ftp to make it more understandable. If we want to split hears over correct terminology, the true lactate threshold is the first rise of lactate (can be sharp rise or not) but what I am talking about is MLSS. MLSS as determined by the lactate test is lower than the predicted ftp by the 20min test.
thanks for the clarification
I do 95% of my testing outdoors a la Dr. ferrari.

is orange juice offered afterwards ;)

[Joachim]

thanks for the clarification


is orange juice offered afterwards ;)

Only if they wire their endorsement fees to my Bank account in panama

[echappist]

those better be some top quality orange juices :p

jest aside, do you do the test on a hill or on a road? My dad has relocated to SC (Columbia), and i'm wondering if there are places to ride in the general vicinity

[Joachim]

those better be some top quality orange juices :p

jest aside, do you do the test on a hill or on a road? My dad has relocated to SC (Columbia), and i'm wondering if there are places to ride in the general vicinity

Flat 6min (approx) loop. Always same circuit, always 2 loops per blood measurement. I also false flat (4-5min) where I can also test, but I prefer the double loop.

Columbia has places to ride but its a drive from Charleston. Come down to charleston for the day of riding and lactate test prior....:)