FTP shenanagins

[redir]

Why not? What I am saying is that for example if your FTP is 300 wats then when you are in a CX race or a TT you can watch that 'dial' and make sure you are holding 300 watts plus or minus 10-20 for the whole race. Does that make sense? I may be misunderstanding the concept of FTP.

[benb]

Originally Posted by redir

Why not? What I am saying is that for example if your FTP is 300 wats then when you are in a CX race or a TT you can watch that 'dial' and make sure you are holding 300 watts plus or minus 10-20 for the whole race. Does that make sense? I may be misunderstanding the concept of FTP.

That kind of make sense except for those times when you gotta outsprint everyone else or run up a hill or stop pedaling to go around a 180 degree hairpin turn in the mud or wet grass.

Cross power profiles don't look anything like a steady effort. Lower efforts in between lots of maximum efforts.

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by redir

Why not? What I am saying is that for example if your FTP is 300 wats then when you are in a CX race or a TT you can watch that 'dial' and make sure you are holding 300 watts plus or minus 10-20 for the whole race. Does that make sense? I may be misunderstanding the concept of FTP.

It makes sense assuming you can maintain what you think is your FTP for an hour.

[Wayne77]

Originally Posted by redir

Ok I see. I guess I could also see it as a tool in say an hour long CX race. If you know you can pull off 300 whats for one hour then you can watch that number as you race and make sure you keep to it. Of course my guess is that people would produce more then their FTP under the stress of a race and so it could actually be a hindrance too.

My 2 cents:

Values like Intensity Factor and Normalized Power are the only FTP derived metrics that mater to me in a race...and they matter more as the length of the effort goes up. In a crit or cx event, I’m either hanging or not hanging...tracking the NP I can maintain based on past efforts has little value partly because the intensity is so high my ability to process information is significantly degraded.

NP and IF do account for the intensity of an effort. FTP is just a baseline number used to derive many other things. I think that is what you’re referring to above. Measured FTP is measured FTP. If you race and there is an extended effort long enough to show that ‘you produced more than your FTP under the stress of a race’, then the FTP you thought was correct going into the race is outdated. Of course some people don’t “test” well and their ride derived FTP could be higher. (TrainingPeaks Will alert you when you’ve reached a new FTP bench mark, as will most bike computers from Garmin, Wahoo, etc)

In any case the last thing I think about during a race is what my FTP is or even what % of FTP zone I am in. % of FTP is only meaningful to me for interval training. I have known people that will express concern about going too hard during rides or races always in relation to their FTP. I agree that shortchanges their ability to do far more than they think they can if the situation calls for it. I always tell them ‘wow I’m not smart enough during a race to pay much attention to my power meter...I can either bridge up or hang with the group or I cannot. I don’t need my PM to tell me whether I can or cannot.”

[redir]

^ NOw that makes sense to me.

[sparky33]

Originally Posted by ergott

There are definitely riders that "perform to the test" (my quote). Just means they are good at taking ftp tests.

^This was absolutely what happened to me.
TrainerRoad would give me a fantastic FTP figure based on the 2x8 minute test, but that figure wasn't right because I routinely fell well short on training programs using that benchmark. I started to dial down the FTP benchmark to get to more useful workouts.
I bet a 20+ minute test would give more appropriate results for my physical disposition, but FTP training is in the rear view these days.

[ergott]

If anyone is interested, this is a great resource for "testing"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8K77jSf3Fs

There is a linked handout as well.

[jimoots]

Not much discussion of weight. When you’re 80kg 300w is not much. When you’re 65kg it’s a decent slab of watts.

I have pals who can do 400w+ for 20 minutes. It’s 5wkg for them at 80kg.

I’m 63-64kg and can hit 4.9 wkg for 20 mins (310w) and did 4.4wkg (280w) recently up a 50 minute climb.

I train my 20 min efforts a lot more than 50-60 min so it makes sense. Nowhere to do 60 minute climbs where I live, for starters.

Disclaimer: not a lifelong athlete or gifted or anything. I just like riding a lot and I really enjoy the work.

[Alaska Mike]

When I was younger, fitter, and had the drive, I trained to improve my FTP (among other things) with a coach. As others have mentioned, if you focus on FTP, 300W is not some magical number. Even a few injuries/lifestyle altering events later, I'm still not too far off that- and I am by no means an elite athlete.

Zwift and the resulting boom of smart trainers has transformed how people train, but it has also unfortunately resulted in a lot of "my FTP is bigger than yours" conversations. Even more so than when Quarq (and then Stages) brought down power meter prices. The fixation on a couple metrics has completely deluded a generation of riders about the real nature of cycling fitness and skill.

And seriously, if Zwift sprints had any bearing on reality, I would have more career wins than Cavendish. It's a game. One that makes trainer time more bearable, but still a game.

[benb]

Originally Posted by Wayne77

My 2 cents:

Values like Intensity Factor and Normalized Power are the only FTP derived metrics that mater to me in a race...and they matter more as the length of the effort goes up. In a crit or cx event, I’m either hanging or not hanging...tracking the NP I can maintain based on past efforts has little value partly because the intensity is so high my ability to process information is significantly degraded.

NP and IF do account for the intensity of an effort. FTP is just a baseline number used to derive many other things. I think that is what you’re referring to above. Measured FTP is measured FTP. If you race and there is an extended effort long enough to show that ‘you produced more than your FTP under the stress of a race’, then the FTP you thought was correct going into the race is outdated. Of course some people don’t “test” well and their ride derived FTP could be higher. (TrainingPeaks Will alert you when you’ve reached a new FTP bench mark, as will most bike computers from Garmin, Wahoo, etc)

In any case the last thing I think about during a race is what my FTP is or even what % of FTP zone I am in. % of FTP is only meaningful to me for interval training. I have known people that will express concern about going too hard during rides or races always in relation to their FTP. I agree that shortchanges their ability to do far more than they think they can if the situation calls for it. I always tell them ‘wow I’m not smart enough during a race to pay much attention to my power meter...I can either bridge up or hang with the group or I cannot. I don’t need my PM to tell me whether I can or cannot.”

These #s can matter in a long ride that's not even a race too if you're doing something long and tough enough.

E.x. knowing what TSS #s you have experience with, if you're stacking TSS up like a house of cards and you know you have hours and hours left maybe you slow down. Recognizing when you're riding with a group and you're expending enough effort for it to not be sustainable in the long run.

Crits and CX and MTB if you look at the computer too much you probably crash out anyway.

[nate2351]

Originally Posted by redir

Why not? What I am saying is that for example if your FTP is 300 wats then when you are in a CX race or a TT you can watch that 'dial' and make sure you are holding 300 watts plus or minus 10-20 for the whole race. Does that make sense? I may be misunderstanding the concept of FTP.

It's a good idea for a TT but thats about it. In any race mass start race its out the window.