FTP shenanagins

[bigbill]

Last night I did Zwift on the Richmond course which is about 10 miles with just under 500 feet of climbing, all in the last few miles. I turned and burned on the first lap setting a new PR at around 27 minutes. I flopped and flailed the second lap at 30 minutes but Zwift moved my FTP up to 237w from 229w based on the effort. My average for the hour including warmup and cooldown was 215w. I may try a flat course for an hour just to see.

[mt2u77]

Like the OP, I'm skeptical-- and I don't think it's just people inflating their FTP online. There is big money to be made on indoor cycling, and part of capturing that market is making people feel good about themselves. If you're marketing an erg trainer, do you think a customer is going to feel better about your product if they think they just crushed a PB and it spits out an impressive FTP, or if on the other hand it reads low and they leave feeling weak and deflated? Advantage: calibrate a little high. I'm not claiming a gross error, just that over a few product cycles, in a competitive landscape, I can see how power values could creep up a few %.

Then there's the test methodologies going the way of 6 minute abs. The result is it's easier to train for the test-- the shorter the test, the more you can train for it anaerobically (cue recent cycling magazine articles about improving FTP by lifting weights). A bike at the gym even has a built in 5-minute FTP test--LOL.

The two factors above can be plausibly denied by the consumer-- "I'm just doing what it told me to do/reporting what it says." Add in the social media factor, and it's pretty easy to see how people would cut the corners on these tests or just straight up inflate the number.

So yeah, I think the typical reported value is high, whether intentional or not.

That said, I don't think 290-300W is all that crazy for an 80+ kg guy who trains for steady state. I might even be able to relate. That same guy will get smoked in any type of bike race that doesn't involve a flat TT effort.

[tctyres]

Originally Posted by bigbill

Last night I did Zwift on the Richmond course which is about 10 miles with just under 500 feet of climbing, all in the last few miles. I turned and burned on the first lap setting a new PR at around 27 minutes. I flopped and flailed the second lap at 30 minutes but Zwift moved my FTP up to 237w from 229w based on the effort. My average for the hour including warmup and cooldown was 215w. I may try a flat course for an hour just to see.

For something like this, Zwift is probably taking your best effort power with time and fitting a curve to it. I know that is what Golden Cheetah does. In Golden Cheetah, you can actually select the type of curve fit you want as well as the duration of data (from the last 7 days to all time). Short term movements in your power curve can indicate that you are getting stronger but just beware that any calculation is just that -- a calculation.

[benb]

Heh.. I forgot to mention I tried Zwift on some fancy pants trainer at an LBS recently.

The bike was a 54cm, 1-2 sizes too small for me. Wrong size cranks, wrong seat height, I was wearing jeans and the bike had flat pedals and I had sneakers on. I.e. everything setup for me to make less power than normal. I'm really out of shape right now.

Get on and immediately it's saying 300+ watts giving a moderate effort not warmed up... really suspicious. It was probably a lot closer to 200.

It'd be REALLY easy to be clueless about calibration. Who knows. It was a direct drive trainer so it shouldn't be off that much.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by mt2u77

Like the OP, I'm skeptical-- and I don't think it's just people inflating their FTP online. There is big money to be made on indoor cycling, and part of capturing that market is making people feel good about themselves. If you're marketing an erg trainer, do you think a customer is going to feel better about your product if they think they just crushed a PB and it spits out an impressive FTP, or if on the other hand it reads low and they leave feeling weak and deflated? Advantage: calibrate a little high. I'm not claiming a gross error, just that over a few product cycles, in a competitive landscape, I can see how power values could creep up a few %.

Then there's the test methodologies going the way of 6 minute abs. The result is it's easier to train for the test-- the shorter the test, the more you can train for it anaerobically (cue recent cycling magazine articles about improving FTP by lifting weights). A bike at the gym even has a built in 5-minute FTP test--LOL.

The two factors above can be plausibly denied by the consumer-- "I'm just doing what it told me to do/reporting what it says." Add in the social media factor, and it's pretty easy to see how people would cut the corners on these tests or just straight up inflate the number.

So yeah, I think the typical reported value is high, whether intentional or not.

That said, I don't think 290-300W is all that crazy for an 80+ kg guy who trains for steady state. I might even be able to relate. That same guy will get smoked in any type of bike race that doesn't involve a flat TT effort.

imagine people's disappointment when they invariably plateau (or even experience decline)

[tctyres]

Originally Posted by echappist

imagine people's disappointment when they invariably plateau (or even experience decline)

I just descend.

(rimshot)

[bigbill]

Originally Posted by benb

Heh.. I forgot to mention I tried Zwift on some fancy pants trainer at an LBS recently.

The bike was a 54cm, 1-2 sizes too small for me. Wrong size cranks, wrong seat height, I was wearing jeans and the bike had flat pedals and I had sneakers on. I.e. everything setup for me to make less power than normal. I'm really out of shape right now.

Get on and immediately it's saying 300+ watts giving a moderate effort not warmed up... really suspicious. It was probably a lot closer to 200.

It'd be REALLY easy to be clueless about calibration. Who knows. It was a direct drive trainer so it shouldn't be off that much.

When I immediately start, my wattage is over 300w as well. It's torque. Most trainers, I have a KICKR are sensitive to changes in torque and if I'm in a group or moving through one, my wattage will be all over the place while I'm moving up or back. I'll cruise at 190-200 watts unless I'm doing some special effort or climbing. It doesn't take that much of a change in the torque I'm applying to go over 300 until I steady out again. I do the calibration cycle on my Wahoo about once a week at the end of a ride when everything is warm.

[wallymann]

a guy i ride with, well we start rides with along with others in a big group at the same time, has logged +320W average power rides of 90 minutes on strava using a powermeter to capture data. it's not a proper FTP test, but he's doing this power for longer than 60 minutes so it's legit.

some people did a nice job of picking their parents *and* training to do something with their gifts.

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Does anyone else think there’s a lot of shenanagins happening with regards to FTP numbers? I’m seriously skeptical about a lot of numbers I’m seeing online especially on forums. Beyond that, it appears that people come up with an FTP number then aren’t even able to replicate their supposed full FTP for 15-30 minute efforts, based on their power numbers on strava. I know performance varies day to day and over the course of a ride, but I have to say I’m skeptical that most people I see posting an FTP number can really do it for an hour. I’ve estimated my own FTP from ride data, not by any kind of FTP test, and my numbers relative to what I see people claiming are terrible, however my strava times seem to place me on par with people I shouldn’t be able to keep up with. Are there really that many people out there that can ACTUALLY maintain 300 watts continuously for an hour? The internet seems to think so however strava indicates that’s pro level performance and if I could do that, I could have near-KOM times even in the 170lb overweight range I’m in now, on popular (2500-5000 time) segments. Is there something I’m missing here? I’m sure I’m not underestimating my power or anything but I don’t understand how I can do a 20+ average on a normal road bike averaging in the low 200’s when people on slowtwitch are claiming a 280 watt FTP and barely going faster than I can go on a fixie, when they’re on a full on tri bike.

Thoughts?

[benb]

Originally Posted by bigbill

When I immediately start, my wattage is over 300w as well. It's torque. Most trainers, I have a KICKR are sensitive to changes in torque and if I'm in a group or moving through one, my wattage will be all over the place while I'm moving up or back. I'll cruise at 190-200 watts unless I'm doing some special effort or climbing. It doesn't take that much of a change in the torque I'm applying to go over 300 until I steady out again. I do the calibration cycle on my Wahoo about once a week at the end of a ride when everything is warm.

99% sure this wasn't a Wahoo.. can't remember the brand but it wasn't Wahoo.

But I wasn't talking about the initial spike.. my Stages does that outside for sure, so does my Tacx IIRC.

This was like a few minutes, long enough to stabilize. I rode it long enough to get to try the video game. I was definitely riding it, I was starting to warm up, the readings just seemed high. Just made sure to quit before I started to sweat.

[Heisenberg]

everything is a lie

[echappist]

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

everything is a lie

coming from you, i've gotta doubt the certainty of your pronouncement

[Heisenberg]

Originally Posted by echappist

coming from you, i've gotta doubt the certainty of your pronouncement

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

[mtechnica]

I never said I don’t think anyone can do it, I just think it seems like less people have a 1hr power in excess of 300 watts than many sources would lead one to believe.

[Heisenberg]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I never said I don’t think anyone can do it, I just think it seems like less people have a 1hr power in excess of 300 watts than many sources would lead one to believe.

it is impressive to log onto zwift and discover a laundry list of people with FTPs well over 5.5 w/kg

so much undiscovered talent! if only there was money in bicycle racing.

[bigbill]

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

it is impressive to log onto zwift and discover a laundry list of people with FTPs well over 5.5 w/kg

so much undiscovered talent! if only there was money in bicycle racing.

I quickly discovered this too. My rides go into my Strava and for fun I'll look and see how my 28,346 ranked sprint stacked up against the top 10 and see that they are all tied at 52 mph. Then there's the guy who did the 5.6 mile hilly loop in 12 minutes. My best sprint on Zwift was at 990 watts but some guy still went by like I was standing still. I compete against myself and so far I'm winning.