I think that is pretty normal. I did an untrained FTP test a few years ago before I even really know what triathlon was and did well as I was teaching power skating for higher level ice hockey at the time.

Then I did an FTP test starting with a new coach and overcooked it trying to impress them.

I did another one about 3 months after training with my coach...my FTP was up 50 watts from the 2nd test but only up 27 from the one I did a few years ago.

I guess what I am getting it is that you can get good at almost anything on a curve with diminishing returns and that applies to FTP tests. You learned a lesson this time and will crush it next time.

It takes a couple of times before you learn what you are capable of holding and reaching for.

It's supposed to be hard though, really really horribly hard. If you can talk straight afterwards then you didn't go hard enough.

Okay, I need to retake my FTP test.

There is definitely a learning curve to taking an FTP test. Proper pacing is essential.

I prefer the 20 minute test, although the 8 minute test does give you an idea of pacing for the second 8 minute period. For the 20 minute test, I usually need to break down into smaller chunks to grit my way through, making Faustian deals if I can just get to the end of the chunk I'm focusing on. I was once trying to justify a new frame purchase to myself and towards the end of the twenty-minute FTP used that carrot to get through the last few minutes...

On a separate note, I use TrainerRoad which switches to slope mode for smart trainers. I tend to subconsciously pace using the projected power target - I haven't done a blind/feel FTP for years. I've always been curious whether that slightly limits how deep you go during the FTP test, or whether the accurate pacing offsets that.

Pacing is an art, that's for sure. I know I'm not good at it without the PM or TrainerRoad graph to watch.

With any kind of Trainer riding, do others find that they have to increase resistance/gear as they fatigue, becuse they simply can't maintain the same cadence? I guess this is what makes Froome so effective, maintaining high cadence.

---

29 years and counting

I tend to maintain my cadence throughout the 20 minute effort.

I read Froome’s cyclonic cadence is a fairly unique trait that isn’t beneficial to emulate for the majority of people. I’m not sure other elite riders are letting their preferred cadence drop off either, they just don’t use such extreme cadences.

I had to last test. After 15 minutes in I opened my eyes and saw a 95-96 cadence and I was running out of gas. That cadence isn't bad but I typically stay around 85. I want to stay as close to race mode as possible so I increased resistance to drop cadence. Watts also jumped up 12-15 points those last 5 minutes. The higher cadence increases my heart rate so I am just more comfortable around 85. I also use Trainerroad 20 minute test.

I use to do a rest day before but then I wouldn't be able to hold intervals during training with some normal fatigue. Result is I would get unmotivated and actually weaker. Now I try to stay as close to actually training conditions as possible. Don't drink a mountain dew before or during the test either. Big numbers for me hurt me in the long run as well. Just my experience.

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

I do find that I prefer a slightly lower cadence on the trainer, maybe 5-10 rpms lower than I would ride on the road. Don't have a PM to verify that my road cadence is ideal in terms of power, just speed on the old fashioned bike computer.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Yeah, sadly this is not unusual for a first attempt. The 2x8m tests are not that hard to recover from though. If you can afford the time, I'd think about trying again (now you have a better idea of pacing) before starting the TCT course, as a good baseline is important for all of the riding sessions.

Regarding different test durations, I think the key is to use the right test for the program you are performing. The TCT/ TCC program is very focused on intervals, most of which don't last longer than 12m, so a 2x8 test is an appropriate calibration. Just don't rush out and race a 1h TT on some scaled 8m test.

Good luck with the program. I have done the TCC 10 week program a couple of times, with decent results.

Out of curiousity, why did you choose the short test when you’re interested in using ftp to estimate power at longer durations?

Because it's more easily repeatable, and I'm using the CTS Time Crunched Triathlete as my basis, and that's the test in that book. Their training zones are based on that number (warmup followed by 2x8 mins with 10 min recovery, and then an 8 minute run. I didn't add the run yet, that'll come in a week or 2.)

End of the day, I don't think it matters all THAT much which test you use, as long as it's an aerobic test the results are going to be within the margin of error (remember, I'm using virtual power, the readings are "jumpy" to say the least) and are still just being used to establish fairly broad zones.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

For longer efforts near or above FTP, yes, I find it beneficial to drop the cadence and increase the pedal force after a while. For example on a 20min FTP test I might drop from 90-95rpm down to 80-85rpm after 13-15mins. But doing that from the start can be counter-productive.

It definitely takes practice to pace an FTP test. It's not just knowing what to aim for, the will to do it is also important. I suspect if you were to do one more than every 6 weeks or so, your result would drop a little simply through lack of novelty. Doing it infrequently adds a novelty factor and "only one chance" aspect that helps me psych up for a max effort.

Since CTS bases their workout intensity from the 2X8 test I think you are right to use that test.

Thanks.

I'm gonna test again tonight and try to get a more consistent number rather than a steadily declining power number over the 8 minute intervals, and then try again next week.

After that, I'm going to do a H2Ofun and swap out crank lengths (from 170 to 165) to retest, with the idea that I might be getting a power meter sometime next year and the most affordable new option that I like is the P2Max.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

A. You should get a power meter. You can learn a lot about pacing your efforts by using one and a used Stages or PT can be pretty cheap.
B. A more enjoyable 8 or 20 minute test is to find a Strava segment that matches the duration of interest and race that periodically. I have 2 20ish minute segments (I think they are Mike's 20 minutes of hell). that I set up. If it is a 2x20 day then I ride them accordingly or I can just do the first flat out and see where I am at relative to FTP. I find this way more enjoyable than going down in the basement and torturing myself on the trainer.

I've also found that it isn't as important as the authors/coaches say it is to go 'uber-100%' or 'all-out 110% effort' for that FTP test seem to imply it is.

Even if 'only' go 97% effort of your true FTP (3% sounds like a small difference, but it's a really noticeable power gap when you are pushing your absolute limits, not trivial at all) you will still get all the improvements you need from the training plan. In my case, in retrospect, I def would have been better off with a lower FTP than I actually tested myself at (I used both 8 min CTS and 2 x 20 standard FTP tests, the 8 min tests usually tested 10watts higher than my 2 x 20s despite white Carmichael says), as my workouts wouldn't have been as crushingly hard and probably would have been more sustainable in the long run.

And if you really do lowball your FTP test, you'll know it if your workouts are too easy and you just dial it up. So not a big deal, especially at the start of training.

It matters a little more near race day if you plan to peg your race effort to %FTP, but even then, I'll bet there are far more athletes (like myself) who did themselves a disservice by trying too hard to hit their %FTP in a race rather than acknowledging harder conditions and backing off for a more level effort given the following run.

I hear you, but winter started up here already, and I don't have the luxury of training during daylight hours. Or even "normal human" hours at this point. So the trainer it is for the next 6 months or so.

Toddlers are SUCH a time suck. (love it though, even when he's acting like a 2 year old).

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Do you mean you were able to ride the test 10 watts harder? or that your calculated FTP was 10 watts higher?

Because the book talks about that. FTP is roughly 90% of the 8 minute number or 95% of the 20 minute number.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

the new P2M is only US$499 for the gossamer pro version and doesn't have the limitations that Stages does. I'm not planning on swapping out wheels anytime soon, since I like my trispokes too much for racing.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Opposite to me then; I generally ride around 85 outside, and 95rpm on the trainer. I rode on a Wattbike at work yesterday, an aerobic 30min (Garmin '3.0') and I was riding at ~100rpm for much of it.

---

29 years and counting

I have been told that if you don't puke at the end of a 20-minute FTP test that you didn't go hard enough...

My calculated FTP watts (adjusted for the time) was 10 watts higher with the 8 min protocols as compared to the 2 x 20s. And my 2 x 20s tend to be 5 watts higher than my 60 min straight FTP. This may be just because I'm mentally or physically weak at longer harder efforts, but I've done at least 3-4 of each of these over several years, and it tends to play out this way every time. I do mine on an indoor trainer as well, which also costs me some, as I can definitely push even harder if I'm on a mild uphill outdoor continuous grade, but as said, in retrospect, I would have been better off with an FTP number 5-10 watts lower than what I tested at since the CTS time-crunched plan as well as the Trainerroad HIM plan ended up being too hard for me. (I couldn't finish the CTS after 4.5 weeks, was too mentally and physically demoralizing to hammer it day in day out, and I finished the entire Trainerroad HIm plan, but was def overtrained on the bike on race day, possibly due to high run load as well - still biked top 10% OA but at 10 watts lower than I'd hoped, and also had a bizarre mile 1-4 bonk on the run at 9:00/mi before waking up and running 7:05/mi for the rest of the HIM.)

OK, thanks for the clarification....

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Which turbo trainer are you using?

It's totally possible that you blew up, but it's also a possibility that the resistance of your turbo trainer is increasing as it heats up. I've had this back-in-the-day when I was using Virtual Power; you try to maintain a constant cadence/VP and the resistance slowly creeps up and up and up so you're actually pushing more and more and more Watts until you just want to die. Sad times...