Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Bryce Lewis TR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I posted this in another forum a few weeks ago and I think it holds true here. IMO, I'd rather we just go with a new standard that's easy enough we don't have to fudge tests. Be that a MAP test or just raw 20 minutes.


FTP has been sliced up so many times its not even a measurable standard amongst cyclists. Does it matter two riders technically have the same FTP but one did a test that matches his strengths so his is 50 watts higher? If they're teammates absolutely, otherwise probably not.

There's also the exhaustion effect of FTP that people completely ignore which is a huge factor. Some can hold threshold at 70 minutes, some at 45 minutes.

There's the standard 20 minute test, 30 minute test, hour test, the 20x2 test, the 8x2 test, Strava estimate, WKO estimate, GC estimate, the new TP standards; and I'm probably missing about 15 more.

Right now my FTP swings 40 watts depending on what standard I use. In WKO its low, the Strava marker is high, Golden Cheetah and 20 minute testing is somewhere in the middle. Which one we decide to go with vastly effects training so a lack of standardization is a big problem.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I did the TR ramp test last night. It was the first ramp test of any kind I have ever done. When factoring in my usual "I screwed up the test" excuses/correction factors, it did seem to get pretty close to what my current FTP is.

As a test, my masochistic side enjoyed it as in I certainly felt something was being seriously tested. But I would not say it was easier than doing 2x8 or 1x20. The part that really sucked sucked more but the really bad part was shorter so it kind of evened out. I will say that it was much easier to get started on the ramp than it is to get motivated when staring down 2x8 or 1x20 on the workout calendar. It certainly sounds easier on paper.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Bryce Lewis TR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I will try this next week. Looks like the fail-point is between 130-140% of FTP.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [surfNJmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I thought FTP was dead?

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [jdais] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It will depend on the rate of increase in power. However, for almost two decades Ric Stern has used 72-77% of maximal 1 min power when incrementing power as described in this article:

http://www.abcc.co.uk/training-with-power/

1/0.72 = 1.39, or 139 %; 1/0.77 = 1.30, or 130%.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [earthling] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
earthling wrote:
I thought FTP was dead?


Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jan 31, 18 12:05
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [AndrewL] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AndrewL wrote:
Does TR automatically determine when to end the test of me? Is this something I would determine when I can't maintain needed watts?

Hey Andrew!

The new Ramp test is intended to push you to failure. Simply ride until you can't turn the pedals anymore :)

At this time, since it is in the beta phase, you will have to wait for a Support Agent to manually calculate your FTP. In the future, this will of course be automated.

Happy Testing!

Get Faster with TrainerRoad
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriSolo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm starting to feel like my coach was just f'ing with me - when I signed up with him he told me a 60 minute test was the way to get a 'true' FTP and I ground away in the basement for a full 60 minutes. For the record - it was close to what was tested later at a lab with a much shorter blood lactate test.

He turned out to be a great coach, got me across my first IM line and eventually took almost two hours out of that time - but I have always suspected that he was testing my focus as much as my FTP.

How many people have done it old-school - 60 minutes on a trainer?

" I take my gear out of my car and put my bike together. Tourists and locals are watching from sidewalk cafes. Non-racers. The emptiness of of their lives shocks me. "
(opening lines from Tim Krabbe's The Rider , 1978
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Bryce Lewis TR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So in ERG-mode. Would I simply ride until I see my cadence drop from let's say 95 to 60 and then manually stop the workout? Will the TR Agent message automatically or do you have to submit something? And if so, where?

Thanks, for your help!
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriDevilDog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
These days, 60 minute FTP tests are a lot easier than they were.

Just warm-up enough, join a long enough Zwift race, and right from the starting gun go go go!
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriDevilDog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriDevilDog wrote:
How many people have done it old-school - 60 minutes on a trainer?

I did it in the off-season when I was evaluating some different methods of estimating FTP:

https://www.trainerroad.com/.../6822728-hour-record

I'm not convinced that I'd ever wring the absolute maximum out of myself with a solo 60-min effort on the turbo trainer, but it's a good testing session. Interesting to see how it correlates with 95% MMP20, 40k TT power etc etc.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriDevilDog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriDevilDog wrote:
How many people have done it old-school - 60 minutes on a trainer?

I did it (60min) on rollers about a year ago. Did it on rollers to keep myself engaged more because I could see myself losing focus on a standard trainer.
I was pleasantly surprised to find my results were only a couple of watts off what I achieved vs. a 20minute test.

No rush to go back and do it again though. If I can get the same consistent feedback from doing this Ramp Test I will definitely stick with doing it that way going forward.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriSolo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think I've read Nathan (TR CEO) write somewhere that the FTP would be 77% of your highest 1m interval.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [lemos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
See my previous post(s): Ric Stern has been using this approach for two decades, estimating FTP as 72-77% of PPO.

Also worth noting that the exact percentage will vary across individuals and also based in the steepness of the ramp protocol used.

(This is why I have never been a huge fan of this method, or Hunter's 20 min test...why conduct a formal test only to arrive at an estimate that is no more precise than can be obtained using other, informal means?)
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [lemos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's quite interesting. I did a lab-based VO2 max test in late-November -- 77% of my final 1m effort (basically at the point of failure) is only a few watts away from my WKO4 mFTP. IIRK, the ramps in my test were 60 seconds each with 20w steps.

With loads and loads of data in my WKO4 profile, my mFTP is currently about 10w higher than my sFTP, so I probably need to make an adjustment anyway.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriDevilDog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think the 60 minute test is good, BUT it has the extreme drawback of being extremely difficult when done correctly. Which means you will hesitate to do this test very often because it hurts so much.

Also, on an indoor trainer, it is sometimes hard to get a completely accurate 60 minute test as you start to fight things like saddle soreness, lack of motivation. Whereas a shorter harder test can sometimes be easier to suffer through.

Someone mentioned a long Zwift race, and at least in that case, you'd have something to focus on and distract from the effort.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [lemos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lemos wrote:
I think I've read Nathan (TR CEO) write somewhere that the FTP would be 77% of your highest 1m interval.

I would think a track rider or road sprinter would get a highly optimistic FTP if they based it on 77% of their 1 minute power number.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [TriDevilDog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
only once

i had commitment issues - a bit too much left at the end as i was afraid to go too hard at the start - so maybe underestimated a tad....but it would have been so easy to completely mess up by being just a few watts higher at the start.

the other issue i had was that 60 mins working really hard on the trainer meant 60 mins locked into a position on the saddle. Pretty much numb from the waist down at the end; despite having a saddle i could ride outside on without any problems.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [nightfend] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Indeed.

To give some idea of the potential variability in this approach: years ago I tested two subjects who, despite having sustainable powers of <300 W, made it to 500 W during incremental exercise tests to measure their VO2max.

One was a collegiate runner-turned-duathlete, who had sub 15 min 5 km PB despite weighing 75 kg or so (IOW, more of a mesomorph than an ectomorph).

The other was an even stockier fellow who mostly trained by lifting weights, but also did some of what is now known as 'cardio.' Perhaps more importantly, he had grown up surfing in So Cal, so had spent a lot of time paddling/swimming in his teens.

On the flip side, when I was young I could only make it to 425 W or so during such a test, but could sustain ~350 W (i.e., 82%) during TTs.

That said, most people will fall within the 72-77% range put forth years and years ago by RST Coaching...as with Hunter's 95% of 20 min power rule-of-thumb, though, there are exceptions (and for precisely the same reason, i.e., resistance to fatigue during supra-steady-state exercise can and does vary between individuals).
Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Feb 1, 18 14:43
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [nightfend] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nightfend wrote:
lemos wrote:
I think I've read Nathan (TR CEO) write somewhere that the FTP would be 77% of your highest 1m interval.


I would think a track rider or road sprinter would get a highly optimistic FTP if they based it on 77% of their 1 minute power number.

As I understand it is not based on your highest 1 min power output, but the highest 1 min step of the ramp test that you can complete. Obviously the fatigue from the testing protocol will prevent anyone from matching their peak 1 minute power for their final ramp level before failure.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [MxRoe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MxRoe wrote:
So in ERG-mode. Would I simply ride until I see my cadence drop from let's say 95 to 60 and then manually stop the workout? Will the TR Agent message automatically or do you have to submit something? And if so, where?

Thanks, for your help!

So as we know, the current test is in the Beta stages so nothing happens automatically. When the test is made official, you'll simply ride until you can no longer hold the Power Target. When that happens, you will stop pedalling. The test will sense that you have "failed" so to speak and will calculcate an FTP for you. You will then have the option to start a five minute cool-down, or save and close the workout.

For now however, you will just ride until you can't anymore, save the workout, and then a Support Agent will comment your earned FTP :) Don't worry about pausing the workout at your point of failure, it's not neccessary for a successful calculation.

I hope that clears things up!

Get Faster with TrainerRoad
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Bryce Lewis TR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Might I suggest - in the name of safety - making the cool-down non-optional?

As I like to emphasize to students, plasma catecholamine levels at the end of such a test are several-fold higher than what you find after, e.g., major burn injury, serious trauma, a heart attack, etc...IOW, it is a significant physiological stressor. Not a good idea to then just stop cold.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Bryce Lewis TR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bryce Lewis TR wrote:


The goal of this is not only to require less TSS during testing, but also to eliminate the feelings of dread and anxiety surrounding testing. It also eliminates the factor of pacing and just allows you to ride hard :)


After having experimented with this type of testing, I've found it to be far more psychologically demanding than an 8 or 20-minute test.

It's exquisitely painful after about the first 15-20 seconds. It's a 2-3 minute pain threshold test. You're bumping right up into your max pain threshold for as long as you can. That makes 2 minutes feel reaalllly long. While an 20-minute test is uncomfortable and an 8-minute test is painful, 2-3 minutes is like waterboarding. It's sheer brutality.

It's hard to get "up" for. It's the kind of thing where you want a buddy pimp-slapping you and talking about your mother right before the start. You really have to be in full rage-mode to face your maximum pain threshold for that long.

I gave up after a few months and was relieved to revert to just doing 40K tests.

But that's just me. Maybe others will find it easy and useful.
Last edited by: trail: Feb 1, 18 19:19
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd gather that's because you know how to fully exert yourself as the test is designed (FWIW this is _the_ most god awful kind of test I can think of).

A majority of athletes struggle enough as it is to truly expend themselves over 8 and 20min durations. Believing they'll embrace several circles of hell lower than those is a bit of a pipe dream.

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
After having experimented with this type of testing, I've found it to be far more psychologically demanding than an 8 or 20-minute test.

I’ll second that. It’s a dreadful experience to subject oneself to. And after doing one or two, that dread starts coming on well in advance of the test.

Mark E
Quote Reply

Prev Next