Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
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'd finally have my 400W FTP that everyone claims! In reality it's more like 233 right now. Never tested higher than 260W. (I'm ~3W/kg)

1min peak power is 520W. Edit: read later this was 1min peak of the ramp, numbers add up pretty close to my result.

I've done about 15 FTP tests with TR and a handful before that. Been a member since 2015.

I did the ramp test and really enjoyed not having to pace. I got the wife to do it as well and she has no idea how to pace so this test is perfect for her.

She's isn't a serious cyclist but got on the trainer this winter to keep up with some fitness, based on her HR (in subsequent workouts) and her HRmax i'd say the ramp under-assessed her just because she's not used to maximal efforts.

2014 P3 DI2 - RT6, CXR80, Power2Max S, 820, Fenix 3 HR. (gone)
Last edited by: P90Puma: Feb 2, 18 5:46
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
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.

Hey Andrew,

Thanks so much for the suggestion, I will pass that on to the decision makers to consider as we move forward with the project.

Get Faster with TrainerRoad
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [DFW_Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DFW_Tri wrote:
But it would also help to hear from the creator as to why they think it is accurate.

I can answer that :-D.

We're really lucky now that we're at a large enough scale that we can test things with our users fairly quickly.

With our new Ramp Test we've ran through 900 riders so far. We've got a FB group called "TrainerRoad Beta Group" where people are responding to the test.

Anecdotally, the response has been hugely positive (and you can read people's responses in that group). The goal is to put them at the right training levels as they start a TrainerRoad plan.

People usually fall into the following buckets:
1) This test is bang on what either my 8/20 minute test results were or where I've self adjusted to
This is the vast majority of riders

2) This test produced an FTP higher than what I'm training at...this can't be right...this test overestimates....oh wait, I just did 90 minutes of over unders at this new FTP...boy that was hard...okay so this is what real training feels like?...okay so this test is good.
I really like these responses because I think these people didn't pace well during the 8/20 minute tests and they've entered a whole new level of HTFU.

3) Your test underestimated my FTP. I've been training at X FTP and I know that's my FTP.
I've looked at each one of these people's workouts personally. So far every single one of them who trains at their "higher" FTP either turns down every workout or can't make it through 10 minutes of sweet spot without two back pedal breaks. I suspect in this situation it's a bit EGO of wanting that higher FTP (I've been there too!).

4) I did 90 minutes of sweet spot training at 8pm with my new FTP and it felt great. Then I woke up at 5am, didn't eat breakfast and tried to do 90 minutes over unders and I couldn't make it past 45 minutes. Is my FTP too high?
This is a general bucket of external stressors, workout spacing and nutrition. If you're on a keto diet anything glycolytic is going to hurt more than normal. If you try to do highly glycolytic workouts with low glycogen stores it's going to hurt. If you put two harder workouts close together it's going to hurt. If you're up with a sick kid half the night your next workout will be much more difficult than if you didn't. This makes me think that we can improve education to inform riders how to set themselves up for success on every workout.

For the data side of it we're seeing if we can quantify the improvement. There are many external variables so it might be hard but we're going to do our best to do that.

If you have any other questions let me know.

CEO at TrainerRoad
Co-host of the Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast
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.

Our current formula takes 77% of your 1 minute best in the ramp test. Because we do that it doesn't mater if you last through an entire step or not.

We then do some down factoring based on if you kick up your power during the last minute compared to what was prescribed. We do this to try to prevent people from "cheating" the test.

The goal is to put you into the right training levels to start a TrainerRoad plan.

CEO at TrainerRoad
Co-host of the Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
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.

In the final product, we'll automatically put you into a cool down once you complete the test. It's only optional in the fact that we don't handcuff you to the bike. You could always close the software during the cool down and stop pedaling.

CEO at TrainerRoad
Co-host of the Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
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.

We won't be removing the 20 and 8 minute tests anytime soon. We might move them to a "team" later on depending on usage. We do plan on replacing the prescribed workout in our tests with the Ramp Test.

CEO at TrainerRoad
Co-host of the Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
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).

Andrew,
What method do you recommend

Yellowfin Endurance Coaching and Bike Fits
USAT Level 1, USAC Level 3
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Nate Pearson] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Nate Pearson wrote:
they've entered a whole new level of HTFU.

Over the past couple of years I've collected a suite of lies & tricks I use to get through intervals.

I'm pretty certain the last 20 min test I did was an actual physical FTP measure, as I lay quivering on the bike afterwards, but when starting out I simply didn't have the tools to dig that deep.

If the new test gives new riders a higher FTP than a traditional 20-min, I wonder how well they'll cope with their first plan when hitting longer sweet-spot/threshold intervals.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [SteveM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SteveM wrote:
Nate Pearson wrote:

they've entered a whole new level of HTFU.


Over the past couple of years I've collected a suite of lies & tricks I use to get through intervals.

I'm pretty certain the last 20 min test I did was an actual physical FTP measure, as I lay quivering on the bike afterwards, but when starting out I simply didn't have the tools to dig that deep.

If the new test gives new riders a higher FTP than a traditional 20-min, I wonder how well they'll cope with their first plan when hitting longer sweet-spot/threshold intervals.

We do ease people into it. So far people are usually happy that they can train harder than they could before. I'm sure there are some people who don't have the mental toughness or desire to work above tempo for anything but very short periods. Those people can just ride their bike rather than train :).

CEO at TrainerRoad
Co-host of the Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Nate Pearson] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So - TR is now saying this is the way to go for all FTP Tests.

I'm about to move Base --> Build on Monday. I should use the Ramp to test Tuesday AM?
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [plumber250] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
plumber250 wrote:
So - TR is now saying this is the way to go for all FTP Tests.

I'm about to move Base --> Build on Monday. I should use the Ramp to test Tuesday AM?

Yes, we're going to recommend it to all users once we have a fully fleshed out test baked into our software.

You still have a choice in what you do, but we recommend Ramp Test X.

Yes, you can use the Ramp Test X on Tuesday. You'll have to wait for a TR employee to send you your new FTP.

CEO at TrainerRoad
Co-host of the Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [surfNJmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Any of the updated seven deadly sins...

"...er, ways of determining your functional threshold power (roughly in
order of increasing certainty):

1) from inspection of a ride file.
2) from power distribution profile from multiple rides.
3) from blood lactate measurements (better or worse, depending on how it is done).
4) based on normalized power from a hard ~1 h race.
5) based on mathematical modeling of mean maximal power data (better or worse, depending on how it is done).
6) from the power that you can routinely generate during long intervals done in training.
7) from the average power during a ~1 h (or ~40 km, if you prefer) TT (the best predictor of performance is performance itself).

Note the key words "hard", "routinely", and "average" in methods 4, 6,
and 7..."

https://groups.google.com/...bJNPV9Q/cZxmnp6rFgAJ
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Bryce Lewis TR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I find the "FTP economy" fascinating.

The ability to build a businesses around generic plans magically scaled by algorithms with coaches standing by to scoopi up thousands of hopelessly confused athletes between trips to the bank to cash royalty checks for books based on twenty year old concepts makes Big 4 consulting firms look like noobs.

The truth is that cycling, especially for triathletes, is no different than any other sport where you can get everything you need for free and in a useful format.

One need look no further than indoor rowing to learn everything they need to be a faster cyclist.

Edit - Case in point...

http://www.fitness.marines.mil/...016-12-15-105509-990

Interval Design Studio
YouTube | SoundCloud
Last edited by: fstrnu: Feb 2, 18 13:52
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [fstrnu] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Would be surprised if anyone was getting rich from cornering the market on threshold testing.

The biggest challenge of coaching and training is consistency.

Getting someone to do a short test is easy but not valid. A longer (30-60min) test is more demanding. But the real challenge is getting people to do 2-6 x 20min intervals to try and build their threshold higher.

This is where, especially in winter, that indoor training comes into it's own. Or here in Christchurch NZ which is road cone and asshole driver city thanks to 15,000 or so earthquakes and aftershocks in the last several years.

I did a Ric Stern protocol MAP test this morning and it overestimates my mFTP from WKO4 by 11 watts. mFTP is based on training for a 10 mile time trial so TTE is around 30min. And this is 11 watts higher than critical power based on 5min and 20min power. YMMV.

Hamish



fstrnu wrote:
I find the "FTP economy" fascinating.

The ability to build a businesses around generic plans magically scaled by algorithms with coaches standing by to scoopi up thousands of hopelessly confused athletes between trips to the bank to cash royalty checks for books based on twenty year old concepts makes Big 4 consulting firms look like noobs.

The truth is that cycling, especially for triathletes, is no different than any other sport where you can get everything you need for free and in a useful format.

One need look no further than indoor rowing to learn everything they need to be a faster cyclist.

Edit - Case in point...

http://www.fitness.marines.mil/...016-12-15-105509-990

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [SteveM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If you don't look like this then you didn't go hard enough haha

https://www.youtube.com/...e=youtu.be&t=365


SteveM wrote:
Nate Pearson wrote:

they've entered a whole new level of HTFU.


Over the past couple of years I've collected a suite of lies & tricks I use to get through intervals.

I'm pretty certain the last 20 min test I did was an actual physical FTP measure, as I lay quivering on the bike afterwards, but when starting out I simply didn't have the tools to dig that deep.

If the new test gives new riders a higher FTP than a traditional 20-min, I wonder how well they'll cope with their first plan when hitting longer sweet-spot/threshold intervals.


Interval Design Studio
YouTube | SoundCloud
Last edited by: fstrnu: Feb 2, 18 16:37
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [fstrnu] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i have a former professional cyclist in my lab. She says that if you don't puke *at least once* during/immediately after your FTP test then the test isn't valid. None of my FTP tests have been valid, I guess, although I did puke a bit in my mouth at the end of one 20 min FTP test. I'm just not tough enough...
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [fstrnu] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fstrnu wrote:
If you don't look like this then you didn't go hard enough haha

Didn't after my first/second tests.

Did after the last test.

Haven't tested since ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [giorgitd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Only those with sufficient glycolytic capacity can perturb the pH of their CSF sufficiently to induce vomiting.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, then, all of the pro cyclists on her team have sufficient glycolytic capacity to perturb the pH of their CSF sufficiently. Whatever that means. Apparently.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [giorgitd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You need to become real acidic in order to stimulate vomiting. Not everyone can do that; I cant. Been close, never had it happen tho. I train for IM's so I dont need to have a high glycolytic capacity. If you want to be successful as a pro cyclist, where the decisive moves are generally over in 30-600 seconds, you really need it. At least on a pro level, it's self-selecting.

I did the new FTP test yesterday. It was great. I like ramp tests. You feel like shit for a while afterwards, but it's not nearly as horrible as a 20 min or longer test. Just pedal until you cant anymore. I took it easy for som 15 minutes then I did 4x4@105% of the tested FTP.

Endurance coach | Physiotherapist (primary care) | Bikefitter | Swede
Last edited by: mortysct: Feb 4, 18 2:22
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just ran the test. Dare I say, it was actually fun!? I enjoyed that way more than the 8' or 20' tests. I was very motivated to keep pushing myself and see how far I could go.

How long has it taken others before hearing from TR with a result? I'm very interested to see where it puts me in relation to my last 8' test.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [teichs42] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
did mine Fri night EST, received an email Sat night EST from TR support.

"Pain is NOT temporary,you remember every bit of it"
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [dennism] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dennism wrote:
did mine Fri night EST, received an email Sat night EST from TR support.

Awesome, thanks!
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [teichs42] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I rode the ramp test this morning. I knew I would fail around 124-130%. Wonder if the test can be skewed if the rider has a high anaerobic fitness, which we rarely train.
Quote Reply
Re: TrainerRoad New FTP test [jdais] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jdais wrote:
Wonder if the test can be skewed if the rider has a high anaerobic fitness, which we rarely train.

You don't need to wonder, it's a well-known fact. The only way to really tease apart the aerobic and non-aerobic components of fitness via ramp testing is to do multiple tests with varying rates of power increase.

(Prediction: a year or so from now, there will be a lot of people scratching their heads, trying to figure out why their performance in triathlons hasn't improved even though their ramp test results have.)
Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Feb 6, 18 13:01
Quote Reply

Prev Next