Andrew Coggan wrote:
In this context, the purposes of modeling are 1) to extract accurate and precise parameter estimates reflective of different underlying physiological determinants of performance (without necessarily performing any formal tests)
But not nearly as "accurate and precise" (whatever that means) as when performing formal tests (ideally performance itself). Calling something "accurate and precise" is only meaningful when you have some reference truth to measure precision and accuracy against. And that's performance. So if it's easy to go out and perform to acquire data for those 3-4 key parameters (e.g. sprint power, pursuit power, FTP, et al), might as well do that. I find it pretty easy to do, so I feed that information to the model so those key points have the highest quality data I can get. Then I can let it fill in the rest for me.
I do completely understand the benefits of WKO4 (and similar) in providing things like great longitudinal tracking of parameters and providing clear, easy-to-digest graphical representation of my current "signature" as a road cyclist.
I was being a bit facetious because I tire of the constant heartache on this forum about FTP testing accuracy.