Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Andrew Coggan]
Andrew Coggan wrote:
trail wrote:

I do completely understand the benefits of WKO4 (and similar) in providing things like great longitudinal tracking of parameters


Actually, I don't think you entirely do.

As an example: there is no test duration that would provide a 'pure' indication of FRC. It can only be separated from other determinants of performance via modeling.


Yeah, I just, personally, haven't found FRC all that useful. Not because it isn't inherently useful, just that it's not part of my current toolbox. Disclosure: I don't regularly WKO4 (though I bought a license and tried to use it). Not because of it's science/math underpinnings - other reasons.

Edit: But what I don't understand is the OP's implying he uses FRC as some sort of proxy for track TT power. When hopefully his athletes would do actual track TTs if that's what they're training for. That's sort of what I was needling him about - being uppity about modeled FTP accuracy then using a non-directly-measurable parameter like FRC as a proxy for something very easily directly measurable. Getting a solid track TT measurement for someone with access to a track takes 3-5 minutes after their regular track warmup!
Last edited by: trail: Dec 27, 17 14:38

Edit Log:

  • Post edited by trail (Dawson Saddle) on Dec 27, 17 14:38