Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
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!

So let's look at the life of a sprinter. Any major event they will ride 2-4 events: Sprint, Keirin, Team Sprint and Kilo/500mTT. So already there are four different performances. Really exponentially more as not two different races are the same. Even a TT differs with conditions on the track, shape of each track etc and then in the racing depending on position coming into the sprint and who you are racing against. PMAX/FRC and power at FRC and the associated times to exhaustion give you an indication of preparedness to perform in any situation if the build up is well planned.

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [aravilare] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aravilare wrote:
When did shilling become allowed on this forum?

If you are suggesting I am being compensated for touting WKO4, then no. I was a beta tester but the real cool stuff has happened in the last year.

As to this forum. Seriously?

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kiwicoach wrote:


Similar? Nothing similar to WKO4.


For my purposes there are. Golden Cheetah. I know that WKO4 has more advanced modelling stuff in it now. But as noted, my current use-case is direct measurement power to populate a power-duration curve.

Quote:
I say it again, no two performances will ever be the same. Am told in swimming the saying is "you never dive into the same water twice".

So does the model predict that variance? :)

I think it depends. In (indoor) track pursuit my performances are very repeatable. I'm working with a 3-4 second range, generally. I'd think swimming time trial performances are probably also very repeatable among experience/elite swimmers.

In 40K TT because of wind and course condition variances time isn't that great, but I work within about 6-7W variance (given a good state of fitness). And that's pretty much in the "error bars" of power meter bias accuracy.

I think if you're athletes' performances on race day are very unpredictable, then there's something to work on them with. A track pursuit performance should be highly predictable. Same with sprint TT.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
For my purposes there are. Golden Cheetah. I know that WKO4 has more advanced modelling stuff in it now. But as noted, my current use-case is direct measurement power to populate a power-duration curve.

Then how do you know your strengths and weaknesses? Where do you focus your efforts. Do you try and lift power or build capacity?

Quote:
I think it depends. In (indoor) track pursuit my performances are very repeatable. I'm working with a 3-4 second range, generally. I'd think swimming time trial performances are probably also very repeatable among experience/elite swimmers.

Over what time frame? Are you using any sort of taper? What if your event is in a different locations. We train and race on an outdoor 400m concrete track and compete at Nationals on one of two very fast indoor velodromes.
Quote:
In 40K TT because of wind and course condition variances time isn't that great, but I work within about 6-7W variance (given a good state of fitness). And that's pretty much in the "error bars" of power meter bias accuracy.

I measured times and power on our Tuesday 16km Time Trials for several riders and found a very poor relationship between power and times due to conditions each night.
Quote:
I think if you're athletes' performances on race day are very unpredictable, then there's something to work on them with. A track pursuit performance should be highly predictable. Same with sprint TT.

No two races are ever the same. You are being way too simplistic.

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
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 teach undergrad and graduate-level classes in mathematical modeling. As the statistician Sam Karlin used to say, "the purpose of models is not to fit the data but to sharpen the questions." Models help us to test (and reject) hypotheses, so we can figure out better questions to ask.
Last edited by: RChung: Dec 27, 17 18:11
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [RChung] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Why not just do the full hour? Taper for it and do it. I rather underestimate it then over estimate it when it comes to racing.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I had a client last week moving off CX to his base workouts. I had him do a 35m over/ under near threshold workout, his average power was 314w and his NP power was 326w. WKO4 said afterwords his MFTP was 282w or 287w. So MFTP has his FTP 10% lower than he did a 35m effort. I have worked with this client for a long time and 1 hour efforts in the 280w area a pretty easy for this client year around and not near his threshold. I have seen this happen several times with some other clients. Maybe I am missing something about MFTP?

BoulderCyclingCoach.com
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Honest question...........

If an hour is "pure" and a 20' test gives "vanity" results.......aren't you still going to be forced to ride to a %-age of the pure number......for anything over an hour?

It's not like people are doing 20' tests and then looking at a chart that tells them to race at 70% of their measured FTP............and then going out and doing that, without trials (at least I hope no one is doing that).

IMO, if you're worried about how someone else derived at their FTP.....or, how they're applying it.....then using vanity to describe them is a bit hypocritical.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kiwicoach wrote:
Another year of using WKO4 to crunch the numbers of cyclists power and other metrics has taught me that using short durations tests is a waste of time.

Majorly overestimate the FTP. Something Andy Coggan refers to as Vanity FTP.

Usual suspects are 95% of a 20min test or even worse a percentage of a shorter duration test.

Modelled FTP in WKO4 really highlights the folly of using just short term maximal efforts to determine threshold power, no matter what your definition of threshold is. A high FTP and a very short Time to Exhaustion (TTE).

This is well modelled in WKO4 for shorter durations as well. PMAX/FRC (Sprint Power), FRC (Track TT Power) and FRC/FTP (Pursuit Power).

Another thread about FTP testing, FML.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [nc452010] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nc452010 wrote:
Honest question...........

If an hour is "pure" and a 20' test gives "vanity" results.......aren't you still going to be forced to ride to a %-age of the pure number......for anything over an hour?

It's not like people are doing 20' tests and then looking at a chart that tells them to race at 70% of their measured FTP............and then going out and doing that, without trials (at least I hope no one is doing that).

IMO, if you're worried about how someone else derived at their FTP.....or, how they're applying it.....then using vanity to describe them is a bit hypocritical.

On average, 95% of maximal 20 min power provides a reasonable estimate of FTP. Where the "vanity" part enters the picture is when people mis/overinterpret the data, convincing themselves that their FTP is higher than it really is. This in turn contributes to other mistakes, e.g., pacing errors. The more accurate the estimate of FTP, the less likely such problems will arise.

Oh, and an hour isn't "pure", as FTP is not, and never properly has been, defined as the power that you can maintain for precisely that duration. (The longer you go, though, the smaller the contribution from FRC, making the data more representative of FTP.)
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [dado0583] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dado0583 wrote:
Another thread about FTP testing, FML.

This is what happens when people rely on second-hand sources.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The bastardisation of a 20 minute "FTP test" even made it onto mainstream British television last year, on Channel 5's Tour de Celeb. Asker Jeukendrup, I'm looking at you.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.

Exactly, although I would note that consistency in testing for FTP is useful, especially when applying that to proper training intensity depending on the workout objective. Meanwhile, this thread has degenerated into an esoteric discussion between Kiwicoach and Coggan regarding proper testing for world class athletes. At that level, yeah, they should be getting it right. But for those of us in the geezer divisions the hair splitting on FTP is just not that important.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HuffNPuff wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.


Exactly, although I would note that consistency in testing for FTP is useful, especially when applying that to proper training intensity depending on the workout objective. Meanwhile, this thread has degenerated into an esoteric discussion between Kiwicoach and Coggan regarding proper testing for world class athletes. At that level, yeah, they should be getting it right. But for those of us in the geezer divisions the hair splitting on FTP is just not that important.

Agree

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.

Says the guy wasting his time obsessing over crank length!

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kiwicoach wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.


Says the guy wasting his time obsessing over crank length!

I do not all feel I am wasting time. I am working on lots of stuff on my trainer for the off season. Is making it fun.
And it is way way more than crank length, but ....

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kiwicoach wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.


Says the guy wasting his time obsessing over crank length!

hahaha. So awesome. That thread is ridiculous. Apparently geriatric cyclists need only concern themselves with crank length to get faster.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HuffNPuff wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.


Exactly, although I would note that consistency in testing for FTP is useful, especially when applying that to proper training intensity depending on the workout objective. Meanwhile, this thread has degenerated into an esoteric discussion between Kiwicoach and Coggan regarding proper testing for world class athletes. At that level, yeah, they should be getting it right. But for those of us in the geezer divisions the hair splitting on FTP is just not that important.

I guess a few things in that.

Does the average rider not deserve to benefit from what we learn from training high performance athletes. Just because someone won the genetic lottery does that that make their goals any more important than yours?

Every Rec Rider or Cat 3-5/C-E rider I coach who owns a power meter wants to make the most out of the tool to guide their riding. Most often to maximise their cycling time to fit around a busy lifestyle.

As mentioned above, the bastardisation of the term, concept and application of FTP for all cyclists.

Also I see no one got the joke in the naming of the thread. Speaking of bastardisation of power meter training metrics :)

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kiwicoach wrote:
HuffNPuff wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.


Exactly, although I would note that consistency in testing for FTP is useful, especially when applying that to proper training intensity depending on the workout objective. Meanwhile, this thread has degenerated into an esoteric discussion between Kiwicoach and Coggan regarding proper testing for world class athletes. At that level, yeah, they should be getting it right. But for those of us in the geezer divisions the hair splitting on FTP is just not that important.


I guess a few things in that.

Does the average rider not deserve to benefit from what we learn from training high performance athletes. Just because someone won the genetic lottery does that that make their goals any more important than yours?

Every Rec Rider or Cat 3-5/C-E rider I coach who owns a power meter wants to make the most out of the tool to guide their riding. Most often to maximise their cycling time to fit around a busy lifestyle.

As mentioned above, the bastardisation of the term, concept and application of FTP for all cyclists.

Also I see no one got the joke in the naming of the thread. Speaking of bastardisation of power meter training metrics :)

I use a powermeter. The biggest benefit for me is that it forces me to work harder in training. For long course racing I mostly ignore my power meter except in setting an upper limit to avoid burning matches. And for my AG, I think it's fair to say I'm a FOP rider.

Yes, it would be great for average riders to benefit from your knowledge. But in my opinion, you need to get out of the tech-blather if you want the average person to absorb what you are saying. Instead of the mini treatise, I would have simply argued that 5 hr power is the more important measure for IM than the FTP you get from a 20 min test, but that doesn't mean I can't use the latter for most training intensities. Meanwhile, I just want to ride and train without needing to pick up a second PhD ... hence, the bastardization you see.

And no, I don't get the joke in the title even with you hinting that there is one.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So it was you with a knife in the dining room after all? I should have guessed...RIP, FTP.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:

On average, 95% of maximal 20 min power provides a reasonable estimate of FTP. Where the "vanity" part enters the picture is when people mis/overinterpret the data, convincing themselves that their FTP is higher than it really is. This in turn contributes to other mistakes, e.g., pacing errors. The more accurate the estimate of FTP, the less likely such problems will arise.

Oh, and an hour isn't "pure", as FTP is not, and never properly has been, defined as the power that you can maintain for precisely that duration. (The longer you go, though, the smaller the contribution from FRC, making the data more representative of FTP.)

Looking for a little guidance here at 63 yrs/ 145lbs. What I have been doing is riding consistently with the power meter and seeing results. Occasionally hitting PBs on NP while training. Currently up to 192 while on a road ride of an hour to two hours. After I exceed the 192 (for example) a few times, then I move it up to say 195. For my purposes, is this good enough progression to challenge myself?

You have said that performance is the best indicator of performance. So my humble approach to that is by increasing power in training/races rather than tests. Your thoughts?

Indoor Triathlete - I thought I was right, until I realized I was wrong.
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HuffNPuff wrote:
Kiwicoach wrote:
HuffNPuff wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
I never understand why most even care.

Most folks would be way further ahead if they just did frequency, consistancy, duration.


Exactly, although I would note that consistency in testing for FTP is useful, especially when applying that to proper training intensity depending on the workout objective. Meanwhile, this thread has degenerated into an esoteric discussion between Kiwicoach and Coggan regarding proper testing for world class athletes. At that level, yeah, they should be getting it right. But for those of us in the geezer divisions the hair splitting on FTP is just not that important.


I guess a few things in that.

Does the average rider not deserve to benefit from what we learn from training high performance athletes. Just because someone won the genetic lottery does that that make their goals any more important than yours?

Every Rec Rider or Cat 3-5/C-E rider I coach who owns a power meter wants to make the most out of the tool to guide their riding. Most often to maximise their cycling time to fit around a busy lifestyle.

As mentioned above, the bastardisation of the term, concept and application of FTP for all cyclists.

Also I see no one got the joke in the naming of the thread. Speaking of bastardisation of power meter training metrics :)


I use a powermeter. The biggest benefit for me is that it forces me to work harder in training. For long course racing I mostly ignore my power meter except in setting an upper limit to avoid burning matches. And for my AG, I think it's fair to say I'm a FOP rider.

Yes, it would be great for average riders to benefit from your knowledge. But in my opinion, you need to get out of the tech-blather if you want the average person to absorb what you are saying. Instead of the mini treatise, I would have simply argued that 5 hr power is the more important measure for IM than the FTP you get from a 20 min test, but that doesn't mean I can't use the latter for most training intensities. Meanwhile, I just want to ride and train without needing to pick up a second PhD ... hence, the bastardization you see.

And no, I don't get the joke in the title even with you hinting that there is one.

Not sure what was tech blatherty about my response. But can you appreciate my frustration when trying to outline this stuff to people so they appreciate their $500-$10,000 investment in a power meter when people say you can determine FTP from a 3min test.

Re 5hr power. Andy has pointed out many times that FTP relates well to power from a track pursuit all the way out to an ironman bike ride. I would add that no two Ironman's are the same and using some form of standard starting point to map out the build up to race day. Also that from 30min outwards the power duration curve tends to flatten out a lot.

I am teaching my riders to go by feel and use power as a guideline to monitor their effort. Advice to some is to go harder, advice to most is to go easier.

While I use WKO4 to crunch the data I did recommend to one weekend warrior that the metrics in Strava were fine for what he wanted to do. Shame that they, like many, don't acknowledge where they got the ideas for thresholds and performance managers from.

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
So it was you with a knife in the dining room after all? I should have guessed...RIP, FTP.

Someone waffling on about their beliefs in another thread.

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Feels like a knife to the heart every time someone misuses the concept of FTP and how you test it. [Kiwicoach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Having grown up competing long before heart rate watches and (much later) power meters were widely available, going by feel comes naturally. I.e, I don't use WK04, Strava, etc. I don't bother with the PMC. I just use it to train harder and set my match burning limit. Perhaps I would be better if I used all these tools as if it were my job instead of my hobby.

$10,000 for a powermeter? That has got to be upper end.

Anyway, best of luck with your WC athletes.
Quote Reply

Prev Next