Why not just skip the whole thing and just make up a number?

It would be a meaningless, invalid result. The test model presumes that you will follow the prescribed power ramp. If you do not, then the calculation of your best minute does not mean anything because it is outside the design of the test.

who are you gaming... a test is personal and if you are doing it for any other reason that that is what you may need to assess. The idea of a ramp test or any other so called fitness test is to try and gauge how you are progressing over time. That alone is not easy. With any physiological test there are all sorts of things that can get in the way of reproducibility, each time you need to control these confounds to the best of your ability for the test to be valid. Your day, your rest, your lead up to the test, what you eat and drink, did you drink coffee, how you warm up, did you calibrate your power meter, is the room temp the same, are the fans cooling you the same, if smart trainer did you warm it up the same, then how motivated you are to perform, are you using music as a motivation.... I am sure there are many more than this, so it is a fools paradise to think that the ramp test or any test is a measure of truth. It can be useful if you are ready to do the work to make it the best test you can, but otherwise it is just a novel workout. The number you get is even controversial, how is it calculated, and what does it relate to? So as always pick a number any number and it will tell your future. Bottom line a good test is not easy to do but if done right it may be useful to you over time (to tell how you change) but then again it may not.

So back to your question: I think you do not know how to do the ramp test, each 1 minute interval is at a certain wattage, regardless of how you set it up and each additional interval is x watts higher. That is the rub there is no way to game it if done right you hold 170 watts for 1 minute then go up 5 watts or 10 watts what ever, then hold that for 1 minute and so on until you can not hold the 1 minute power. So if you think of gaining the test you are only cheating yourself. I suggest you should probably look up the test protocol because it is not what I think you think it is. Suggested reading:
https://trainerday.com/...s-the-best-ftp-test/

https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/new-ramp-test-makes-ftp-testing-more-efficient-and-less-stressful/

I thought the same thing, just fake it outright if thinking of doing this.

The day I stopped caring about what a test number was versus caring about why it was and what I was going to do about it is when I started getting faster. Also when I started making the test look more like what race day would look like for a TT.

I mean, so many folks almost seem to tailor training to hitting a test number instead of generating real life results.

I care about my 10mi and 25mi times. So, that's how I test. Then I do my workouts based off the power from doing a full-kit time trial. Not practical outdoors for all folks, but can do it indoors for sure. Zwift folks can do a Tempus Fugit race, they hold them daily. Dumb trainer folks can just pace an effort of that duration.

Just do the testing properly. If you're concerned about not being able to hold the power without an erg due to the dumb trainer........substitute a more steady paced effort of longer duration instead. 2 x 8min, 1 x 20min, 1 x 60min.......whatever.

Let me say this, if folks "fear" doing a test and want to do an "easier" test then they really need to be fearing the suck that's going to happen come race day when it actually is tough.

^^^^^^
well said

here's the thing about ramp tests.

I can design 3 ramp tests that are going to yield vastly different final numbers. In fact I could design one to give you a really low #, a moderate # and a high # all of which would not reflect your actual FTP. I could also design a ramp test to more accurately reflect your FTP.

It all depends on the how big the steps are, how fast you ramp, how long the ramp test is.

Now ymmv, but when it comes to setting your FTP I'm of the thought that longer is more reflective than shorter for what you can actually do.

There have been numerous threads regarding Trainer road, ramp tests, setting FTP this year. Tons of good info. You may want to browse some of those before making a decision how to do a test

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

ramp test is for those people who dont have much time. It creates enough exhaustion to simulate the 20min test (which has a 5 min exhuast session before that fryi). So your 1 minute power, is just going to be your 1 minute power. I assume you are looking to cheat the test by skipping the lower levels and riding near 90% ftp to start.. it doesnt work like that since the point is to raise your heart rate and not have a steady heart rate

No idea what you are trying to achieve. Doing the test the way you are planning will give you an unrealistically high result.

Maybe the reason you have to "bail" from intervals is because you have set your FTP higher than it really it is, so why do you want to set it even higher?

What is your training goal?

Also keep in mind that different types of riders will fare better on different types of tests. Pure bike riders will probably do better on a ramp test, while more endurance, steady-staters (like us triathletes) will generally do better on a longer test like the 20 minute one. I've done both of them a few times and my FTP (according to the test protocol) is 15-20 watts higher on the 20 minute test. The ramp test pegged it at 339, but the 20 test has it at 355 or so. The 20 minute test is far more accurate for me, as I'm not as good at the shorter, punchy stuff, but can hold decent power for longer durations.

---

Blog: http://262toboylstonstreet.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/NateThomasTri
Coaching: https://bybtricoaching.com/ - accepting athletes for 2023

I know what a ramp test is for. The points I was trying to make are

1. depending which ramp test you do your numbers are going to be accurate or they could be wildly inaccurate.

2. the 20 min test is accurate for about 60% of people. Do you know if you're in the 60% or 40%? My guess is the OP has no clue. I'd be willing to bet a lot of $ that >50% of all triathletes have no clue.

3. If you can't hold your 20 min FTP for 50-70 minutes it's too high.

4. Most people prefer a shorter test or ramp test bc they tend to do lots of > FTP intervals for short duration. Teaching to the test.

5. Just bc you're short of time doesn't mean you can't do a longer test on weekends or on days you have more time. Call it a second data point to check in the the first.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Yes I agree with Brian here, the test is deigned around some sort of protocol and often measures some part of physiology related to power production... the key is the test is something that can have 2 implications:
1- how to do your training efforts (give you a target to work around)
2- a way to see progression (sort of)
it is not a measure of you as a person or your value as an athlete. So why would you game it that just messes you up.

if you find you can not execute the power requirements of what ever you are doing be it a race, a group ride or a workout then it says you are not at the fitness required to do these things to the level needed, reset your expectations and train more. Find a test to tell you the sort of truth you need to know and stick to it. Also remember that like any test you get better at it with practice and that has nothing to do with your fitness.

This does not make sense to me - it would be like running mile repeats on a course that measures less than a mile and then using that pace to set training paces or to brag about your mile time. If the goal here is to set accurate training zones, "gaming" the test will destroy that goal by degrading the integrity of the test. If the goal is to set an impressive number for the test, "gaming" the test undermines that goal because you would be cheating. Lose-lose.

Accuracy depends on your goal. If you just want to measure how your fitness changes, any of them should be fine, as long as you follow the protocol well.

I, personally, don't feel the need to get a super precise # that tracks perfectly to my 40K TT power. When I want that I just go out and do a 40K TT.

Just looking to stir up some discussion. Some would argue that the ramp test was created for time restraints. While that is likely true, I also believe that had it not been for the introduction of ERG mode we never would have seen it. With ERG mode you simply pedal until you can't any more. Pretty simple test. That's why personally I don't think it's as well suited for a dumb trainer, which would allow you to cheat, vs ERG which would not.

Contrast that to 8 and 20 minute tests which don't really make sense in ERG. The goal is to push your limits for the test intervals. I've done 8 and 20 minute tests (on dumb trainers) as well as ramp tests (ERG) in the past; usually doing two different tests within a few days of each other has yielded results within 5 watts or less. But I guess my original question could also be asked of an 8 or 20 minute test - what happens if you don't nail the clearing intervals at exactly 100%? Invalid test? Personally on those I don't think it would have as much of an impact. Chances are my 8 or 20 minute output would be marginally impacted by my warmup. But maybe I'm totally wrong.

Thus the discussion. Of the three tests, doing a ramp test in non-ERG mode would be the only one where I *think* I could cheat it. And yes, I fully get that cheating a test and getting invalid results are meaningless. Just thought it was an interesting topic.

You can game it much easier than that by just getting out of the saddle and stomping for the last 30 seconds but seems pretty pointless. Your best 1-minute power in a ramp test is going to be hundreds of watts lower than your best 1 minute power generally.

Some would argue that the ramp test was created for time restraints.
Probably not it was a variation of the Conconi test based upon the 1982 paper which tested runners using heart rate

which would allow you to cheat, vs ERG which would not.WHY, if you can hold your power you can hold your power and if you know the power to hold for the next step it is just the same no difference just that erg mode takes the thinking and the need to watch that you hold the power out of the test.

what happens if you don't nail the clearing intervals at exactly 100%? Invalid test? Personally on those I don't think it would have as much of an impact. AGAIN other factors than just your warm up can affect our results the key to any of these tests is consistency.

If done correctly there should be no way to "cheat" or "game" the test... if you do cheat the test you did it wrong. Even a 8 or 20 minute test if you don't pace it correctly or too conservatively can give rubbish results....

So if done right you will get a number what that number means is up for interpretation but that is another discussion.

So here's my n=1 on a non-ERG ramp test attempt.

Tried it yesterday. Crashed and burned spectacularly about 12 minutes into the ramp. The biggest thing I noticed was the perceived effort it took to dial in each interval. That and the constantly changing cadence (to dial them in). On an 8 or 20 minute test I usually find a gear + cadence and then just hold. I'm not a solid over / under / interval guy. So the constant changes felt extremely taxing.

I didn't accept the results. Tried again today, same time of day. ERG mode this time. Biggest noticeable difference was that effort changes between intervals was negligible. Felt like it should. Constantly increasing efforts vs swings in cadence. Lasted the entire 15 minute ramp + 10 seconds into a bonus interval which is (for me) about how a good test should go. Logged ERG power to TrainerRoad, pedal power to Garmin. Less than 1% difference in NP between them so no major differences there.

So my statement that ramp tests are designed for ERG mode holds up with my n=1. Curious to know if anyone is actually doing them on dumb trainers with any degree of success.

Haven't done a ramp for a year or so, but I used to do them on an old KK road machine and got numbers that both aligned well with my RPE and were reasonably consistent with other test protocols and maximal efforts, which is about as much as I'm looking for from any shorter FTP test.

I am curious- do you always train using ERG mode? I have personally not found the mental aspect of holding steady power in resistance mode to be much of an issue. Certainly no harder than doing so outdoors with more external distractions/fluctuations. Might be a different story if you aren't used to it though, in which case I probably wouldn't bust it out for the first time on test day.

Completely agree. I hate erg mode and it sounds like the previous poster perhaps relies on it too much ?
I have a kikr core and a kk road machine. The latter feels infinitely better with road feel and I like the changing gears and finding a rhythm and cadence for each interval. That includes a ramp test. In fact I use resistance mode only on the kikr. I’m using the latter because I hate it sitting there being a pricier item and letting it go unused but the kk does feel a lot better.
Erg mode bogs my legs down I feel- maybe it’s a mental thing but I’m not a fan. I prefer to stay engaged with the watts required and use gears. I’m in off-season right now but I plan to use the kikr in resistance mode for a ramp test when the time comes. My only concern is how much gear I have to go through to top out. I’d like to keep a set resistance of around 25% so will see what happens.

Why do you have to hold power 50 min minimum to be a legit ftp? Are you saying that for long steady state triathletes or all cyclists? Thanks.

just like ramp test people trying reduce effort... 50min? its supposed to be an hour. ramp / 20 minis to simulate the hour