Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

differences in mftp depending on date range
Quote | Reply
So I installed wko4 today and was curious about mftp figures I'm getting depending on date range selected. I loaded data back to 1/1/17 (I have data going further back, but I had a pretty long layoff from late 2016 into 2017 that caused my ftp to fall dramatically and I was starting from scratch). So, when I have date ranges like "all workouts" I get an mftp of 286, whereas if I select "year to date" I get mftp of 294 (my set FTP at the moment is 280 and has been that way for 2 weeks, previously had based my workouts on a 270 ftp). Was just curious what data point(s) could be pushing my modeled ftp up like that, my best 60min NP is 266, 20min power is 260, 15min is 280 and best 8min in 302. Was also curious why year to date would be that different from all workouts. I'm not expecting to really change anything about my training based on this figure at the moment, as things feel appropriately hard when it matters, and I'm not seduced by the vanity ftp of 4.2w/kg versus 4.0 lol It's possible I'm leaving out other critical info so feel free to bug me!
Quote Reply
Re: differences in mftp depending on date range [pgp128] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
1. All points on the mean maximal power curve exert some amount of influence on every one of the model parameters. Some, though, have more leverage on particular parameters than others (e.g., Pmax, FRC, and mFTP depend mostly on the first ~25 min).

2. The reason you get different results using different date ranges is because you are analyzing different data. It is as simple as that.
Quote Reply
Re: differences in mftp depending on date range [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks, I actually found the culprit, there was a single 1500w or so power spike in one ride file, without it my mftp is 270 and it makes more sense given what i've actually done.
Quote Reply
Re: differences in mftp depending on date range [pgp128] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yup, one thing that will skew the model fit is bogus data. It is amazing to me how so many people would previously accept that their power declined dramatically from 1 to 2 or 3 seconds. Muscle does fatigue pretty quickly, but not *that* quickly.

Anyway, glad to hear you found the culprit and have got things sorted out.
Quote Reply