Let’s say I am training for half and full IM, would I benefit from frequent 60 min rides at 95% FTP. Keep in mind that I also have to do swim and run training and don’t want to be too cooked to do quality in those workouts. In other words, once I get my FTP where I “want it to be”, will my overall training benefit from riding lots of volume close to FTP but not higher, so that I can hit race day and ride at the high end of the FTP range for the race distance and still run well.
My FTP currently somewhere around 275. However, I can easily hold 310W for 5 minutes and could likely hold it for 15 minutes with a lot of sweating and pain. So a power level such that any increase during any point in a test would lead to a blowup within 2-3 minutes is obviously not 275 for me.
Is it 300W? Well, if I start a test at 300W and increase it to 310, that’s fine and would not lead to a blowup within 2-3 minutes. If I start at 310 and increase to 320, I could still likely hold it for at least 5 or 6 minutes before blowing up.
have you actually tried this? i.e. 275 for 40 mins, then try to ride 310W for 5mins without “consequences”, and then return to another 15 mins @ 275W ? if you can do that, your FTP is almost certainly not 275. riding FTP+X% for 5 minutes is very different than riding that same level in the middle of a steady-state-achieved FTP workout.
so yes, OK, i was being insufficiently precise in my terminology. if you want something more precise, it would be like this: ride for one hour at a power level where any increase in power after settling in (typically 2-3 minutes for HR to catch up and stabilize) will decrease the final average recorded power if maintained for more than a period of at least 100% of your anerobic interval limit.
my guess is that if you actually tried that test out, you’d find out that either your FTP is actually above 275W or that shifting from 275W upward in the middle of a 1 hour 275W effort is problematic.
Riding at 95% for 60 min is probably the least likely way to increase your ftp (or 60 min peak power). I’d never do that workout. The longest interval that I ever do at full power is 20 min, but that’s after a lot of work mixing below for longer durations and above for shorter.
Really?
Even if you are at a lower winter/spring season fitness?
In my experience, doing significant amounts of 100 - 105+% of FTP work leads to burnout. For me to have consistent, steady, long-term FTP growth, I need to nudge it up from the bottom as long as possible, then when that plateaus, do the real hard work (mentally and physically hard).
I only have 3 seasons of racing with PM, though, and freely admit I still have a lot to learn.
have you actually tried this? i.e. 275 for 40 mins, then try to ride 310W for 5mins without “consequences”, and then return to another 15 mins @ 275W ? if you can do that, your FTP is almost certainly not 275. riding FTP+X% for 5 minutes is very different than riding that same level in the middle of a steady-state-achieved FTP workout.
I agree completely. However that’s not even close to what you said. I think you’re just misinterpreting the concept of ‘maximum average 60min power’. ‘Maxiumum average 60min power’ and ‘maximum 60min power’ are exactly the same thing.
The problem is, riding 250W for 30 minutes and then bumping it up to 300W for 30 minutes, while an average of 275W, is likely not going to be very good as a testing protocol as it isn’t going to have the same physiological effects as simply riding a steady 275W for 1hr. I’m guessing that my ability to complete such a test would be more dependent on my peak 20min power than it would on my FTP, but really, who knows. It’s not relevant as it’s not testing the same thing.
so yes, OK, i was being insufficiently precise in my terminology. if you want something more precise, it would be like this: ride for one hour at a power level where any increase in power after settling in (typically 2-3 minutes for HR to catch up and stabilize) will decrease the final average recorded power if maintained for more than a period of at least 100% of your anerobic interval limit.
my guess is that if you actually tried that test out, you’d find out that either your FTP is actually above 275W or that shifting from 275W upward in the middle of a 1 hour 275W effort is problematic.
I agree with you on this too, but I still don’t see how that means that FTP doesn’t equal CP60. The terms are still interchangeable. It’s the max you can hold for 1hr. It doesn’t matter if you’re throwing in hypothetical spikes or rest periods. In fact, I would guess that a test that just concentrated on ‘average’ with spikes and rest periods, while probably very good for INCREASING one’s FTP, wouldn’t be very accurate as an FTP test.
I’m not knowledgeable enough to say this for sure, but what is clear is that FTP = CP60.
“FTP is the highest power that a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing for approximately one hour. When power exceeds FTP,fatigue will occur much sooner, whereas power just below FTP can be maintained considerably longer.”
“FTP is the highest power that a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing for approximately one hour. When power exceeds FTP,fatigue will occur much sooner, whereas power just below FTP can be maintained considerably longer.”
Precisely. Now it all hangs on the meaning of the word “just”
“FTP is the highest power that a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing for approximately one hour. When power exceeds FTP,fatigue will occur much sooner, whereas power just below FTP can be maintained considerably longer.”
Precisely. Now it all hangs on the meaning of the word “just”
It’s not that hard to ‘just’ look at the data.
90% of FTP can be held by most for 2+ hours
110% of FTP can only be held for ~7-12 mins by most
90% of FTP can be held by most for 2+ hours
110% of FTP can only be held for ~7-12 mins by most
measurement error is problematic here. actually knowing FTP to within 5% is quite an accomplishment. and yes, clearly its going to be asymmetric. It wouldn’t suprise me that if you really knew your FTP level for a given day, you could probably drop even just 1 or 2% and be able to sustain it for more than 2 hours subject to the nutritional issues that Dev mentioned above. The problem is, your FTP is going to vary from day to day by at least that much, and as Dev noted, you probably cannot keep the nutritional situation stable either.
OT, huge fan of your software, BTW!
ah! the real reason my FTP is not where it should be
Let’s say I am training for half and full IM, would I benefit from frequent 60 min rides at 95% FTP. Keep in mind that I also have to do swim and run training and don’t want to be too cooked to do quality in those workouts. In other words, once I get my FTP where I “want it to be”, will my overall training benefit from riding lots of volume close to FTP but not higher, so that I can hit race day and ride at the high end of the FTP range for the race distance and still run well.
Thoughts from others are also appreciated.
Dev
I would also say the most effective way to actually increase FTP would be shorter intervals at 100%-120% of FTP, not a 60 min sustained effort just below FTP. But to get better at maintaining a high effort level, say 90-95 % of FTP, it would be more useful to do longer reps, 20-30 mins, or a single, sustained effort 45-90 mins. And that quality is very useful in especially 1/2-IM. In a full IM, I can’t sustain an effort level more than something like 80% of FTP.
Here’s my current favourite:
10 min. warmupOne rep =
5min. @110% of FTP then 2min. @60% of FTPDo 3 reps per set and 2 sets with 10min. @ L2 between the sets.10 min. cool down
That’s a question better answered by the experts given the longer distance and run after; I’d just be guessing (which I’m doing mostly already for TTs, based on experience).
When it comes to “TT power” I’m always trying to tweak it up. During training some of the long, really tough intervals will crack me, especially if I’m already on the edge. I think it’s more valuable to get quality work in that’s in the shape of more sets at shorter duration. For example, if I can’t hold appropriate power for 2x20 then I’ll adjust mid-workout to 3x15 or 4x10. I don’t really see the point of slogging through 20+ min intervals if power is falling off at the end.
In your case, for longer distance tris I would think there’s some benefit to doing something like you prescribed. When I’m in shape one of my weekly workouts is 3 x 30 at ~90% (I’m very much of a Steady Eddie guy and can pull these off). Then I’ll do 100%+ ftp stuff of shorter duration on another day.
Really, never. As I just posted, I’ll do multiple longer sets at closer to 90% to nudge it from the bottom as you say, but the only time I get close to a 60 min at full gas is our district 40k TT championship.
The 105%+ efforts hurt and can lead to burnout but cycling isn’t an easy sport. Even worse are 4-5 min vo2 max sets, which my body hates and it takes me a long time to recover. So much so that I’ll finish my last set at the top of a climb about 8 miles from my house and then pedal downhill almost the entire way home. Those are one of the tools to get the job done.
Well, that explains why I wasn’t in the break … just looked. 326np for the first 10 mins (with terrible crit like spikes of course), to 266 np drafting for the next hour. That won’t get it done, even with the lower power in that heat/humidity.
That’s a question better answered by the experts given the longer distance and run after; I’d just be guessing (which I’m doing mostly already for TTs, based on experience).
When it comes to “TT power” I’m always trying to tweak it up. During training some of the long, really tough intervals will crack me, especially if I’m already on the edge. I think it’s more valuable to get quality work in that’s in the shape of more sets at shorter duration. For example, if I can’t hold appropriate power for 2x20 then I’ll adjust mid-workout to 3x15 or 4x10. I don’t really see the point of slogging through 20+ min intervals if power is falling off at the end.
In your case, for longer distance tris I would think there’s some benefit to doing something like you prescribed. When I’m in shape one of my weekly workouts is 3 x 30 at ~90% (I’m very much of a Steady Eddie guy and can pull these off). Then I’ll do 100%+ ftp stuff of shorter duration on another day.
Thanks Carl. I guess the other part that longer course triathletes need to consider is where they are in the yearly cycle. Once spring and summer roll around (depending on where you live), and you’re probably doing some racing and also trying to figure out where to get some additional riding volume in, then something has to give…its hard to keep raising FTP, improve 10K run speed, get the longer rides in, work on sharpening swim speed etc etc all at the same time. This is how I’m working it:
Winter: Jan-Mar Bike FTP focus, run base, XC ski racing April: 10 K run speed focus, sustain FTP gains May-June: half IM race specificity swim and bike focus, with some high volume run weeks to get through a summer Ironman, try not to lose too much FTP (which I don’t think should happen)
Question for you Dev - I’m more or less on a similar path as I ski (alpine touring) all winter and don’t have much chance to get out for long rides on the weekend. The majority of my bike time is after dark - i.e. inside on the trainer.
Do you find that your XC skiing helps with that endurance base, making up for the lost LSD sessions on the bike? I’m hoping to jump right back into bike racing around April and while I’m not worried about FTP, I do wonder if I’ll pay a bit in the long road races early on. I’m putting in a lot of long days in the mountains, so I do effectively have a lot of LSD work under my belt already (and will get a lot more in the coming months), it’s just not bike specific.
My weekly longer ride is replaced by a weekly longer ski…or if it is miserably cold, I’ll do a trainer ride Sunday morning focused on intensity followed by a 2-2.5 Hour XC ski later in the day. Otherwise it’s usually a 2.5-4 hour XC ski on Sunday mornings.
Any XC skis during the week are typically 60 minutes in length with a variety of intervals, so the winter bike FTP focus compliments that intensity needed for XC ski races. The nice thing about both bike and XC ski intensity is that you can do a lot of it and recover for the next day. XC ski intervals are all on perceived exertion…typically 1-6 minutes for intervals @ ~ 100-110 % of the effort that I could hold for an hour and a weekly 20 min TT on non race weeks, which would be done at the equivalent of 5K running race intensity/perceived exertion. On a good XC ski week, I’ll get a mid week 2 hour ski in during which I will do my TT, in which case I’d drop one of the harder bike rides
You can see it is quite similar to some of the stuff the guys on this thread are talking about wrt to raising bike FTP. I had my highest wattage trainer rides all year during my XC ski race season and I also had my fastest 10K run time in March the week after my last XC ski race even though I was carrying 145 lbs vs 138 lbs in tri season. I was hoping that as I lost the extra 7 lbs my 10K time would get better, but they stalled and in fact got a touch slower.
