1:42:11 with an IF of 0.96 -- time to bump FTP setting?

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

I did a race today, 40 miles in 1:42:11, and my IF came out at 0.96. I haven't done any FTP testing for about a month -- time to bump the FTP? It was pretty variable, but it was a tough race.

NP 322, AP 262, FTP 335

thanks...

Definitely....... time to retest. :)

Definitely....... time to retest. :)

Why would you say definitely - .96 is definitely not 1.00. I'd hold off a bit and see if you have any other evidence.

Why would you say definitely - .96 is definitely not 1.00. I'd hold off a bit and see if you have any other evidence.I did bust out a new best for 5m power last week during my hill repeats. 4.3% improvement in three weeks (from 418W to 436W).

Why would you say definitely - .96 is definitely not 1.00. I'd hold off a bit and see if you have any other evidence.
I guess one could look for more evidence before retesting, but I don't see the harm in testing anyway since it's been about a month.

Just to clarify, I said it was definitely a cause to retest, not definitely a cause to raise FTP (which I would *not* recommend based on the info provided). FWIW, I tend to think that when a poster asks the forum if they should raise their FTP based on such and such, they really should be asking themselves if the ride warrants a retest.

I did something like this on the KKR last Saturday a 6x20 at 95% FTP but my 3x20s have never averaged higher than 99%. Should I wait until my recently started maintenance L5s (3x4s) raise the ceiling for my 3x20s to over 100% and then do a HOP test?

I guess one could look for more evidence before retesting, but I don't see the harm in testing anyway since it's been about a month.

Just to clarify, I said it was definitely a cause to retest, not definitely a cause to raise FTP (which I would *not* recommend based on the info provided). FWIW, I tend to think that when a poster asks the forum if they should raise their FTP based on such and such, they really should be asking themselves if the ride warrants a retest.

I did something like this on the KKR last Saturday a 6x20 at 95% FTP but my 3x20s have never averaged higher than 99%. Should I wait until my recently started maintenance L5s (3x4s) raise the ceiling for my 3x20s to over 100% and then do a HOP test?Anything that falls in the intensity-duration ballpark of a '5% drop' for a doubling of duration would be in the realm of what I consider 'normal' (ie, 30min at 105%, 1hr at 100%, 2hr at 95%, etc.) from about 15 minutes to ~4hrs. But again, if you think your FTP may have risen to the next step then there's no harm in testing it to be sure, using whatever method you typically use to test/set FTP.

"Training is testing. Testing is Training" -- A. Coggan.

Anything that falls in the intensity-duration ballpark of a '5% drop' for a doubling of duration would be in the realm of what I consider 'normal' (ie, 30min at 105%, 1hr at 100%, 2hr at 95%, etc.) from about 15 minutes to ~4hrs. But again, if you think your FTP may have risen to the next step then there's no harm in testing it to be sure, using whatever method you typically use to test/set FTP.

"Training is testing. Testing is Training" -- A. Coggan.
I'll 2nd these comments but add that if you think/feel your FTP has risen, typically it has :) .

Thanks for the input it just seemed strange compared with last years 6x20 at 88% PB.

I'll 2nd these comments but add that if you think/feel your FTP has risen, typically it has :) .

Thanks everyone. I'll work in some testing in the next week.

Just to clarify, I said it was definitely a cause to retest, not definitely a cause to raise FTP (which I would *not* recommend based on the info provided).Thanks for the clarification.

Just to clarify, I said it was definitely a cause to retest, not definitely a cause to raise FTP (which I would *not* recommend based on the info provided).

Oops, misread what you wrote. I definitely agree with this statement.

Oops, misread what you wrote. I definitely agree with this statement.
I was trying to be cute. It obviously backfired. :o

I was trying to be cute. It obviously backfired. :o

Nah...some of us are just too slow to pick up on such suddle (I don't even know how to spell subtle) humor. :o

Nah...some of us are just too slow to pick up on such suddle (I don't even know how to spell subtle) humor. :oOr humour :p

Or humour :p
I actually disagree with most of the guys in here - An IF of 0.96 in 1:42 hours sounds like you did a hard race to me - but your FTP isn't necessarily higher than 335 watts... I have done looong stretches of time in races close to FTP in terms of normalized watts where I thought my FTP had risen - but didn't seem to when I tested later on...

The keywords are normalized watts and an IF BELOW 1.00 for over an hour in a race. Many slow-twitch guys will actually be able to ride very close to their FTP for a long time in terms of normalized watts in a race when going "all out" - or that is my experience anyway...
If I were you, I would look closer at the file: What is your peak 1 hour normalized power? If it is below 335 watts I do not see any sign of an increased FTP - sorry!

I actually disagree with most of the guys in here - An IF of 0.96 in 1:42 hours sounds like you did a hard race to me - but your FTP isn't necessarily higher than 335 watts... I have done looong stretches of time in races close to FTP in terms of normalized watts where I thought my FTP had risen - but didn't seem to when I tested later on...

The keywords are normalized watts and an IF BELOW 1.00 for over an hour in a race. Many slow-twitch guys will actually be able to ride very close to their FTP for a long time in terms of normalized watts in a race when going "all out" - or that is my experience anyway...
If I were you, I would look closer at the file: What is your peak 1 hour normalized power? If it is below 335 watts I do not see any sign of an increased FTP - sorry!I haven't done any hard hour-long rides for comaparison. I use Monod to predict FTP generally.

Yesterday I broke out the aggressive TT position for the first time in three months. I did an 8-mile TT and broke my best from three weeks ago (which was in my road position) by 5W. I didn't feel strong in the TT position, and I'm positive I can go another 5-10W higher in my road position, so I'll get that tested maybe next week along with a 5 and 10m test. It's looking like my estimated FTP's going to fall in the 345-350W range.

I've got another month before I have to do any TTs, so I'll just hit the TT position a couple times a week and hope the power comes up a bit.