Newbie question about FTP

It's all in the book. The FTP test is a 20 minute time trial, the others are done separately. Page 50 outlines the FTP, the power profile test is p66. You don't have to do a 60min test as you take your 20min value and subtract 5% to get what is accepted to be the 60min value.

Once you've tested work out your zones. The CyclingPeaks website explains it all and provides a link to a spreadsheet calculator to work out zones. Go to http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/

It's the same as in the book (same brains behind both).

It's best to do the test on the road on a flat or slightly uphill stretch, as it's mentally easier to hurt yourself on the road than on a trainer.

Good luck, and push hard in your test! :eek:

grahamspringett said:

It's all in the book. The FTP test is a 20 minute time trial, the others are done separately. Page 50 outlines the FTP, the power profile test is p66. You don't have to do a 60min test as you take your 20min value and subtract 5% to get what is accepted to be the 60min value.

Once you've tested work out your zones. The CyclingPeaks website explains it all and provides a link to a spreadsheet calculator to work out zones. Go to cyclingpeakssoftware.compower411Open ↗

It's the same as in the book (same brains behind both).

It's best to do the test on the road on a flat or slightly uphill stretch, as it's mentally easier to hurt yourself on the road than on a trainer.

Good luck, and push hard in your test! :eek:

OK...so...you take the average power for the 20 minutes and subtract 5%...I see that. It also says to perform the warm up, a couple of short efforts...then a 5 minute all out effort followed by 10 minutes at 65% HR.

So...then the 20 minute effort starts...I don't have hills that last that long (unless I go to the mountains) so I assume that as long as I keep my effort at near max over rolling terrain, I can get a decent avg power to figure this out. So...if that is the case...do I go as hard as I can for 20 minutes and not even look at speed/hr/power?

Just trying to figure out the best method.

Thanks.

bverdon said:

.....Just trying to figure out the best method. ....

Then take a look at this piece by Andy: lists.topica.commessage.htmlOpen ↗

Notice the 20 minutes *0.95 doesn't make the list. Personally I just track the power I can regularly hold for my long (20 to 30 minute) intervals(#6 out of 7). I also do periodic Monod CP tests and look at power histogram step downs as well as actual TT data but it's just easiest to keep track of long intervals. It gets back to the training is testing idea and avoids dedicated test days.

If 20 minutes * 0.95 works for you, then great. But there are other ways to get a good FTP estimate and 0.95 doesn't work for everyone(Monod results put me closer to 0.98 which doesn't sound like a big difference but results in about a 10 watt difference in power at FTP).

-Dave

daveryanwyoming said:

Then take a look at this piece by Andy: lists.topica.commessage.htmlOpen ↗

Notice the 20 minutes *0.95 doesn't make the list. Personally I just track the power I can regularly hold for my long (20 to 30 minute) intervals(#6 out of 7). I also do periodic Monod CP tests and look at power histogram step downs as well as actual TT data but it's just easiest to keep track of long intervals. It gets back to the training is testing idea and avoids dedicated test days.

If 20 minutes * 0.95 works for you, then great. But there are other ways to get a good FTP estimate and 0.95 doesn't work for everyone(Monod results put me closer to 0.98 which doesn't sound like a big difference but results in about a 10 watt difference in power at FTP).

-Dave

Thanks Dave. I guess what I don't understand is, how can you determine FTP from a ride file? Per the link you provided...that was the best way to determine FTP. I mean...wouldn't it have to be a specific ride file? So...I went for an easy spin...looked at a ride file...now what? See what I mean? I think it has to have more structure...something you can reproduce.

I would have to imagine that I would have to actually plan an all out 20 minute interval to determine this...as the previous post...and go with an avarage wattage reading...and multiply by 95%...that one makes the most sense to me.

bverdon said:

Thanks Dave. I guess what I don't understand is, how can you determine FTP from a ride file? Per the link you provided...that was the best way to determine FTP. I mean...wouldn't it have to be a specific ride file? So...I went for an easy spin...looked at a ride file...now what? See what I mean? I think it has to have more structure...something you can reproduce.

I would have to imagine that I would have to actually plan an all out 20 minute interval to determine this...as the previous post...and go with an avarage wattage reading...and multiply by 95%...that one makes the most sense to me.

For the time being, that will be close enough until you gather several month's of data and experience and begin to find (and understand) the method that best suits your riding style / physiological makeup / terrain / time avail. etc.

As an example though of why it not always the best method, I have recently had an athlete who completed both a 1 hr and 16km TT efforts inside of 2 weeks. Their ratio of 1hr MMNP : 16km TT NP was 99% (and in AP terms 97%). OK there were a few reasons for that but therein lies the fun - working out why.

bverdon said:

Thanks Dave. I guess what I don't understand is, how can you determine FTP from a ride file? Per the link you provided...that was the best way to determine FTP.

Actually, you're reading that backwards, the list is given in order of increasing accuracy. The gold standard is to actually ride a time trial that takes approximately an hour on a well rested, highly motivated day. Inspection of a single ride file ranks number 7 in terms of estimation accuracy.

Quoted post said:

... I mean...wouldn't it have to be a specific ride file? So...I went for an easy spin...looked at a ride file...now what? See what I mean? I think it has to have more structure...something you can reproduce.

Yep, you can't derive much info from a ride that was never intended to take you to or beyond your FTP. That's part of the reason inspection of multiple ride files is a better estimate, better chance of pushing yourself up to and beyond FTP during a lot of rides, at least for a competitive cyclist. But the unstated assumption in ride files is that you push yourself pretty hard. It's in the book, but basically competitive cyclists tend to push themselves pretty hard in a lot of situations, taking a look at the power distribution histogram and noticing any sharp steps down on the high side of the curve can give you clues to your current FTP. But you're right, you can't just noodle around the neighborhood and expect your FTP to jump out of your power data.

Quoted post said:

I would have to imagine that I would have to actually plan an all out 20 minute interval to determine this...as the previous post...and go with an avarage wattage reading...and multiply by 95%...that one makes the most sense to me.

Cool, whatever works for you. As Alex points out it's plenty accurate especially as you first get started. But don't dismiss tracking your regular long intervals, it's easier as you're presumably going to do those intervals anyway and it helps maximize training by minimizing dedicated FTP testing days. And again, it's offered as the second best way to estimate your FTP right behind a dedicated hour long time trial. And that's coming from the coauthor of the book who is well aware of the other author's 20 minute *0.95 method and chose not to include it in his top 7 list.
-Dave