2008 Ftp?

Did my testing this morning...20' CP up to 276 (from 248 in early september[img]cyclingforums.comeek.gifOpen ↗[/img]) and weight down almost 1kg in the last few weeks.

KP....................275W.......49kg.......5.61W/kg 4th place finisher womens olympic MTB
Squint...............332W.......63.5 kg...5.22 W/kg
Markster............352W.......69kg......5.10 W/kg (69min TT @ 347W (5ºC)) (105min TT @ 330W)
BullGod...............340W (KK)69kg......4.9W/Kg (elite, Benelux)
Piotr..................267W.......55kg......4.85W/kg (M35+, Cat III, Utah)
PSUcycling..........322W.......67kg......4.80w/kg (26,cat 1,Tx)
MintID................370W.......77.5kg....4.78W/kg (Beginner Class)
rmur(Mar.08).......410W.......86kg......4.77 W/kg (M45-49, PT Pro, from long L4 intervals)
Midbunchlurker....290w........61.5kg....4.72W/Kg (35-39, Cape Town, SA)
PaulMD...............317w.......67.5kg....4.71w/kg (recreational rider, training for La Marmotte)
pledac................312W.......67.5kg....4.62W/kg (39, PT Pro, from 0.93*20MMP)
esammuli............302W.......66.4kg.....4.55 W/kg (22, Cat III, SoCal)
rmur(Feb.08).......395W.......87kg......4.54 W/kg (M45-49, PT Pro, from long L4 intervals)
doctorSpoc.........250W.......55kg......4.5W/kg (M1/MB Ontario)
iliveonnitro...........290W........67kg.....4.33W/kg (21, cat3, IL)
tehpr3chr............315W......73kg.......4.3W/Kg (Cat III, GA)
Tyson.................315W......73kg.......4.3W/Kg (Sillyoldtwit)
strader...............285W.......66.5kg....4.28W/kg (Cat V, Sport MTB)
bbrauer..............290W.......68kg.......4.26W/kg
waterrockets.......345W.......80.9kg....4.26W/kg (M35+ road, Austin (Cat III))
Hammertoe.........256W.......61.2kg....4.18W/kg (middle aged, well marbled, hill climber)
Ade Merckx.........300W (KK)72kg.......4.16W/Kg (UK 3rd cat)
tonyzackery........365W.......88kg.......4.15W/kg (Cat4, 1hr+ L4 climbs on trainer)
grahamspringett.....268W.....65kg.......4.12W/kg (Masters 2, looking forward to 32km mountain climb in stage race)
Miscreant............260W.......63.5kg....4.09W/kg (Cat 5,new to racing)
Sgrundy..............263W.......64.3kg......4.09W/kg (Cat 4, NYC, 20'MMP * 0.95)
Rob Powell............305W......74.8kg....4.08W/kg (Welsh 2nd Cat, 20.04 for 10m TT)
bigwillie013........290W.....72kg......4.03W/kg beginner in racing loosing some fitness and gaining weight :o wrong way, eh?
bigbadwoulfe.......293W.......72.0kg....4.02W/kg (Over estimated my FTP. 320 down to this level. 3x20 @305 W used monod sheet)
ctgt...................270W.......70kg.......3.94W/kg (M2 Ontario, previously S4, mostly Citizen MTB)
Betulla ...............269W.......70kg......3.85W/kg (Cat V, Ohio, training for the 2008 Etape)
mikeyp123...........260W.......67.5kg.....3.85W/kg (Cat 5, SoCal, 32, racer noob, 230 -> 260 so far this season)
No1kung1............294W.......77kg.......3.82W/kg (Cat 3, NYC)
otb4evr...............375W.......99kg......3.79w/kg (Cat3, 40+, 40k @ 56:51 - 348 AP on TT bike)
Simone...............226W.......60,7kg... 3.72 W/kg (Simone@Italy, 30, rides for fun)
ruleof72..............272W.......74kg.......3.67W/kg (almost 44, former bad crit racer, likes to climb)
artemidorus.........315W.......86kg.......3.66W/kg (commuter, 38, rides for fun)
Millzebub.............310W.......86kg......3.6W/kg (Cat 5, new racer, 36, oakland, ca)
catlike.................232W.......65kg......3.57W/kg (2nd year of training, M32)
kopride................283W.......79.5kg...3.55 W/kg (Weekend Warrior, Philly)
dkrenik................260W......78.9kg.....3.3W/kg (4erver4, M45+, Colorado)
RJBTrek...............243W.......85kg.......2.86W/kg (Cat 5, Chicago, 47, new to racing)
Swampy..............233W.......88.5Kg....2.63W/kg (Numpty)
Alex Simmons.......240W.......92kg.......2.61W/kg (MAP 355W, 10-mile TT 248W, SRM, M40+ track enduro, acquired LBK amputee in 2007)
Fergie.................228W.......92kg.......2.47W/kg (M1 NZ, fat rider, underweight coach, MAP 367W)
Felt_Rider...........190W.........78kg......2.43W/kg (club rider)

If I based mine off .95 of 20min then I think it would be higher than it really is. Note my MAP is higher than Alex and we both ride track so would have a well developed anaerobic system. Highest mine has been for a 60min effort is 260 and I am dropping weight. About 80 watts behind where I was 20 years ago riding Cat 1 in NZ which like Cat2 in US.

fergie said:

If I based mine off .95 of 20min then I think it would be higher than it really is. Note my MAP is higher than Alex and we both ride track so would have a well developed anaerobic system. Highest mine has been for a 60min effort is 260 and I am dropping weight. About 80 watts behind where I was 20 years ago riding Cat 1 in NZ which like Cat2 in US.

Having said that, the ratio of my MAP to TT power is at the other end of the spectrum than it was before my crash.

On my most recent test I had an FTP:MAP ratio of 240:355 watts = 67.6% which is somewhat below the typical range of 72-77%.

Before my accident, my last tested ratios were 315:399 watts = 78.9% although I believe at the time of that FTP my MAP was actually higher than that (I hadn't had a recent test - a pesky crash got in the way when I was due).

In this case low or high does not mean good or bad, it just is what it is and is a means to help determine your current physiological profile and what the training focus needs to be.

Anyway, Fergie's main point is, it is often helpful to have more than one data point or indicator as reference to validate an FTP number.

For me, since the tests, the TT intervals I'm doing are a solid validation.

Alex Simmons said:

Having said that, the ratio of my MAP to TT power is at the other end of the spectrum than it was before my crash.

On my most recent test I had an FTP:MAP ratio of 240:355 watts = 67.6% which is somewhat below the typical range of 72-77%.

Before my accident, my last tested ratios were 315:399 watts = 78.9% although I believe at the time of that FTP my MAP was actually higher than that (I hadn't had a recent test - a pesky crash got in the way when I was due).

In this case low or high does not mean good or bad, it just is what it is and is a means to help determine your current physiological profile and what the training focus needs to be.

Anyway, Fergie's main point is, it is often helpful to have more than one data point or indicator as reference to validate an FTP number.

For me, since the tests, the TT intervals I'm doing are a solid validation.

Fortunately, I have the anaerobic capacity of a small child.[img]cyclingforums.combiggrin.gifOpen ↗[/img]

Seriously though, I realize that figure may be a bit high (or low). What's important to me though is that I have a consistent way of estimating FTP. For a while I used a more 'interpretive' approach, looking at ride files from my L4 intervals and some other figures. But it was a very haphazard way of estimating FTP, and I decided I needed to choose a more defined method. Right now, since almost all of my training is focused on improving FTP, it seems like a reasonable assumption that any increase in 20'MMP is attributable to an increase in threshold. Also, the 263 figure seems consistent with my hardest L4 interval (30' @267 before my recovery week) and the 'big step down' in my power distribution chart.

However, I take your point. In the next few weeks I'll have some more data to work with.

sgrundy said:

What's important to me though is that I have a consistent way of estimating FTP.

This is quite important. It's hard to compare athletes just on power to weight. So much more determines the result of racing in terms of power supply and demands of the sport. A consistent method of determining your FTP at least allows you to monitor your progress.

I went for an "hour of power" last night to try and raise my miserable FTP. FAIL. At least I am droping weight and should dip below 90kg for the first time in a while by the end of next week.

Still have to do 6 minute and 12 minute tests for this month (Tuesday probably) but so far the first test of the month was somewhat of a surprise. Thursdays training session was just a 20 minute ride with the monitor hidden going off PE and that was at ~280watts for the last 10 minutes. No training yesterday - but my kid did have a birthday party with 30 other kids and 2 hours in a place with a dozen or so bouncehouses.... maybe not the idea "rest day" LOL

20minute test 306watts and still some gas left in the tank. The last 3 minutes were at 318watts, it was hard but something I could have held for at least 5 minutes if required. On the other hand the 306 felt hard but I could have kept that going for quite a lot longer. I think I may go for 320 watts of the 6 minute test and if still OK carry it on either until I gring to a halt or keep going for the full 12...

The gearing was 'odd' 50x14 was too small for ~320 but 50x13 was a bit of a push and required concentration to keep the pedalling smooth. As with the ~320watt effort, I could have felt a little more relaxed with something ever so slightly bigger for the 306 watt effort. Maybe a 52 ring could be usefull but maybe I'm splitting hairs at this point...

After 15 minute 'rest' I did a 1 minute test and somewhat fluffed it. I forgot to up the resistance on the trainer as I run out of revs in 50x12. I'm still uncomfortable with anything over 95rpm. 100+rpm is completely foreign territory. Average a rather iffy 465watts.

Adding in the 306 watts for the 6 and 12 minute tests (as the average wattage was higher for the 20minute test today than the 6 and 12 from a couple of weeks ago)

So for now my test results @192lbs (87.3Kg) for the Monod spreadsheet:

1. 465 - as measured
6. 306
12. 306
20. 306 - as measured.

Which gives, from the spreadsheet a 60minute average wattage of 301watts (3.45 W/Kg). I'll update when the two other tests are done. No point in updating until I have all the numbers.

Big observations from the test. I'm utilizing my hamstrings and the muscles at the very top of the front of the thighs (what are those called?) alot more. Little to no pain or strain in the quads within 12" of the knee. I've never pedalled like this before - especially under stress. For the first time ever my glutes felt somewhat sore after a sub two hour ride. The only thing I can attribute this too is training on Powercranks as during 12 years of racing I never pedalled this way.

Test was done with cranks in 'fixed' mode in order to compare with the previous test. I feel that I could have gone faster with them in regular PC mode as I seem to be more relaxed but that's subjective for now as (a) I haven't tested it and (b) I have no desire to do so right now.

Other points to note. Since I only have one "test" result posted I'm changing protocol from just using a 20 minute effort and mutiplying by 0.93, instead using the Monod spreadsheet as it will force me to test at shorter efforts and will also give me some numbers to work from for longer training sessions plus it 'should' be a little more accurate.

I noticed Andy's comments regarding best results being obtained with results from 3 to 20 minutes, thus seemingly negating the 1 minute test. Would 3, 6, 12 and 20 be best or just 3, 12 and 20.... or maybe something else?

When "the honeymoon period" of getting back into training and rapid power increase seems to end then I may consider doing so. For now it's a continuation of smashing my skull against a old dry stone wall...

Comments welcome.

swampy1970 said:

I noticed Andy's comments regarding best results being obtained with results from 3 to 20 minutes, thus seemingly negating the 1 minute test. Would 3, 6, 12 and 20 be best or just 3, 12 and 20.... or maybe something else?

Two really solid tests are sufficient, one at 5-6 minutes and another at 20-25 minutes. Easier to pick a power that you expect to be sustainable for about that long and and go 'til you blow, noting the time and average power. No great need to add more tests, certainly no value if they are not really solid tests.

I'd suggest using the CP value and not the predicted 60-min power as your FTP estimate.

Use the same protocol for the tests each time.

If you are going to bother doing 4 individual tests in one week (personally I wouldn't recommend it - these might be short but as any track TT or pursuit rider knows, they do take it out of you), may as well just do a one hour TT and be done with it. :p

Alex Simmons said:

Two really solid tests are sufficient, one at 5-6 minutes and another at 20-25 minutes. Easier to pick a power that you expect to be sustainable for about that long and and go 'til you blow, noting the time and average power. No great need to add more tests, certainly no value if they are not really solid tests.

I'd suggest using the CP value and not the predicted 60-min power as your FTP estimate.

Use the same protocol for the tests each time.

If you are going to bother doing 4 individual tests in one week (personally I wouldn't recommend it - these might be short but as any track TT or pursuit rider knows, they do take it out of you), may as well just do a one hour TT and be done with it. :p

The CP value? The only CP value I see is 3.4. 😕 just above AWR and R2. Please enlighten me as I think the efforts this afternoon may have taken a little more out of me than I first though. LOL

Part of the problem that I had is that I don't know what power I can ride at when "really motivated" given that I'm just getting back into the swing of things yet again after many months off and just having bought a power meter. Only pure luck would give the 'perfect' ride at the momement. Three weeks ago 260 watts for 20 minutes was a near apocolyptical effort - drool 'n puke territory. Last week 280 and I could feel it - hard but doable... I only decided to try 300+ towards the end of the warm up today. I don't think I'm going to be able to nail a solid figure for another week or so when I expect things to plateau finally. I could never have thought that I'd be finishing the test with almost 320watts. I zero'd before the test and checked torque against the values I got in the middle of last week. Just like the values that Analytical Cyling was giving me when hill climbing a while back, I still don't believe these numbers to be accurate.

As I said, as I only had one prior test and plan on doing many more. It seemed as though Monod would provide a better way than just chosing .93 or .95 of a 20 minute test, so I'd use that from now on. To be honest that first test was just a baseline from nothing a best guess effort that was actually pretty well paced with only the last few minutes of sheer hell. This 20 minute test was a fair bit more civilized and didn't end in near collapse and drool down my face....

If using the Monod spreadsheet isn't the way to go when compare to the .9x multiplier from a 20 minute test then I'd appreciate comments.

I was thinking of just carrying on for an hour but too be honest those Cannondale bib shorts dont lend themselves for a 1 hour seated effort and the Castelli shorts (non bib) are too tight around the ol gut for extended (>20minutes) effort. They were great at 175lbs - 192lbs and they're tight. I had to stick my ol San Marco Regal saddle back on the bike as I now exceed the weight limit on the uber comfy Specialized Toupe but the Regal's padding, a 1990 vintage, is somewhat harder than it once was. When I lose some weight and get the "comfy" back then that'll be an option.

What was funny about today was it's been the first time in over a decade that I inadvertantly ended up sitting in a quiet spot just relaxing and concentrating prior to the test. I didn't mean too either... it just happened. Spaced out for a test - who'da thunk it? The Chinese could have dropped bombs on Travis Airforce Base which is about 5 miles away and I wouldn't have known about it until either I saw it on the news or the blast wave took the house out. 😄

swampy1970 said:

The CP value? The only CP value I see is 3.4. 😕 just above AWR and R2. Please enlighten me as I think the efforts this afternoon may have taken a little more out of me than I first though. LOL

Part of the problem that I had is that I don't know what power I can ride at when "really motivated" given that I'm just getting back into the swing of things yet again after many months off and just having bought a power meter. Only pure luck would give the 'perfect' ride at the momement. Three weeks ago 260 watts for 20 minutes was a near apocolyptical effort - drool 'n puke territory. Last week 280 and I could feel it - hard but doable... I only decided to try 300+ towards the end of the warm up today. I don't think I'm going to be able to nail a solid figure for another week or so when I expect things to plateau finally. I could never have thought that I'd be finishing the test with almost 320watts. I zero'd before the test and checked torque against the values I got in the middle of last week. Just like the values that Analytical Cyling was giving me when hill climbing a while back, I still don't believe these numbers to be accurate.

As I said, as I only had one prior test and plan on doing many more. It seemed as though Monod would provide a better way than just chosing .93 or .95 of a 20 minute test, so I'd use that from now on. To be honest that first test was just a baseline from nothing a best guess effort that was actually pretty well paced with only the last few minutes of sheer hell. This 20 minute test was a fair bit more civilized and didn't end in near collapse and drool down my face....

If using the Monod spreadsheet isn't the way to go when compare to the .9x multiplier from a 20 minute test then I'd appreciate comments.

I was thinking of just carrying on for an hour but too be honest those Cannondale bib shorts dont lend themselves for a 1 hour seated effort and the Castelli shorts (non bib) are too tight around the ol gut for extended (>20minutes) effort. They were great at 175lbs - 192lbs and they're tight. I had to stick my ol San Marco Regal saddle back on the bike as I now exceed the weight limit on the uber comfy Specialized Toupe but the Regal's padding, a 1990 vintage, is somewhat harder than it once was. When I lose some weight and get the "comfy" back then that'll be an option.

What was funny about today was it's been the first time in over a decade that I inadvertantly ended up sitting in a quiet spot just relaxing and concentrating prior to the test. I didn't mean too either... it just happened. Spaced out for a test - who'da thunk it? The Chinese could have dropped bombs on Travis Airforce Base which is about 5 miles away and I wouldn't have known about it until either I saw it on the news or the blast wave took the house out. 😄

once you determine FTP "accurately" what good use are you going to put it to? how will this number be more advantageous to you than say just looking at 20min power?

swampy1970 said:

The CP value? The only CP value I see is 3.4. 😕 just above AWR and R2. Please enlighten me

It's a per kg number, so multiply it by your mass in kg and that will be your CP.

swampy1970 said:

I think the efforts this afternoon may have taken a little more out of me than I first though. LOL

Which is essentially what I was saying about attempting to get four high quality maximal efforts done for this. They are short but they take it out of you, hence cutting down the number of tests. As long as they are good honest maximal efforts, then two data points can be enough.

swampy1970 said:

Part of the problem that I had is that I don't know what power I can ride at when "really motivated" given that I'm just getting back into the swing of things yet again after many months off and just having bought a power meter.

Which is what makes doing MAP tests so handy, since the wattage just keeps going up until you can't do it anymore. No need to worry about pacing it right, the pacing is dictated as part of the protocol.

It is normal when doing tests for the first time to not be real sure how hard to go but after a while, you get a bit of a better feel for it. For some rider's they are better off not knowing what the meter is reading and to just go for it.

doctorSpoc said:

once you determine FTP "accurately" what good use are you going to put it to? how will this number be more advantageous to you than say just looking at 20min power?

Presumably if one is going to utilise the Training Stress Score metric and all that flows from it, then it helps to use a solid methodology by which to arrive at an FTP number.

While 20-min MMP is an excellent marker of aerobic fitness, its ratio relative to FTP is not necessarily static, so it will matter more (or less) depending on the nature of a rider's target events.

Yes! A rest day then an hour of power after work and a new FTP moving me up a few places!!! 20min power was 265watts so perhaps I should do 95% of that (251watts)😄

KP....................275W.......49kg.......5.61W/kg 4th place finisher womens olympic MTB
Squint...............332W.......63.5 kg...5.22 W/kg
Markster............352W.......69kg......5.10 W/kg (69min TT @ 347W (5ºC)) (105min TT @ 330W)
BullGod...............340W (KK)69kg......4.9W/Kg (elite, Benelux)
Piotr..................267W.......55kg......4.85W/kg (M35+, Cat III, Utah)
PSUcycling..........322W.......67kg......4.80w/kg (26,cat 1,Tx)
MintID................370W.......77.5kg....4.78W/kg (Beginner Class)
rmur(Mar.08).......410W.......86kg......4.77 W/kg (M45-49, PT Pro, from long L4 intervals)
Midbunchlurker....290w........61.5kg....4.72W/Kg (35-39, Cape Town, SA)
PaulMD...............317w.......67.5kg....4.71w/kg (recreational rider, training for La Marmotte)
pledac................312W.......67.5kg....4.62W/kg (39, PT Pro, from 0.93*20MMP)
esammuli............302W.......66.4kg.....4.55 W/kg (22, Cat III, SoCal)
rmur(Feb.08).......395W.......87kg......4.54 W/kg (M45-49, PT Pro, from long L4 intervals)
doctorSpoc.........250W.......55kg......4.5W/kg (M1/MB Ontario)
iliveonnitro...........290W........67kg.....4.33W/kg (21, cat3, IL)
tehpr3chr............315W......73kg.......4.3W/Kg (Cat III, GA)
Tyson.................315W......73kg.......4.3W/Kg (Sillyoldtwit)
strader...............285W.......66.5kg....4.28W/kg (Cat V, Sport MTB)
bbrauer..............290W.......68kg.......4.26W/kg
waterrockets.......345W.......80.9kg....4.26W/kg (M35+ road, Austin (Cat III))
Hammertoe.........256W.......61.2kg....4.18W/kg (middle aged, well marbled, hill climber)
Ade Merckx.........300W (KK)72kg.......4.16W/Kg (UK 3rd cat)
tonyzackery........365W.......88kg.......4.15W/kg (Cat4, 1hr+ L4 climbs on trainer)
grahamspringett.....268W.....65kg.......4.12W/kg (Masters 2, looking forward to 32km mountain climb in stage race)
Miscreant............260W.......63.5kg....4.09W/kg (Cat 5,new to racing)
Sgrundy..............263W.......64.3kg......4.09W/kg (Cat 4, NYC, 20'MMP * 0.95)
Rob Powell............305W......74.8kg....4.08W/kg (Welsh 2nd Cat, 20.04 for 10m TT)
bigwillie013........290W.....72kg......4.03W/kg beginner in racing loosing some fitness and gaining weight [img]cyclingforums.comredface.gifOpen ↗[/img] wrong way, eh?
bigbadwoulfe.......293W.......72.0kg....4.02W/kg (Over estimated my FTP. 320 down to this level. 3x20 @305 W used monod sheet)
ctgt...................270W.......70kg.......3.94W/kg (M2 Ontario, previously S4, mostly Citizen MTB)
Betulla ...............269W.......70kg......3.85W/kg (Cat V, Ohio, training for the 2008 Etape)
mikeyp123...........260W.......67.5kg.....3.85W/kg (Cat 5, SoCal, 32, racer noob, 230 -> 260 so far this season)
No1kung1............294W.......77kg.......3.82W/kg (Cat 3, NYC)
otb4evr...............375W.......99kg......3.79w/kg (Cat3, 40+, 40k @ 56:51 - 348 AP on TT bike)
Simone...............226W.......60,7kg... 3.72 W/kg (Simone@Italy, 30, rides for fun)
ruleof72..............272W.......74kg.......3.67W/kg (almost 44, former bad crit racer, likes to climb)
artemidorus.........315W.......86kg.......3.66W/kg (commuter, 38, rides for fun)
Millzebub.............310W.......86kg......3.6W/kg (Cat 5, new racer, 36, oakland, ca)
catlike.................232W.......65kg......3.57W/kg (2nd year of training, M32)
kopride................283W.......79.5kg...3.55 W/kg (Weekend Warrior, Philly)
dkrenik................260W......78.9kg.....3.3W/kg (4erver4, M45+, Colorado)
RJBTrek...............243W.......85kg.......2.86W/kg (Cat 5, Chicago, 47, new to racing)
Fergie.................241W.......91kg.......2.64W/kg (37yrs, M1 NZ, fat rider, underweight coach, MAP 367W)
Swampy..............233W.......88.5Kg....2.63W/kg (Numpty)
Alex Simmons.......240W.......92kg.......2.61W/kg (MAP 355W, 10-mile TT 248W, SRM, M40+ track enduro, acquired LBK amputee in 2007)
Felt_Rider...........190W.........78kg......2.43W/kg (club rider)

fergie said:

Yes! A rest day then an hour of power after work and a new FTP moving me up a few places!!! 20min power was 265watts so perhaps I should do 95% of that (251watts)😄
Fergie.................241W.......91kg.......2.64W/kg (37yrs, M1 NZ, fat rider, underweight coach, MAP 367W)
Swampy..............233W.......88.5Kg....2.63W/kg (Numpty)
Alex Simmons.......240W.......92kg.......2.61W/kg (MAP 355W, 10-mile TT 248W, SRM, M40+ track enduro, acquired LBK amputee in 2007)

Well it's a close race, too early to call.

The early favourite is Swampy with all the hormones that flow from his status as a power virgin. With his magic weapon at his side, those trusty light sabre cranks, the force is strong with him.

Fergie has sprung to the lead but his record as a stayer over last couple of years has been questionable. Can he go the distance?

Alex has prior form but recent troublesome injuries might slow him down. He needs a fast track to perform. Secret indoor trainer methods guided by head trainer Stern, one can never discount a horse from the successful RST stables.

Sorry - it's Melbourne Cup Day here tomorrow :p

Ah gawd not another challenge:eek:

Alex Simmons said:

Well it's a close race, too early to call.

The early favourite is Swampy with all the hormones that flow from his status as a power virgin. With his magic weapon at his side, those trusty light sabre cranks, the force is strong with him.

Fergie has sprung to the lead but his record as a stayer over last couple of years has been questionable. Can he go the distance?

Alex has prior form but recent troublesome injuries might slow him down. He needs a fast track to perform. Secret indoor trainer methods guided by head trainer Stern, one can never discount a horse from the successful RST stables.

Sorry - it's Melbourne Cup Day here tomorrow :p

What are the odds, and are any of the bookmakers taking action on punters from the states?

Alex Simmons said:

Presumably if one is going to utilise the Training Stress Score metric and all that flows from it, then it helps to use a solid methodology by which to arrive at an FTP number.

While 20-min MMP is an excellent marker of aerobic fitness, its ratio relative to FTP is not necessarily static, so it will matter more (or less) depending on the nature of a rider's target events.

i'm talking from a purely practical sense... how will this change how i train? will i run my interval training any differently as a result of knowing this number to this degree of accuracy? will the error associated with roughly guesstimating the number based on 20min power have any significant change in TSS scores? if there is a significant degree of error, but it is consistent and effects TSS scores in a consistent manner, won't one be able to glean the same useful info from changes in one's performance manager chart?

i've got to be honest... unless your thing is doing 1hr TTs... i see all this FTP fascination as a colossal waste of time... a rough guesstimate of FTP is all that is required for entry in performance manager... it doesn't inform one as to how to run one's training... change in 20min power is just a valid an indicator/test of change in fitness (imo i'd say it's likely an even better all round indicator of road racing fitness) and everyone does 20min - 30min intervals all the time in their training so it's also a more reasonable test from a practical standpoint as it doesn't interrupt one's regular training.. sure use monod.. but at the end of the day... knowing 1hr power to the nth degree of accuracy is not all it's cracked up to be...

the biggest "practical" use i see for calculating and testing FTP... aka, 1hr power, is so one can enter the giant pissing contest that it the FTP Thread on Cycling Forums... other than that, don't waste your time... from a practical sense it's not going to change or inform what you do when you get out there on the road training or racing... so don't sweat it.

doctorSpoc said:

the biggest "practical" use i see for calculating and testing FTP... aka, 1hr power, is so one can enter the giant pissing contest that it the FTP Thread on Cycling Forums... other than that, don't waste your time... from a practical sense it's not going to change or inform what you do when you get out there on the road training or racing... so don't sweat it.

I thought the whole purpose of determining FTP was to know with some certainty when you started entering "match burning" territory and when you were operating at or right below LT, or exercise intensity at which lactate begins to accumulate in a person's blood. If you are entering races that are only 20 minutes or less, it might not be helpful to know FTP for an hour. But, if you are racing for anything longer than 40 minutes, why wouldn't you want to know whether you are under or over threshold at any given time. I would agree with you that a person with a lower threshold, but better 20 minute power, may very well outperform a rider with a higher threshold and lower 20 minute power, in certain types of races. Ultimately, the guy that crosses the finish line first is the winner. But I could imagine that you could achieve a higher 20 minute power by spending a significant proportion of the time above LT, which might not help you in a 60 minute race where you spent too much time above LT at an unsustainable pace.

Having actually been a participant in a giant pissing contest in my youth, I believe it was at the end of a pub crawl, I can tell you that the FTP Thread is nothing like that contest, which involved filling liter bottles with [censored], and then measuring total volume.

FTP is vital for setting training zones, that's all.

And yes, NP and IF and TSS that flow from it are useful to tell you what you did and when to rest.

kopride said:

Having actually been a participant in a giant pissing contest in my youth, I believe it was at the end of a pub crawl, I can tell you that the FTP Thread is nothing like that contest, which involved filling liter bottles with [censored], and then measuring total volume.

Your bottles were small then. :p

Alex Simmons said:

Your bottles were small then. :p

My bottle only involved 20 minutes of drinking. The contest took estimates, in my case, 20 minutes of pissing/drinking, to estimate the volume that would be achieved in one hour using at least 7 different ways of estimating bladder threshold. I complained vigorously, that 20 minutes was not a true reflection of the number of liter bottles I could fill after an hour, but ultimately, the commision allowed multiple ways, listed from most accurate to least accurate, to measure volume. 🙂 I will try and find the list of seven deadly sins of pissing contests.

Come to think about it, it was a lot like this contest:eek: