J\V said:I'm pretty sure that Coggan's test protocol derives the 95% estimate of FTP based upon the fact that the entire testing protocol had been followed (i.e. the 1-min and 5-min tests performed prior to the 20-min). Maybe Andrew will chime in here, but as I understand it, just doing a max 20-min effort while fresh would be sort of like 'cherry-picking' what is a relatively high value, thus the 95% estimate might be closer to 90% in that situation. Of course we all know that the 95% is an estimate based upon his original test population, and we all likely vary from that average value. I'm not sure if WKO+ has the option for using a value other than 95%...
The testing protocol outlined in our book is the one that Hunter uses. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the approach, as:
1) IMO, if you're going to the trouble of performing a formal test, why settle less-precise estimate based on an assumed correction factor, and
2) it is hard to control the intensity of/account for the effects of the 5 min "blow out" effort. In particular, I don't think many people realize just how hard they can actually go for that duration (such that they may not really go all-out), and I don't think Hunter appreciates just how fatiguing such an all-out effort can truly be, at least for some people.
To give an example of the latter: I've seen my wife have to be lifted off her bike and carried to a bench to recover after doing a 3 km (~4 min pursuit), as her legs were simply so locked-up that she couldn't get off without help, much less walk. I would imagine that if she had attempted to do a 20 min TT after such an effort that her power would have been way, way, WAY off of her functional threshold power.