FTP Test - Modus operandi?

[Porkyboy]

Hi

I know there are conflicting views but when I periodically test my FTP in a "formal" way I use the method used in Allen & Coggan's book. I do the full high cadence sections, the 5 minute flat out section, and then the 20 minute main part of the test. I have a pretty good idea of my FTP from informal pointers but I'm planning a test shortly and will base my Winter training zones on the results.

I will do my test on a CompuTrainer and there are theoretically 3 possible options for load setting available to me:

1. Preset workout with loads set using .erg control file.
2. Ride in erg mode and adjust wattages as you go depending on how things are going and how you are feeling.
3. Ride in "normal" mode and control power using the +/- slope feature, gearing, and cadence.

I would be interested to hear what people think would be the best option, I think option 1. is out of the question! I have used option 3 in the past as on the face of it it provides "finer" control but it does make it very easy to blast off too hard and pay a horrible price for doing so!

I was wondering about trying option 2 for a change as I thought this might discourage me from going off too hard and ending up a quivering wreck on the bars as I could set off at about, or just below, what I believe to be my FTP and then adjust slightly up or down as I went along and if things went well I could up the gas say in the last 5 minutes.

It just seems to me that the ergo mode might just offer the advantage of acting as a bit of an effort "smoother" and might make my effort that bit more efficient.

Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Q

 

[mullerrj]

Hi

I know there are conflicting views but when I periodically test my FTP in a "formal" way I use the method used in Allen & Coggan's book. I do the full high cadence sections, the 5 minute flat out section, and then the 20 minute main part of the test. I have a pretty good idea of my FTP from informal pointers but I'm planning a test shortly and will base my Winter training zones on the results.

I will do my test on a CompuTrainer and there are theoretically 3 possible options for load setting available to me:

1. Preset workout with loads set using .erg control file.
2. Ride in erg mode and adjust wattages as you go depending on how things are going and how you are feeling.
3. Ride in "normal" mode and control power using the +/- slope feature, gearing, and cadence.

I would be interested to hear what people think would be the best option, I think option 1. is out of the question! I have used option 3 in the past as on the face of it it provides "finer" control but it does make it very easy to blast off too hard and pay a horrible price for doing so!

I was wondering about trying option 2 for a change as I thought this might discourage me from going off too hard and ending up a quivering wreck on the bars as I could set off at about, or just below, what I believe to be my FTP and then adjust slightly up or down as I went along and if things went well I could up the gas say in the last 5 minutes.

It just seems to me that the ergo mode might just offer the advantage of acting as a bit of an effort "smoother" and might make my effort that bit more efficient.

Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Q

Option 2 is what I use. I think it's just more (outdoor) realistic. It helps teach you how to ride a 20 min TT correctly. i.e. not going out too hard, selecting the right cadence, etc. I also do what you suggest: just start a little below what I believe my current FTP is..because as you know, it's a lot easier to ramp it up than it is to back it off and hang on to the end. I'm sure we've all been there at one time. Good luck. Rob

 

[swampy1970]

Hi

I know there are conflicting views but when I periodically test my FTP in a "formal" way I use the method used in Allen & Coggan's book. I do the full high cadence sections, the 5 minute flat out section, and then the 20 minute main part of the test. I have a pretty good idea of my FTP from informal pointers but I'm planning a test shortly and will base my Winter training zones on the results.

I will do my test on a CompuTrainer and there are theoretically 3 possible options for load setting available to me:

1. Preset workout with loads set using .erg control file.
2. Ride in erg mode and adjust wattages as you go depending on how things are going and how you are feeling.
3. Ride in "normal" mode and control power using the +/- slope feature, gearing, and cadence.

I would be interested to hear what people think would be the best option, I think option 1. is out of the question! I have used option 3 in the past as on the face of it it provides "finer" control but it does make it very easy to blast off too hard and pay a horrible price for doing so!

I was wondering about trying option 2 for a change as I thought this might discourage me from going off too hard and ending up a quivering wreck on the bars as I could set off at about, or just below, what I believe to be my FTP and then adjust slightly up or down as I went along and if things went well I could up the gas say in the last 5 minutes.

It just seems to me that the ergo mode might just offer the advantage of acting as a bit of an effort "smoother" and might make my effort that bit more efficient.

Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Q

Unless you have a really good idea of what your FTP is when really motivated I'd use option 3 and adjust gearing during the ride to suit. Choose what options (slope etc) and use these same settings when you do your next test.

I don't know what you're like 50% the way through a test but I'm normally not thinking about adjusting the finer points of an electronic piece of kit. Which way to push the gear lever is about as much as I want to think about...

 

[daveryanwyoming]

Unless you have a really good idea of what your FTP is when really motivated I'd use option 3 and adjust gearing during the ride to suit. Choose what options (slope etc) and use these same settings when you do your next test.

I don't know what you're like 50% the way through a test but I'm normally not thinking about adjusting the finer points of an electronic piece of kit. Which way to push the gear lever is about as much as I want to think about...

I'm with Swampy and would go with option 3 as well. Not because the electronics are tough, you bump power up in down in 5 watt increments with the +/- keys just the way you'll adjust resistance in preset workout mode. I'd go with fixed resistance (variable power) mode so you don't chase a self fulfilling prophecy. In erg mode you have to choose a starting power even if you ramp up and down, I'd prefer to fix resistance during the test and just ride hard without regard to power and see what happens.

Sometimes I use erg mode for Monod tests, but then I have a pretty good idea of my power targets and try to hold the time as long as possible. But for straight 20*0.95 testing (which I don't like, but you probably already know that) I'd fix trainer resistance and just ride your bike.

Whichever way you go, I'd definitely cover up both the PT and CT displays leaving only interval time showing. It's too easy to start chasing power number during the test. Similarly don't watch HR or other performance metrics, just do the tests as hard as you can for the appropriate durations and try to pace so that you can give it your all. Basically ride a set of short time trials based on feel.

The only time I'd use option 1 is for a structured MAP test.

Just my take on it - good luck let us know how it goes,
-Dave

 

[frost]

Whichever way you go, I'd definitely cover up both the PT and CT displays leaving only interval time showing. It's too easy to start chasing power number during the test. Similarly don't watch HR or other performance metrics, just do the tests as hard as you can for the appropriate durations and try to pace so that you can give it your all. Basically ride a set of short time trials based on feel.

Interesting. Have you tried if the result differs when you can pace on power or not? Especially on a trainer I find it hard (or is it that I just imagine so) to keep up the power (while testing, normal interval with lower power is different story) if I don't have a power figure to chase.

I do not have a trainer with ergo mode but the reasoning about self fulfilling prophecy sounds quite right, so I'd go for option 3 also.

 

[daveryanwyoming]

Interesting. Have you tried if the result differs when you can pace on power or not? Especially on a trainer I find it hard (or is it that I just imagine so) to keep up the power (while testing, normal interval with lower power is different story) if I don't have a power figure to chase.....

Maybe it's just me, but when I keep an eye on power during testing I tend to do one of two things: try too hard to set a personal best and blow up before the time is up or get complacent when the displayed power looks pretty good relative to recent tests. I'm typically disappointed either way and have pleasantly surprised myself when I do my tests "blind".

I suspect it's psychological and probably differs a lot between riders, but my tests have gone better when I didn't watch the PM. FWIW, I do keep a loose eye on my PM for the first few minutes of TTs to make sure I don't go out too hard and periodically after the turnaround to make sure I'm not getting complacent. So for whatever reason I find the PM useful for hitting my best TT times but not that great while testing.

YMMV,
-Dave

 

[Porkyboy]

Hi

Thank you for your replies, your time and advice is much appreciated. In the end I decided to opt for option 2. The main reason I did this on this occasion was I'm afraid not very scientific, I just thought I would try it and see how I felt about it as a method, not having tried it before.

I felt it worked pretty well for me and I didn't feel that it hindered me at all. Making small adjustments to the load up or down as I felt I needed to wasn't a problem and I don't think being able to see the numbers altered the outcome one way or the other.

I've posted a report of my test and the outcome data to my training blog if anyone fancies a browse.

http://pedalbiker.blogspot.com/2008/11/tuesday-training_11.html

Thanks very much again for your help.

PBUK

 

[liversedge]

You didn't mention the best bit ... you made it into the 300w club - congratulations!!

 

[Porkyboy]

Hi Mark

You didn't mention the best bit ... you made it into the 300w club - congratulations!!

Yes, I did, thanks for the kind words, your turn next.

Q

 

[strader]

Nice work!

With the Winter weather setting in and race season over it's time for me to start training indoors. I was planning to do my ftp test doing method #2, but after reading dave's recommendation I might go with #3. I'm going for the whole 60 min test.

 

[Porkyboy]

Hi Strader

Nice work! With the Winter weather setting in and race season over it's time for me to start training indoors. I was planning to do my ftp test doing method #2, but after reading dave's recommendation I might go with #3. I'm going for the whole 60 min test.

Hope you enjoy it more than I enjoyed mine. I hope it goes well, 60 minutes I'd find hard to stomach, all I wanted was an "accurate enough to guide my training" figure so the protocol from the good book did me. I can only take so much suffering!

Hope all goes well, may the force be with you...

Q

 

[strader]

I just pulled off the 60 min test tonight. 292 watt average according to the powertap, which I'll round up to 295 for my FTP since I didn't bother doing any type of taper and I've been racking up SST miles this week.
I chose to use method 2 (erg mode). Started off at 280 watts for 5 minutes, then droped down to 270 for 5 to see if my heart rate kept going up. It didn't so I ramped back up to 280, then 285, then 290 by the halfway point. Last 20 minutes I ramped up to 295, and then 300 for the last 5 which resulted in me dying a slow painful death during the last minute and pulling off the end of the test with several out of the saddle efforts to keep the pedals turning at a reasonable cadence. (note: my computrainer reads ~5 watts lower than the PT)
My heart rate was up to 188 by the end, which is the highest I have ever seen while training indoors or on a road bike. The highest I have ever seen is 192, but that is only on a mountain bike with lots of out of the saddle efforts and lots of upper body action.
The road bike mounted up on the CT sure is a lot nicer than the clunky mountain bike I've been using. The cranks on my mtb bike have an enourmous Q factor, and the worn out bottom bracket must be robbing me of 10+ watts.