FTP test road vs trainer



Originally Posted by Felt_Rider .

An old Guy, I have to say as someone learning that a lot of your posts baffle me. I do not have enough experience or knowledge to debate, but I do have to spend some time as if there is some sort of riddle about some of your posts.

"Back to back 100 mile days - morning and then afternoon" "Bring a group of guys"

Might as well look for cyclists that are paid to cycle. Who else has that amount of time available to train?

For how many consectutive days? At what intensity?
How is that split up? 100 mile days - morning then afternoon? Is that 50 in the morning and 50 in the evening?
But regardless wouldn't one be forced into LSD in order to keep the effort low enough as not to go above a certain TSS for the day and the accumulation through the week?
Click to expand...
When I was young and riding with a group ...

The Saturday group ride was 100-125 miles. The Sunday group ride was 125+ miles. There were 5 or 6 regulars - showed up almost every ride all year long. There were 20 or so guys who showed up at least once every weekend and did the back to back rides onc or twice a month. I think a lot of people with full time jobs and families do back to back 100 mile days.

Intensity depends. I would do the whole ride in the wind - I worked hard all day long. Some guys would ride in the wind for an hour or so. I could easily sit off the back and take pace off them. Some guys would work together and take short hard turns at the front. Tougher to keep up with that pace. Then there were the crazy guys who would go off the front. I would have to catch the group and then work at a pace that the group could handle as I chased down the guy off the front. On the other hand some guys would just sit in all day. LSD is as hard or as easy as you want it.

I should point out we did these rides every week. So we were in shape for doing them. (The same group had 3 hour Tuesday and Thursday rides.)

---

I don't tell people how many miles they need to do. I tell people how many miles I and those I rode with did.

If you think 12-15 hours a week is enough to compete with guys who are doing those hours plus 5-10 more you are delusional. Those guys are just as smart as you are about training. but they know that the extra hours put them into much better shape.
 
DocSpoc, I think you are onto something about cooling. I have a cheap fan I use and even with sub 70 degree temps inside, I get overheated and it can dramatically affect hard interval sessions. My HR is typically much higher indoors than outside. I'm glad I train with power.

Im not too sure I agree with you about the elimination of formal testing, but I do understand. If it works for you, great!



An Old Guy, assuming most of us don't have the constant 10 - 15 hours/week to train, I have come to realize that long endurance rides are a not a great use of training time. The limited time would be best spent at tempo or sweet spot levels. The amount of adaptations you get at these levels is vastly greater than those you get at endurance levels. Building your FTP by doing tempo, sweet spot, and threshold intervals will help all energy systems that are aerobic. All power levels are a percentage of FTP for a reason. Endurance is tremendously affected by doing work at these higher levels. Getting ready for a 200 mile race can be done by not spending any dedicated time with a focus on zone 2/endurance. I will leave shorter sessions of Zone 1 and 2 for active recovery days and for the time between intervals and warmups/cooldowns. Zone 2/endurance should be the average goal when actually doing the long event as there is little chance any of us could maintain tempo pace for a solid 100 or 200 mile event - at least not I /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

To myself, LSD miles are good when I want a relaxing time on the bike to enjoy nature. I find the time mentally refreshing.
 
My HR is typically much higher indoors than outside. I'm glad I train with power.
Click to expand...

for sure.. HR is a reflection of the strain your body is under, while Power is a measure of the stress. the adaptations you're after are stimulated by the stress though.. overheating can prevent you from putting necessary stress on your body.. i can do 50+ more watts indoors with sufficient cooling.. that's makes a HUGE difference in the quality of workouts indoors... night and day..

..when you do your formal testing.. what do you do with that info?
 
Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .





for sure.. HR is a reflection of the strain your body is under, while Power is a measure of the stress. the adaptations you're after are stimulated by the stress though.. overheating can prevent you from putting necessary stress on your body.. i can do 50+ more watts indoors with sufficient cooling.. that's makes a HUGE difference in the quality of workouts indoors... night and day..

..when you do your formal testing.. what do you do with that info?
Click to expand...


You gotta tell me what kind of fan you have. I need to get one!!!

My formal testing is usually done on a Saturday of a rest week. Here in the off season, I haven't been doing it much. I usually do some short threshold efforts on the day before a test day. I find that going into a test without having done hard efforts the day before really hinders my performance during the test. It may just be me, but I have noted others saying the same thing. So, on to your question. What do I do with the information. I simply go out and do a 20 min all out effort and take 95% of the average power generated. I use that number as my new FTP number and adjust my power zones accordingly.

You may not do formal testing, but I'm sure after a while, a given power becomes easier and easier. Therefore, you just up the power for subsequent sessions until that gets easier and easier. Then, you just increase it more. If you follow a percentage of FTP like I do, formal testing of a 20 minute all out effort is required. But, you are right - training is testing and testing is training. We may just approach it two different ways. The results, however, are the same. I care about my FTP alot because my primary focus is time trialing. And, I know if I keep my average pegged right at 100%, I won't blow up.
 
Originally Posted by awilki01 .

An Old Guy, assuming most of us don't have the constant 10 - 15 hours/week to train, I have come to realize that long endurance rides are a not a great use of training time. The limited time would be best spent at tempo or sweet spot levels. The amount of adaptations you get at these levels is vastly greater than those you get at endurance levels. Building your FTP by doing tempo, sweet spot, and threshold intervals will help all energy systems that are aerobic. All power levels are a percentage of FTP for a reason. Endurance is tremendously affected by doing work at these higher levels. Getting ready for a 200 mile race can be done by not spending any dedicated time with a focus on zone 2/endurance. I will leave shorter sessions of Zone 1 and 2 for active recovery days and for the time between intervals and warmups/cooldowns. Zone 2/endurance should be the average goal when actually doing the long event as there is little chance any of us could maintain tempo pace for a solid 100 or 200 mile event - at least not I /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

To myself, LSD miles are good when I want a relaxing time on the bike to enjoy nature. I find the time mentally refreshing.
Click to expand...
I never ride in zone 2. I never warm up or warm down.

I ride 80+ miles most days. My first 80+ mile ride this season was hard. But now the same effort feels much easier and I recover from it much better. I think that is proof that there is benefit of doing longer efforts. Perhaps the disagreement is due to the suggestion that the longer distances are done at L2. I do longer distances at L3 which produces much different results.

---

A couple things bother me:

1) People who don't have time to train think that they can do well in competitions with people who do have time to train.

2) People who train for 2-3 hour events think they can compete in 7-8 hour events.

If you don't see the folly in those ideas, I cannot help you.

---

I was asked to help out at a 200 mile event. Mostly flat. The rider I was helping wanted to be under 8 hours. On the day of the event I went to the front and sat at 25mph for a while. A fellow came up and asked if I wanted some help. He was working for a fellow who wanted to be under 8 hours also. So we took 1 mile turns at the front. At 100 miles we decided to go back to the cars and get some food and water. As we dropped back we passed through a lot of horsepower. We realized our race was over. By the time we got food and water the group was well up the road. We sent our cars up the road and finished the ride taking 1 mile turns at the front. The group with our riders finished under 8 hours. We finished under 8 hours.

That works out to 8 hours of 2:30 intervals at 300+w with 2:30 250w rest between each. Try and do that with your training schedule. And we were not the strong guys in the event. (The strong guys regularly rode 100-200 miles in training. And not in L2.)
 
Training smart is not the same as training long. My primary assumption in my argument was that most of us don't have the time to train the long hours. If we did, there is no doubt we would get better. However, we have to make the best use of the time we have. And, since the time is limited, doing the long miles may not be a possibility. So, what options do we have? We try to train at the higher levels for a shorter amount of time and skip on the long zone 2 efforts. If you have 15 hours a week to train, a long Sunday ride for 4-5 hours at zone 2 is just what the doctor ordered.

I agree to an extent with your statement about competing in a 7-8 hour event and only having the time to train for a 2-3 hour event. During the off-season and base periods, you can do shorter rides at L3 and L4 to build a huge aerobic base. However, as the long event gets closer, it is imperative you start trying to mimick the conditions of the race in your training. But does that mean you must go and train 7-8 hours one day to get ready for a 7-8 hour race? I would think you could get away with quite a bit less so long as you kept the TSS about the same as that expected on the long race. This just means on average riding a little harder than the average you think you would for the event. So, if you are going for a long race, you need to do "longer" training to simulate the stress of the event so the body can adapt to the specific demands of it. But, I don't think you have to go out and do 7-8 hours in one day. Let the saddle sores develop during the event - not training /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif. The difference the 15-20+ hour/week training will make is probably only noticeable at the Cat1/Pro levels. Those guy's race to pay their mortgage. The extra training gives them an edge, but at most of our levels (mine at least), the difference in performance is not worth the extra time it takes to get there.

I think that is why my primary focus is time trials. I can get away with doing good and not having to put in all those hours. I probably do about 7-10 hours/week myself - on the weeks I'm good. If I put in more, would/could I get better? Sure, but its a balancing act between this, family, career, hobbies, etc.

Last year, I got ready for the Hotter'n Hell 100 mile ride in Wichita Falls, TX by doing a substantial amount of long distance in 100+ heat (it was 110F that day in Wichita Falls during the ride). I'm going to test my theory and focus on Zone 3 and higher training for this year's event. I want to see if what I read is true; however, I have read it in many sources that L3 and higher training will greatly increase your aerobic engine and your ability to ride at Zone 2.

I'm no expert here. I've only been riding for a little over a year now. Heck, I'm still trying to lose weight! I hope I don't come across as trying to sound like a 'know-it-all'. I learn from these forums. If I'm not correct with anything I say, I will be the first to tell you I'm wrong.

By the way, you said you did 300+ watts for 2.5 hours and 250 watts for another 2.5 hours? What is your FTP????
 
Originally Posted by awilki01 .

By the way, you said you did 300+ watts for 2.5 hours and 250 watts for another 2.5 hours? What is your FTP????
Click to expand...
(Those numbers are from when I was younger.) Well over 300w. But not pro level. And in any case I had a good job.

---

You bring up that many people are limited in the time they have to train. I agree. The training plans that are posted on line with short mileage tend to be directed toward improving performance in typical amateur races - at most a few hours in length. (At least that is what the disclaimers indicate.)

The poster asked for help in improving his performance in a 200 mile race. I assume that he read the training plans that are posted on line and discarded them.

I offered the poster ways to improve his performance in a 200 mile race. I suggested that he bring friends to help him. I suggested he train more and longer. I suggested he do at least a few long rides. I will even suggest that he hire a coach to address his specific goal.

If you think that arguing that quality miles are sufficient, I disagree.
 
Originally Posted by An old Guy .




(Those numbers are from when I was younger.) Well over 300w. But not pro level. And in any case I had a good job.
Click to expand...
Here's Fabian Cancellara's data for the 2010 Tour de Flanders:

  • Average power 285 watts
  • Max power 1,450 watts
  • Average heart rate 143 bpm (75% of max)
  • Max heart rate 190 bpm
  • Average cadence 73 rpm
  • Max cadence 147 rpm
  • Average speed 40 kph
  • Max speed 80 kph
  • Total time 6 hrs 22 min
  • Total energy 6,459 kJ
Source:
http://adrianfitch.wordpress.com/2010/12/05/fabian-cancellaras-2010-tour-of-flanders-srm-power-data/
 
Originally Posted by awilki01 .


Here's Fabian Cancellara's data for the 2010 Tour de Flanders:

  • Average power 285 watts
  • Max power 1,450 watts
  • Average heart rate 143 bpm (75% of max)
  • Max heart rate 190 bpm
  • Average cadence 73 rpm
  • Max cadence 147 rpm
  • Average speed 40 kph
  • Max speed 80 kph
  • Total time 6 hrs 22 min
  • Total energy 6,459 kJ
Source:
http://adrianfitch.wordpress.com/2010/12/05/fabian-cancellaras-2010-tour-of-flanders-srm-power-data/
Click to expand...
As I understand that race: He sat in for 6 hours and did a time trial for the last 22 minutes. I could be wrong, but I just had video of the last 16K of the race.

As I understand racing, he finished first and won. Whether his power output was 285w or 350w does not matter. He finished first.So he won.

As I understand the race once he had a gap on the field he could take it easy as there was no organized chase.

As I understand racing, the pros race a whole lot and don't get the full benefit of rest days and peaking at all of their races.

As I understand racing, drafting at regular intervals really helps a lot as does riding with a partner as oppossed to alone.

---

According to the power model I use 25mph is about 350w. Drafting drops that to 240w. It is doubtful that the 200 miles we rode in 8 hours that day was much different from those numbers Back then my everyday 5 hour power (and I rode 5 hours or more every day) was about 250w. And I would often ride 10 hours. My training and goals were much different than you might expect, so my power curve was a lot different than you might expect.

If you are going to make comments on my abilities, you really need to know more about me and my training.

---

I was out on the road today. A couple local racers were 1/2 mile down the road from me. I kept my power above 200w until I got close. It took several miles. They finally noticed me sitting a couple seconds back. I was enjoying the easy effort after the chase. They tried to drop me. It was embarrassing. I had to keep my power down to keep from passing them on the hills. Eventually our routes diverged. Not as much fun as riding with the young woman racer yesterday.
 
got it on sale for $70...



http://www.lowes.com/pd_9236-49537-HVD-24_4294857062+4294965690_4294937087?productId=3047373
 
i find there are two common mistakes that people make when they start using power...

a) they think that power training zones are discrete when they are in fact continuous.. training in zone 1 will in fact improve 4 performance.. what you are trading off is time.. you can only physically train shorter periods of time in higher zones so it is limiting in that way.. and at lower zones it takes more time on the bike to get certain adaptations.. so you make trade off based how much time you have to train and what particular adaptation you are after..

b) they think like you seem to be here that there is something magical about those percentages associated with the pre-canned zones.. and there really isn't.. they are just crude approximations fork some idealized, fictitious athlete.. those aren't YOUR zones.. YOUR zones are what YOU can in fact do for the specified period of time. everyone has different capacities for different interval lengths and it's actually WAY more accurate to base the intensity of an interval based on what YOU can do for a that period of time rather than some crude approximation..
 
Originally Posted by doctorSpoc .

i find there are two common mistakes that people make when they start using power...

a) they think that power training zones are discrete when they are in fact continuous.. training in zone 1 will in fact improve 4 performance.. what you are trading off is time.. you can only physically train shorter periods of time in higher zones so it is limiting in that way.. and at lower zones it takes more time on the bike to get certain adaptations.. so you make trade off based how much time you have to train and what particular adaptation you are after..

b) they think like you seem to be here that there is something magical about those percentages associated with the pre-canned zones.. and there really isn't.. they are just crude approximations fork some idealized, fictitious athlete.. those aren't YOUR zones.. YOUR zones are what YOU can in fact do for the specified period of time. everyone has different capacities for different interval lengths and it's actually WAY more accurate to base the intensity of an interval based on what YOU can do for a that period of time rather than some crude approximation..
Click to expand...


I agree zones are not discreet. The body doesn't automatically do something drastically different between the high end of zone 3 and the low end of zone 4. They are simply targets to shoot for during workout sessions. I'm not sure about the zones being pre-canned as they are simply a percentage of one's FTP - which can be clearly defined through testing. The percentages are general guidelines, but they are defined through testing of not just one athlete but many. Could some be different? Of course, but I wouldn't think drastically enough to make much difference. For me, the zones seem to work. Everyone has their different methods they use. As a matter of fact, it sounds like you are pre-canning intervals based on the length of time you can do them. So, it boils down to the Coggan method of percentage of FTP or your method of 'how long can you maintain X power for Y time'. When you look behind the curtain, the methods dovetail nicely together. What you can hold for one hour is your FTP. Now, what you can hold at higher powers above FTP is documented nicely by Coggan's fatigue profile testing. For a given FTP, some people may be able to hold 150% of it longer than others, but that doesn't change the fact that 150% of FTP is in the anaerobic zone. If you want to work on being able to maintain that longer or go even higher, you need to work in the anaerobic zone to stress that energy system for subsequent adaptation.

I think we agree. We may just use different methods to get there.

I think I'm gonna pick me up a fan like that. I can't wait to see my wife's face.
 
don't know if you've seen the list below, but have a look at what Dr. Coggan says is the 2nd best method of determining FTP.. it's not 95% of a 20min, rested effort.. and either is number 1.. with setting zones.. my only point is that power zones are sufficiently wide that you simply don't need the kind of precision given by doing a 1hr ITT even if you are going to just go with the pre-canned zones as your guideline.. especially when the caveats are with perfect motivation and perfectly rested.. also if your formal testing doesn't involve actually doing a 1hr TT, with perfect rest and motivation.. according to Dr. Coggan, you're not actually even getting a better estimate of you FTP than by simply taking note of what you routinely do for long intervals (20-30mins) in training (i.e. under some measure of residual fatigue) for me No. 1 doesn't fit into my schedule in season to do a 1hr TT in season when i'm building... i never let myself get to that perfectly rested condition.. always leave some residual fatigue because i don't want to decondition and step off the gas that much.. and when i'm tapering for an event i'm not going to screw that up by throwing in an all out 1hr effort just before my big event.. at the end of the season i do take some time off and i go for some personal records too, but by that time it's too late to use those numbers to guide my training.. as far as i can see Dr. Coggan and I are kinda on the same side on this one.. Andy Coggan's Seven Deadly Sins
How to determine your Functional Threshold Power
In decreasing order of reliability:
  1. from the average power during a ~1 h TT (the best predictor of performance is performance itself).
  2. from the power that you can routinely generate during long intervals done in training.
  3. using critical power testing and analysis.
  4. based on normalized power from a hard ~1 h race.
  5. from blood lactate measurements (better or worse, depending on how it is done).
  6. from power distribution profile from multiple rides.
  7. from inspection of a ride file.
 
this i more concise than me.. i tend to be very verbose.. as the author wrote.. i don't actually know if those are actually Dr. Coggan's words, but they make all kinds of sense for practical purposes..

http://www.twowheelblogs.com/2-old-2-go-slow/how-to-determine-your-functional-threshold-power


why I'm against fixed ratios (20 min power x 0.95, MAP x 0.75) the real Andy (not verified) wrote 5 years 22 weeks ago
Both of these methods will, in most cases, provide a reasonable estimate of your functional threshold power, but there will always be outliers. Take, for example, my wife: her functional threshold power was only 90% of her 20 min power, because she had an extremely high anaerobic capacity (as you'd expect for an elite pursuiter). OTOH, my functional threshold power is 97% of my 20 min power, because my anaerobic capacity is less than average. So, why go to the trouble of conducting some sort of formal test if you're only going to get a ballpark estimate anyway?

if for example i did my zone 5 intervals based on the pre-canned estimates of what it's supposed to be I wouldn't be anywhere near getting and optimal workout for that zone...

my major point is to not get so caught up in the numbers.. use common sense... it's not as complicated as people make it out to be..

one good thing about looking at pre-canned zones CAN help you with is determining what are your likely strengths and weaknesses because after a show while most will see that they don't line up with those zone perfectly and you'll know that your better/worse than ave. in one area or the other.. if you're like me and have greater AC than average you do your AC intervals harder than predicted because following the guideline is actually going to keep you back and not stress you enough...
 
I think I'm gonna pick me up a fan like that. I can't wait to see my wife's face.

we were walking through Lowe's and my wife actually pointed it out to me... i've got a pretty awesome wife!! /img/vbsmilies/smilies/cool.gif

that fan is a beast! works great!



i had also thought about using a cooling vest as well for summer months.. never tried one though..

http://www.arcticheatusa.com/
 
I thought the argument was surrounding the accuracy of the zones themselves. You are now debating the method by which to determine FTP. I have no disagreement with you here.

For myself, the 20 minute test's average power multiplied by the 95% yielded the EXACT same number as my 1 hour TT test a few months ago. Since my focus is TT'ing, a one hour test/training is not that unheard of for me during the build phase. However, in the off-season like right now, 20 minutes are more conducive to my personal training objectives than an hour test. But, maybe I should reconsider.

Will my 20 minute test always yield the same results as my one hour test? Absolutely not!. I was a bit lucky on my first one. If my AC increases, I'm sure my 20 minute test power (multiplied by 95%) would be greater than my one hour power.

So, why go to the trouble of conducting some sort of formal test if you're only going to get a ballpark estimate anyway?
Click to expand...
I'm good being in the same ballpark. I'm not looking for exact figures all the time.

--------------------------------------------------

Don't be a pansy and get a cooling vest! /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif I'm in the Dallas area and our summers get to around 106F. You just have to get acclimated to it and ensure you take in more electrolytes (Endurolytes work great!). Of course, in the winter months like now, if it's less than 45 degrees outside, I stay indoors on my rollers. Many of you would call me a pansy for that. LOL!!

Speaking of heat acclimation. I did the Wichita Falls, TX 100 mile ride called the Hotter'n Hell last year in August. It got to around 110F that day. Since I had ridden for a couple months in 100+ heat, my body was used to it and I was absolutely fine. I knew how to hydrate in the heat. Some of those poor Joe's were in serious trouble though! I saw so many people on stretchers at medical stations at rest stops. Some were on an IV drip!!!! I saw pictures of people that were given ice baths! People just don't take the heat seriously. It can kill you!!!!! So, really, if you have issues in the heat, by all means get a cooling vest. I was only kidding with you about being a pansy.
 
my biggest point was for people to not get all caught up in the numbers.. for training, lots of precision and calc are just not necessary.. for training anyway.. for pacing TT's it can obviously be advantageous.. but not necessarily of knowing FTP, but of knowing what power you can do for your particular race length.. because of differences in AnCap can be quite different from FTP.. unless you race length is really going to be 1hr..

i was kind of wander between determining FTP and zones because they are so interrelated... my very 1st point was that formal testing for setting zones in not necessary.. as you can see the guy that determined the zones doesn't think it is either... i find that the biggest reason for determining FTP is to enter into a pissing contest with your buddies... and then my 2nd point was that the zones are valid, but that the pre-canned zones might be problematic for some especially if you happen to have a higher or lower than average AnCap... a) you if you use the 20min Thresh interval x 95% your FTP estimate will be off.. and b) your calculated zones will also be off.. so you see, you can't really talk about one without talking about the other.. basically the zones are valid, but the pre-canned zones are just rough estimates.. and unless you're very lucky, they aren't YOUR zones...


well i'm in Canada and I flip to inside training at -5C (23F), but still commute down to -25C (-23F)... so you're sounding a little wimpy too.. just on the other end of the scale.. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif

but again something that i eluded to.. yes, you want to get acclimatized to riding in high temps.. but you also want to maximize your training stress and riding in blazing heat for Threshold and above training session doesn't do that.. even outside you're going to get higher ave power and higher training stress by riding in cooler temps or with better cooling.. so you're going to be farther ahead doing you zone 4 + workouts early in the morning or late afternoon or inside with great cooling, than doing them in the blazing sun when you will generate relatively crappy power numbers.. i tend to do my higher intensity/structured workouts during the week and will tend to do those in morning or late afternoon to get away from the blazing sun.. we had a month of 35-40C + (95-105F +) days here last summer.. I've been to Texas so I know that's just a run of the mill day there in summer but super hot day are no strangers to this part of the world either...not much fun riding in that.. but on the weekend group ride no problem... that's where i get my acclimatization and race simulation... long group rides.. did 180km on a day with a 38C high.. that hurt! in any case i'm likely going to win the pissing contest for cold weather riding and you're going to kick my ass in the hot weather riding so i'll concede that contest right now.. lol..
 
You would be surprised even in hot weather how much cooling the wind can give.

You ride at -25C? You are not a pansy any longer. I think you may be borderline insane. LOL!!!

Take care!!! Have a great 'rest of the weekend'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

novetan
FTP test. Trainer or road?
Replies
9
Views
3K
Power meters
ForFlynLow
ForFlynLow
A
After The First Ftp Test
Replies
1
Views
2K
Power meters
longlivetarmac
longlivetarmac
A
After The First Ftp Test
Replies
6
Views
3K
Power meters
AverageGuy
A
Rider123
FTP Hour Trainer Test Done, Post-Ride Pacing Questions
Replies
88
Views
11K
Power meters
Rider123
Rider123
bsamm
Effect of elevation on long climb FTP test
Replies
5
Views
1K
Power meters
ric_stern/RST
ric_stern/RST
Top Bottom Back