Phsycological aspect of FTP based training...

[Terry Ferguson]

Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen this addressed before on the power forums. It was just touched on in a 'trainer/outdoor' thread.

I believe that the psychological aspect of cycling is HUGE, and I've struggled with this aspect of FTP based training (or any functional threshold based training) since I first read the Book. Indoors/outdoors, uphill/flat, warm/cold, riding/competing,... and especially rider/rider.

It seems that there are two ways it can be handled. The first is to consider it part of the 'system' that we are testing and training, but this makes the whole thing only semi-physiological. The second is to just ignore it and just pretend we are dealing with a physiological system only. Both choices would seem to make everything extremely fuzzy.

Comments?

TF

 

[shawndoggy]

I believe that the psychological aspect of cycling is HUGE, and I've struggled with this aspect of FTP based training (or any functional threshold based training) since I first read the Book.

TF -- not sure what you mean... are you saying that you have a hard time with the mental aspect of holding threshold? I totally agree that it's an issue and I think that it's one of the things that keeps a lot of riders from reaching their potential. I found last winter that several weeks of 2x20s at 85ish% of FTP was a great way to build up to longer efforts (like 90 @ 90%), and that those really got to be quite bearable with repeated ventures into that territory.

I'm now back at that building phase, and I'm finding it hard to get to those extended sub-threshold efforts right off of the bat. But I know from experience that if I work up to them that in a month or so my body will be responding a lot better to them. It's a matter of getting over that hump...

 

[frenchyge]

Comments?

By definition, FTP is one's best case 1hr power. For that reason, FTP tests should be conducted from a well-rested physical condition, and under race-level motivation. On individual workouts, a rider's sub-optimal mental or physical state can prevent a person from reaching their FTP, but they do not change FTP itself.

Just as an athlete can have different VO2max values in cycling vs. running or swimming, it could be possible to define different FTP values for different modes of cycling** (indoor/outdoor, uphill/downhill, road/mtb, etc.). That's not saying that FTP varies depending on day-to-day conditions like mental state or motivation, but that there is some distinct difference between those 2 modes which affects FTP consistently and can be quantified.

** - note that I said could be possible, in the sense that it's not really part of the author's definition of FTP and probably hasn't been tested enough to say with certainty that it's even real... but might be.

 

[NomadVW]

I would wholeheartedly agree that the mental aspect to holding threshold is huge. Indeed, FTP is the best case 1 hour power - on well rested and in the best mental condition (and capability). In fact, I'm one of those people that don't enjoy doing 2x20's @ 100% hardly at all. (Doesn't help that I had a completely **** workout today).

In the last month I've had 2-3 great 2x20 workouts "on the mark" and I've had two weeks of completely **** 2x20 workouts. Interestingly, I can usually follow those workouts up later in the week with 60-90 minutes @ 92-94% of FTP at a PE that barely breaks the 5 marker. Today I was lucky to be holding FTP at all. Today was after a very unusual 2 days off for me, and I probably should have delayed the 2x20's to tomorrow and done some kind of leg opener workout today. It would have done two things. 1st, actually "leg opened." 2nd, it would have told me mentally that I had opened the legs up whether or not I really did physiologically.

All of my power distro charts and numbers from the last month or so indicate I might be able to consider my FTP higher than I have it marked now. I'm calling it 345, but I had a 45+ minute race in August normalized @ greater than 350. Four weeks in a row, I'm looking at power distro charts from threshold workouts that show maybe even 355-360 FTP. Last two weeks, I don't want to do the workout - sure enough, holding 340 is hard as hell.

That's why I don't like the 1 hr TT as the "best marker" for FTP. Some people (me included) are weak minded and holding that FTP for 1 hour is hard enough. However, physiologically, I can hold 92-94% for well into 1 1/2 - 2 hours. If I were to use my "1 hour TT power," I might train too low for what I need physiologically to improve threshold power.

 

[Animator]

Same boat here. Maybe it's because I've only been doing 2x20s since about May but I rarely can hold FTP -- or what used to be my FTP based on a 1 hour NP from a race in June -- for more than 15 minutes. Part of the problem for me is the terrain around here which is constantly undulating. It's impossible to keep the pressure on on the downhills. I get a little rest and my mind says, "OK, it's over!" Conversely, the hill climbs are too short for an FTP test -- 10 minutes at the most (but my 10 min. best is 50W higher than my last FTP estimate!). So I've taken the advise of others here and have been doing a lot of SST work. I can cope with that mentally and it has had some obvious good results. I just can't make a good FTP estimate. Yeah, I know, a good 40K TT would solve the problem -- but I am NOT going to do that, thank you very much!

 

[daveryanwyoming]

...It seems that there are two ways it can be handled. The first is to consider it part of the 'system' that we are testing and training, but this makes the whole thing only semi-physiological. The second is to just ignore it and just pretend we are dealing with a physiological system only. Both choices would seem to make everything extremely fuzzy.

Comments?...

I think it depends on your perspective and how you're using FTP. IOW if we're talking about race performance say a long TT like a lot of folks mention then psychological limits to performance can be huge and something we'd like to train to overcome. Same applies to choosing a method for estimating FTP. If you struggle with best performances for a full hour (I know I do) then you might underestimate FTP based on the gold standard long time trial.

But if you're talking about training your muscles and metabolic processes do you think your physiology cares whether you're motivated or mentally engaged or just responds to workload without a mental component? There are so many documented mind body connections I can't even guess, but it seems to me training adaptation results primarily from workload. If you can't maintain the mental focus to produce that workload it seems you'll have trouble sufficiently stressing your system and adaptation may be slower than desired. I guess from a training perspective I'd avoid including the mental component since it seems your metabolic processes adapt in response to physical stress and overload regardless of how psyched you are to ride indoors or out, rain or shine or any other conditions that might lead you to feel high RPE at relatively low average power outputs.

I'm totally guessing with this stuff, but it's definitely an interesting subject.

-Dave

 

[frenchyge]

It'd probably require invasive lab testing to separate the physical aspects from the mental aspects. If that's not desired then I'd suggest combining the 2 effects and training them both together.

 

[Terry Ferguson]

I think it depends on your perspective and how you're using FTP. IOW if we're talking about race performance say a long TT like a lot of folks mention then psychological limits to performance can be huge and something we'd like to train to overcome. Same applies to choosing a method for estimating FTP. If you struggle with best performances for a full hour (I know I do) then you might underestimate FTP based on the gold standard long time trial.

But if you're talking about training your muscles and metabolic processes do you think your physiology cares whether you're motivated or mentally engaged or just responds to workload without a mental component? There are so many documented mind body connections I can't even guess, but it seems to me training adaptation results primarily from workload. If you can't maintain the mental focus to produce that workload it seems you'll have trouble sufficiently stressing your system and adaptation may be slower than desired. I guess from a training perspective I'd avoid including the mental component since it seems your metabolic processes adapt in response to physical stress and overload regardless of how psyched you are to ride indoors or out, rain or shine or any other conditions that might lead you to feel high RPE at relatively low average power outputs.

I'm totally guessing with this stuff, but it's definitely an interesting subject.

-Dave

Let's just look at estimating FTP. How you train your muscles and metabolic processes depends on how you did the estimate and then set up your zones.

I feel that the maximum FTP a rider could estimate may easily be 25% mental (probably 50% for all riders, but they are probably not reading this forum). That includes:

Motivation - your overall desire to do this and do it well.

Focus - your ability to stay "in the moment" and be constantly aware and maximizing performance.

Mental Toughness - your ability to face, ignore or even use the pain and still go harder.

So I have estimated my 260 watts from a number of 'really hard' training rides of about an hour. Am I a super motivated, totally focused, tough as nails rider who has a true FTP of 260 or am I a total wimp with a true FTP of closer to 350. Are the levels I've set up really maximizing the gains in the systems targeted or am I just kidding myself.

There are dozens of riders, just on this forum, training with functional power. We aren't all Super Rider.

TF

 

[daveryanwyoming]

...There are dozens of ...

Sorry Terry, but I'm not seeing your point. I'm not demeaning anyone's toughness, just suggesting how you look at the physiological vs. psychological contributions to FTP may depend on whether we're talking about achieving our best possible race results or how we approach and measure training load relative to desired adaptations.

I agree it may be tough to ever know what our potential is since it's awfully hard if not impossible to distinguish the psychological from physiological. And I agree that like it or not we have to deal with the whole package as Frenchyge points out. I just don't think we should adjust our FTP estimates during those times we have trouble putting out our normal FTP such as indoor training. Seems to me the muscles still want to be stressed to the usual levels to encourage adaptation even if we have trouble doing that indoors. Different story if there are clear physiological limiters like working out at altitude, in that case I'd suspect the muscles and system are being stressed plenty hard even at lower average power levels.

I'm assuming this is a philosophical discussion since we're talking about things that are difficult if not impossible to compartmentalize in practice.

Sure don't mean to imply that anyone here or anywhere else is weak or less than the Super Rider just because indoor training aint a lot of fun. I usually don't hit my best 20 minute power numbers much less hour long power numbers when riding the trainer even with a real big fan but I also don't bump my FTP down in WKO+ because I believe that for whatever reason I just didn't stress my system as hard during those workouts. Maybe one of the exercise physiologists will chime in and tell me where I'm missing something but I can't figure out why we'd drop our FTP estimates thereby elevating IF and TSS, ATL and CTL estimates for workouts just because they're done indoors instead of outdoors.

I've thought about thermal issues, but even with a big fan in front of an open window on a sub zero Wyoming winter day I still have trouble putting out as much power indoors. I just have trouble seeing why I'd adjust my FTP to account for the higher RPE indoors.

Seems you're keying on the problem of really knowing what your potential FTP is, I guess I'd define that as what you can achieve so yep it must include a mental component. I'm focusing on the question of whether you should adjust that number once you've found it for workouts that seem harder without a clear reason why they actually should be harder.

-Dave

 

[Alex Simmons]

It'd probably require invasive lab testing to separate the physical aspects from the mental aspects. If that's not desired then I'd suggest combining the 2 effects and training them both together.

Well I'm waiting for that new trainer I've heard about on the grapevine - you know - the one with the built in MRI brain scanner that detects all sorts of things about your mental state while numbing yourself silly on the trainer . It is playing havoc with the wireless CPUs though!

 

[Squint]

I've thought about thermal issues, but even with a big fan in front of an open window on a sub zero Wyoming winter day I still have trouble putting out as much power indoors. I just have trouble seeing why I'd adjust my FTP to account for the higher RPE indoors.

You still have the inertia problem. With lots of fans and a 55 lb flywheel, my power indoors is 20W higher for 3x20s compared to on rolling terrain. It's also about 15W higher than when doing a 50-60 min climb.

 

[NomadVW]

I'm not sure about adjusting FTP based on indoor or outdoor. I wouldn't.

I thought this was more of a discussion of whether or not the methods of determining FTP sufficiently take into account the mental toll they demand, possibly giving someone an underestimated FTP, causing a low basis for training zones, reducing the possible physiological benefits of training based on the FTP.

One of the reasons I like MAP testing is because it's quick, short, and relatively simple. It's also one of the things I like about Monod's CP chart. I don't need to find the motivation to do a bunch of testing (admittedly even the MAP test can be intimidating). I can plot the handful of personal bests, and it gives me a reasonably solid number to base FTP zones around and thereby maximize my training value during workouts.

One of the arts of coaching is finding the workouts that do/don't fit a particular athlete's "mental capacity." Then it's a matter of keeping a delicate balance of maximizing the training benefit of workouts, as well as motivating the athlete to suffer through workouts he/she may not choose on their own.

 

[frenchyge]

Well I'm waiting for that new trainer I've heard about on the grapevine - you know - the one with the built in MRI brain scanner that detects all sorts of things about your mental state while numbing yourself silly on the trainer . It is playing havoc with the wireless CPUs though!

You could try a wired brainwave input device, but as I said..... invasive.

So I have estimated my 260 watts from a number of 'really hard' training rides of about an hour. Am I a super motivated, totally focused, tough as nails rider who has a true FTP of 260 or am I a total wimp with a true FTP of closer to 350. Are the levels I've set up really maximizing the gains in the systems targeted or am I just kidding myself.

Well, you could set your FTP at 350w instead and then be unable to complete any of the workouts, so you decide which program is giving you the best bang for the buck.

There's no reason to estimate your FTP at a hypothetical level that you're never able to achieve, so you're better off including the mental aspects of performance and doing whatever you can do. "The best indicator of performance is performance itself,"(TM) and all that.

 

[rmur17]

Let's just look at estimating FTP. How you train your muscles and metabolic processes depends on how you did the estimate and then set up your zones.

I feel that the maximum FTP a rider could estimate may easily be 25% mental (probably 50% for all riders, but they are probably not reading this forum). That includes:

Motivation - your overall desire to do this and do it well.

Focus - your ability to stay "in the moment" and be constantly aware and maximizing performance.

Mental Toughness - your ability to face, ignore or even use the pain and still go harder.

So I have estimated my 260 watts from a number of 'really hard' training rides of about an hour. Am I a super motivated, totally focused, tough as nails rider who has a true FTP of 260 or am I a total wimp with a true FTP of closer to 350. Are the levels I've set up really maximizing the gains in the systems targeted or am I just kidding myself.

There are dozens of riders, just on this forum, training with functional power. We aren't all Super Rider.

TF

get on an ergometer, set it to 350W and pedal 'til you drop. That'll tell you pretty quickly whether your FTP is much over 260W ...

I've been reading the thread but am still grasping at the underlying question. I don't see any practical way for folks to separate the mental and physical aspects of FTP testing. You do it when you're fresh, motivated and in the manner that suits your riding/terrain/practicalities best. For some that's a (say) monthly 40k TT, for others it's just observing how threshold workout power is coming along.

i guess you could do a lactate test and have someone say well at OBLA (4mmol/l) you're putting out 340W so at 260W you're just dogging it ... but IIRC that's still not 100% accurate for all people.

Over the past five years training with power, I honestly think I've hardly ever let power zones or levels dictate how I rode during an outdoor workout or race. I'm really an RPE kind of guy there. So the fact my FTP was XX or XX+10W or +20W doesn't really matter. With my structured workouts (L4 and above), I compare to what I did last week, last month ,,, not to a perhaps estimated FTP. I certainly use FTP as part of the TSS/PMC ensemble but that's it's primary purpose for me.

I guess there's a point as to how hard we push ourselves in a normal training week. For me, I like to think that's generally pretty hard but at certain times of the year and for undefined/inexplicable certain weeks during the year, I like to let off the gas and just 'ride'. All year on the gas leads to a sore pedal foot

If one is dodging the pain barrier during training, then in a race situation - power should show up considerably higher. That'd be one clear tell for me. if you can't get motivated when chasing someone down in a TT or in my case, getting dropped on a long/steep hilll , then perhaps you shouldn't be racing.

re indoor/outdoor training, my training history clearly shows I suffer a drop of 3-4-5% in sustainable power vs. duration indoors vs. outdoors. It starts around the 15-min mark, increases with duration, and is so reliable that since 2004 I've found I can simply take my indoor 30MP as outdoor FTP. Since many of my threshold training workouts hit that power-duration, I've no need at all for formal FTP testing. IOW, "Training is testing" (Dr. A.Coggan)

Anyway, just some pretty random thoughts.

 

[Squint]

get on an ergometer, set it to 350W and pedal 'til you drop. That'll tell you pretty quickly whether your FTP is much over 260W ...

i guess you could do a lactate test and have someone say well at OBLA (4mmol/l) you're putting out 340W so at 260W you're just dogging it ... but IIRC that's still not 100% accurate for all people.

That's just for P*wercranks users

Seriously, the only caveat is that it on a low inertia ergometer like the CT, I can't generate nearly as much power as outdoors or on a high inertia ergometer.

I've been reading the thread but am still grasping at the underlying question. I don't see any practical way for folks to separate the mental and physical aspects of FTP testing. You do it when you're fresh, motivated and in the manner that suits your riding/terrain/practicalities best. For some that's a (say) monthly 40k TT, for others it's just observing how threshold workout power is coming along.

I find that ergometer mode takes care of pacing and motivation issues. I had a lot of trouble getting my power up on a course with wind gusts, lots of turns, and rolling terrain if my legs weren't really fresh. In other words, PE was high relative to power output.

re indoor/outdoor training, my training history clearly shows I suffer a drop of 3-4-5% in sustainable power vs. duration indoors vs. outdoors. It starts around the 15-min mark, increases with duration, and is so reliable that since 2004 I've found I can simply take my indoor 30MP as outdoor FTP. Since many of my threshold training workouts hit that power-duration, I've no need at all for formal FTP testing. IOW, "Training is testing" (Dr. A.Coggan)

I prefer using long interval power (3x20) as an estimate of FTP as well but this method is only available when I'm doing intervals at 100%. If I'm doing SST the numbers don't really give me an idea of what my FTP might be.

Time for my 6x20s on the erg

 

[rmur17]

That's just for P*wercranks users

Seriously, the only caveat is that it on a low inertia ergometer like the CT, I can't generate nearly as much power as outdoors or on a high inertia ergometer.


I find that ergometer mode takes care of pacing and motivation issues. I had a lot of trouble getting my power up on a course with wind gusts, lots of turns, and rolling terrain if my legs weren't really fresh. In other words, PE was high relative to power output.


I prefer using long interval power (3x20) as an estimate of FTP as well but this method is only available when I'm doing intervals at 100%. If I'm doing SST the numbers don't really give me an idea of what my FTP might be.

Time for my 6x20s on the erg

Sadly I've only got access to my teeny-flywheel CT but I find that, using gearing that keeps my wheel speed up around 40kph or so, it feels just fine. When I use 3D courses, I tend to avoid those with steep grades as the feel degrades to that of slogging thru mud when my speed drops much below 30kph. I believe that is mostly a function of the low-inertial flywheel.

I use ergo mode an awful lot and as you say it certainly covers the 'focus' bit quite well. Let your cadence drop only a few rpm and it'll quickly remind you to pay attention . I think it can also help show you how hard/long you can push the pain barrier w/o imploding. And in an environment safer than a busy road should you start weaving around, getting blurred vision, etc.

Maybe some day, I'll get around to writing up my "MILOS" approach to training. Not that anyone would read it of course .

 

[daveryanwyoming]

...Maybe some day, I'll get around to writing up my "MILOS" approach to training. Not that anyone would read it of course .

I'd definitely read it Rick. Between your history of good solid advice posts and your incredible FTP gains over the last couple of years I suspect there would be some great stuff in that document!

-Dave

 

[rmur17]

I'd definitely read it Rick. Between your history of good solid advice posts and your incredible FTP gains over the last couple of years I suspect there would be some great stuff in that document!

-Dave

thanks Dave but I'd rather read yours .

Meanwhile, here's a good link with some commentary on indoor training starting around page 36 that folks may find worthwhile.

http://www.freewebs.com/velodynamics2/rcgtp1.pdf

 

[Uhl]

With lots of fans and a 55 lb flywheel, my power indoors is 20W higher for 3x20s compared to on rolling terrain.

What trainer do you have that has a 55lbs flywheel? Is it a custom job?

 

[Squint]

What trainer do you have that has a 55lbs flywheel? Is it a custom job?

I have a Velotron which is best described as an ergometer than a trainer.

Two things I can't stand are low inertia trainers and tire-roller interfaces so I only considered "trainers" with big flywheels and direct chain drive (spin bikes, CycleOps PT300, Velotron, etc.).

I rode a CT once during a fitting and it was hard to maintain FTP for just a few minutes.