Hi all!
I`m what could be considered as a forum lurker in a number of forums, and I dont post that often. But one issue is really bothering me. Well, bothering might not be the right term, but anyway, something seems off to me. That something is the alleged FTP of the pros vs the alleged FTP that numerous forum-active amateur cyclist seem to boast.
First, to start with the pros: I`m not going to claim that i have all the insight in this, and my knowledge of the pros ftp is mostly picked up in forums and online articles. However, from what I`ve read, it does not seem all that far off to assume that alot of the pros come in the range of 350 - 450 watts (speaking in terms of absolute FTP), and 4,7/4,8 - 6 w/kg (speaking in relative terms). Ref f.ex the thread on Lances ftp, where i see there is alot of guesswork putting him at somewhere above 400w, and close to 6 w/kg. Also, i know saxo-bank posts some of their riders FTP at the SRM-webside where they share the powerdata from the TdF. (se July 12, Stage 9: Saint-Gaudens - Tarbes 160.5km- Chris Anker Sorensen where Chris Anker Soerensen is listed with a threshold of 380 w).
To me this is, by all means, impressive. Those wattages I mention above are above what i can sustain for even a few minutes, and I`m heavy at 80 kg!
However, beeing impressed by the numbers of the pros, I cant get over the suspicious feeling I get reading numbers that different "amateurs" are posting in various forums. A number of what I would call amateur riders post FTP`s in the 350`s (absolute), and above 5 w/kg (relative). These riders are probably - by all means - super-fit and way above my level, but the way I see it they should be no where near the pro-league. In one forum I read a mid 40`s masters racers who posted FTP`s of 350 w @ 70 kg. In another, I`ve read a "collage racer" posting an FTP of close to 400w. On another webpage, i read about this "up and coming" young rider (19-20) with an FTP at 395w, but weighing in at only like 65 kg!
As I said, I have no noubt all these forum-guys are superfit and skilled cyclist, but I cant grasp the fact that there isnt more of a difference between the "amateur-level" and the pros.
The questions I`m really left with, are these:
1) Is the difference between 4,7-5 w/kg and up so large that only the "elite" could achieve FTP`s from 5 w / kg and up? Do those relavively small - on the paper - differences in FTP amount to the great difference in performance that separate the pros for us mere mortals?
2) Are the pros able to perform much closer to their FTP for an increased duration (i.e. more than an hour)? f.ex - will the amateur with an FTP of 350w be toast after 90 mins of 330w, while the pro with an FTP 380 watts sustain 350 for 3 hrs?
3) Are forum-boasters generally overestimating/lying when posting own FTP?
4) Other explanations?
Please discuss - and enlighten me
I`m what could be considered as a forum lurker in a number of forums, and I dont post that often. But one issue is really bothering me. Well, bothering might not be the right term, but anyway, something seems off to me. That something is the alleged FTP of the pros vs the alleged FTP that numerous forum-active amateur cyclist seem to boast.
First, to start with the pros: I`m not going to claim that i have all the insight in this, and my knowledge of the pros ftp is mostly picked up in forums and online articles. However, from what I`ve read, it does not seem all that far off to assume that alot of the pros come in the range of 350 - 450 watts (speaking in terms of absolute FTP), and 4,7/4,8 - 6 w/kg (speaking in relative terms). Ref f.ex the thread on Lances ftp, where i see there is alot of guesswork putting him at somewhere above 400w, and close to 6 w/kg. Also, i know saxo-bank posts some of their riders FTP at the SRM-webside where they share the powerdata from the TdF. (se July 12, Stage 9: Saint-Gaudens - Tarbes 160.5km- Chris Anker Sorensen where Chris Anker Soerensen is listed with a threshold of 380 w).
To me this is, by all means, impressive. Those wattages I mention above are above what i can sustain for even a few minutes, and I`m heavy at 80 kg!
However, beeing impressed by the numbers of the pros, I cant get over the suspicious feeling I get reading numbers that different "amateurs" are posting in various forums. A number of what I would call amateur riders post FTP`s in the 350`s (absolute), and above 5 w/kg (relative). These riders are probably - by all means - super-fit and way above my level, but the way I see it they should be no where near the pro-league. In one forum I read a mid 40`s masters racers who posted FTP`s of 350 w @ 70 kg. In another, I`ve read a "collage racer" posting an FTP of close to 400w. On another webpage, i read about this "up and coming" young rider (19-20) with an FTP at 395w, but weighing in at only like 65 kg!
As I said, I have no noubt all these forum-guys are superfit and skilled cyclist, but I cant grasp the fact that there isnt more of a difference between the "amateur-level" and the pros.
The questions I`m really left with, are these:
1) Is the difference between 4,7-5 w/kg and up so large that only the "elite" could achieve FTP`s from 5 w / kg and up? Do those relavively small - on the paper - differences in FTP amount to the great difference in performance that separate the pros for us mere mortals?
2) Are the pros able to perform much closer to their FTP for an increased duration (i.e. more than an hour)? f.ex - will the amateur with an FTP of 350w be toast after 90 mins of 330w, while the pro with an FTP 380 watts sustain 350 for 3 hrs?
3) Are forum-boasters generally overestimating/lying when posting own FTP?
4) Other explanations?
Please discuss - and enlighten me