Test power of 20 minutes: In plain or uphill?
- Thread starter danieleaq
- Start date
It depends on what you want to know:
What your threshold is on a climb or what your threshold is on a flat. The climb will almost always be higher due to your position on the bike and more constant resistance against you.
It's not about what it best overall but what number is more useful to you.
What your threshold is on a climb or what your threshold is on a flat. The climb will almost always be higher due to your position on the bike and more constant resistance against you.
It's not about what it best overall but what number is more useful to you.
Thank you for your opinion.
I ask again for accuracy and for confirmation.
Do you agree with me then that the two values ​​can be different?
So if I do a test for an athlete I have ever run in the same place or uphill or flat because Wattsexpressed may differ.
D
I ask again for accuracy and for confirmation.
Do you agree with me then that the two values ​​can be different?
So if I do a test for an athlete I have ever run in the same place or uphill or flat because Wattsexpressed may differ.
D
Yes, not only CAN they be different; they SHOULD be different. If the numbers from a flat test and an uphill test were ever the same, I'd start questioning whether other variables like wind, fatigue, or equipment differences caused the hill number to be artificially low..
IME, some athletes test higher on moderate climbs, some sustain higher power on flat roads but I haven't seen any that sustain higher 20 minute or longer duration power on climbs steeper than about 8% grade.
Personally my best 20 minute efforts have all been recorded on flat roads or the velodrome on my road bike in both cases and within a watt of each other over a several month time span. My best 20 minute hill intervals on moderate climbs have been about 3% lower and my best power for steep hill climbs have come in about 8% below what I've managed on flat courses. Ironically my best five minute power numbers have always been hit on climbs, sometimes fairly steep climbs.
Many of the athletes I work with sustain a lot more power on gradual climbs and struggle to hold as much power on the flats and at least one struggles badly on climbs but does much better (as in 10% better) in flat fast tailwind conditions. I don't think there's any universal pattern and there's probably as many psychological as well as physiological factors that play into this.
I strongly agree with qcwtom's first response above. Test in terrain most relevant for either racing or future training goals and for an all around road racer test in various terrain to help identify strength's and weaknesses and opportunities for improvement.
-Dave
Personally my best 20 minute efforts have all been recorded on flat roads or the velodrome on my road bike in both cases and within a watt of each other over a several month time span. My best 20 minute hill intervals on moderate climbs have been about 3% lower and my best power for steep hill climbs have come in about 8% below what I've managed on flat courses. Ironically my best five minute power numbers have always been hit on climbs, sometimes fairly steep climbs.
Many of the athletes I work with sustain a lot more power on gradual climbs and struggle to hold as much power on the flats and at least one struggles badly on climbs but does much better (as in 10% better) in flat fast tailwind conditions. I don't think there's any universal pattern and there's probably as many psychological as well as physiological factors that play into this.
I strongly agree with qcwtom's first response above. Test in terrain most relevant for either racing or future training goals and for an all around road racer test in various terrain to help identify strength's and weaknesses and opportunities for improvement.
-Dave
IMO the two should be about the same in a highly trained athlete (and that's coming from someone who for many years showed a difference of up to 15% between the two! -- a difference that is now zero as of this year). I.E. if you're riding 10+hrs per week they should be about the same.
In less trained athletes I think it is common to get higher numbers up a hill (even a steep one if properly geared). Which one should you use in that case depends on what you want to do with it. If you want to estimate your FTP then you have two different FTP numbers as well, one for each type of terrain. There are lots of past posts on this issue that you can search for.
In less trained athletes I think it is common to get higher numbers up a hill (even a steep one if properly geared). Which one should you use in that case depends on what you want to do with it. If you want to estimate your FTP then you have two different FTP numbers as well, one for each type of terrain. There are lots of past posts on this issue that you can search for.
Guys I think I found a forum for athletes / coaches qualified, experienced and moderate
Thanks for the responses you provided. In training it is essential to exchange experiencesand I think this could become for me a great place to get help
When you want to come here to ride with me you are a guest. Let me ride in one of the most beautiful places in Italy (Abruzzo)
Daniele (ITALIA - L'Aquila)
ps
I'm 48 years old
Thanks for the responses you provided. In training it is essential to exchange experiencesand I think this could become for me a great place to get help
When you want to come here to ride with me you are a guest. Let me ride in one of the most beautiful places in Italy (Abruzzo)
Daniele (ITALIA - L'Aquila)
ps
I'm 48 years old
Dave, you said some athletes sustain a lot more power on gradual climbs.
I took part in the Tollhouse TT yesterday and set a new peak power in every duration from 1-40 minutes. My time up the hill was 38:50, not a PR and nowhere near a course record but I had the fastest time of the day. My NP was 343 whereas my highest AP/NP on my almost flat-ish L4 interval course had been 312, for 20 minutes.
Between the grade, and the fact that this was a race not a workout does that seem like a reasonable difference? Whats more, should I change my power levels to reflect a new FTP during workouts in the valley or on my rollers?
I took part in the Tollhouse TT yesterday and set a new peak power in every duration from 1-40 minutes. My time up the hill was 38:50, not a PR and nowhere near a course record but I had the fastest time of the day. My NP was 343 whereas my highest AP/NP on my almost flat-ish L4 interval course had been 312, for 20 minutes.
Between the grade, and the fact that this was a race not a workout does that seem like a reasonable difference? Whats more, should I change my power levels to reflect a new FTP during workouts in the valley or on my rollers?
Nice job on the TT, I keep saying I'll try to get down there to race it again one of these years but I never seem to be able to make the trip. I'd like to see what I could do on that hill these days.
Unless you're going to do a lot of your L4 work on climbs like Tollhouse I'd leave your FTP alone until you see similar numbers on the terrain where you do most of your training. BTW, what was your AP for the climb? IOW was it really bursty driving NP high or fairly steady where AP and NP were similar? Either way I'd use it as a clue that your FTP may be climbing but see what happens during training intervals on more typical terrain to see if things are moving upwards before setting new target zones.
-Dave
Unless you're going to do a lot of your L4 work on climbs like Tollhouse I'd leave your FTP alone until you see similar numbers on the terrain where you do most of your training. BTW, what was your AP for the climb? IOW was it really bursty driving NP high or fairly steady where AP and NP were similar? Either way I'd use it as a clue that your FTP may be climbing but see what happens during training intervals on more typical terrain to see if things are moving upwards before setting new target zones.
-Dave
AP was 332, VI of 1.03 if I understand the concept, I'm not sure whether or not that is 'bursty' but I did really nail the last kilometer, after a hard recovery on the second 'flatish' section.
Bob Brooks was out and at the age of 69 and just under a year after a nearly fatal crash put down a 45 minute ride.
Bob Brooks was out and at the age of 69 and just under a year after a nearly fatal crash put down a 45 minute ride.
The fact you set a 1 minute power record in the middle of a 40minute steady effort would flag the ride for me as a very high risk of being an un-zeroed or otherwise inaccurate power meter. I simply don't believe it's possible to get actual power records in both the few minute and 40 minute efforts in a steady ride.
Is your time similar to the watts?
Is your time similar to the watts?
Jibber Jim
The watt/kg is in line with other riders with similar finish times. In fact I expected my FTP to be about 330 based on my time from last year and other riders data, but was closer to 300 when I had tested it on the flats.
The climb is 6.7 miles long at about 6-7% with to flat-ish sections along the way and a .6 mile wall of about 10% average with some bits as high as 13%. As I said I rode on my limit for the majority of the climb recovered a bit on the last flat and nailed the steep section.
I also just got my PM and have put maybe 10 rides on it so far, I think my peak 1 min power is as much a reflection of that fast, as my actually doing a particularly hard minute. It was 512 watts, 7.2 w'kg, compared to my AP of 332 (4. 7 w/kg) but good looking out Jibber Jim that certainly does sound suspect.
The watt/kg is in line with other riders with similar finish times. In fact I expected my FTP to be about 330 based on my time from last year and other riders data, but was closer to 300 when I had tested it on the flats.
The climb is 6.7 miles long at about 6-7% with to flat-ish sections along the way and a .6 mile wall of about 10% average with some bits as high as 13%. As I said I rode on my limit for the majority of the climb recovered a bit on the last flat and nailed the steep section.
I also just got my PM and have put maybe 10 rides on it so far, I think my peak 1 min power is as much a reflection of that fast, as my actually doing a particularly hard minute. It was 512 watts, 7.2 w'kg, compared to my AP of 332 (4. 7 w/kg) but good looking out Jibber Jim that certainly does sound suspect.
Nice job! That's some good power. I'm going to disagree with Dave on this one. Assuming that your PM was properly calibrated AND that this was not just a one-off performance (so you could replicate it next week), then I think that the race serves as a pretty good FTP test. You didn't say what your FTP was set to now, but I'd move it up to at least 330.
I think your issues on the flat are likely (1) motivation, and (2) training. The 330 is more indicative of what you are currently capable of. If you can't come close to that on the flats then you should be able to address that in your training (and then have your NP in hard flat races approach that number).
I think your issues on the flat are likely (1) motivation, and (2) training. The 330 is more indicative of what you are currently capable of. If you can't come close to that on the flats then you should be able to address that in your training (and then have your NP in hard flat races approach that number).
Whatever gives you the highest numbers are best. Many people set up their bicycles to be more aero and lower power on the flats. They should get higher power numbers on climbs. 60 minutes gives better FTP numbers than a 20 minute test.
I get my best numbers outside on my trainer on a cold day. (Even cool days I sweat too much to keep my power up trying to keep my body temperature normal. even on a 20 minute effort.)
But don't pay too much attention to your FTP. Use it to set your training zones and then adjust the zones if the efforts are too much or not enough. It is not like one size fits all training.
Similar threads
