Normal FTP
10-11-13, 08:00 AM
#26
Senior Member
I have found the Critical Power tab on Golden Cheetah does a consistent job of predicting my Ftp so I rarely do formal tests anymore. I haven't used them but I assume Training Peaks and others do this too.
Last edited by canam73; 10-11-13 at 08:06 AM.
10-11-13, 08:08 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
10-11-13, 08:26 AM
#28
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,302
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1447 Post(s)
Liked 724 Times
in
371 Posts
You're trying to determine what you could hold for an hour. As others have indicated, you can up the average for 20 minutes, higher than an hour by recruiting anaerobic systems for a few minutes.
Hence the 5 minute effort before to exhaust that, and .95% of the 20 minute power.
You could do 100% of an hour, but that's pretty hard mentally.
Alternatively, you can do 2, 8 minute efforts and take 92%.
Any one of these approaches is going to be adequate to set your training zones.
Biggest key is just to be consistent in your test protocol, so it's repeatable, and the tests are comparable.
Hence the 5 minute effort before to exhaust that, and .95% of the 20 minute power.
You could do 100% of an hour, but that's pretty hard mentally.
Alternatively, you can do 2, 8 minute efforts and take 92%.
Any one of these approaches is going to be adequate to set your training zones.
Biggest key is just to be consistent in your test protocol, so it's repeatable, and the tests are comparable.
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
10-11-13, 08:43 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
https://cyclingtips.com.au/2009/07/ju...re-these-guys/
Numbers are only valid if you're using a power device (not virtualpower from Trainerroad or other calculated power)
Numbers are only valid if you're using a power device (not virtualpower from Trainerroad or other calculated power)
A trainer can be as accurate and produce as repeatable results as a PowerTap for a fraction of the price if you have a basic understanding of your trainer and the variables that influence it. The statement of "numbers are only valid if you're using a power device" is false even if it can be true in certain instances. Although I would agree that indoor numbers aren't necessarily transferable to outdoors even if you are using the same PowerTap both indoors and outdoors.
So if you have a trainer and want to use it for power training indoors it is extremely valuable so long as you have a basic understanding of what you are doing.
10-11-13, 09:06 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 2,844
Bikes: '13 Spech Roubaix SL4 Expert
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
10-11-13, 09:31 AM
#32
Senior Member
FTP is relative.
The year I upgraded to Cat 2 (2010 - I've since downgraded back to 3) I would typically hit the following w/kg:
20 seconds (well, 18 seconds, length of my typical sprint): 15.3w/kg
record 60 seconds: 8.2w/kg
FTP: 3.07w/kg
Typical average in a very hard for me crit (i.e. I placed very high or maybe won): 2.5w/kg
Currently FTP is more like 2.86w/kg, 20 seconds 13.0w/kg (power down 100w, weight up), min 7.6w/kg (although I haven't come closer to replicating that record 60s... it's more like 6.5w/kg at the moment), typical crit average is 2.1-2.3w/kg (where I can sprint).
In 2010 I was a touch under 72 kg. Now I'm a touch under 77 kg.
The year I upgraded to Cat 2 (2010 - I've since downgraded back to 3) I would typically hit the following w/kg:
20 seconds (well, 18 seconds, length of my typical sprint): 15.3w/kg
record 60 seconds: 8.2w/kg
FTP: 3.07w/kg
Typical average in a very hard for me crit (i.e. I placed very high or maybe won): 2.5w/kg
Currently FTP is more like 2.86w/kg, 20 seconds 13.0w/kg (power down 100w, weight up), min 7.6w/kg (although I haven't come closer to replicating that record 60s... it's more like 6.5w/kg at the moment), typical crit average is 2.1-2.3w/kg (where I can sprint).
In 2010 I was a touch under 72 kg. Now I'm a touch under 77 kg.
10-11-13, 09:39 AM
#33
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Palm Desert, CA
Posts: 2,504
Bikes: Speedvagen Steel
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 429 Post(s)
Liked 248 Times
in
156 Posts
I checked out the file. First, five minutes isn't anywhere near enough warmup. I'd do 20 minutes as a minimum.
The execution of the test itself looked about right. Power was relatively steady, HR rose slowly towards the end. Good job on that part! According to the graph (right above the power graph, click on the "20 min" box), your max average power was 168. The rule of thumb for figuring FTP from 20 minute power is to multiply it by .95, so you end up with 160 watts (159.6). From what I've read, FTPs for active recreational cyclists are in the 150 watt ballpark, so you're not doing too badly. And as noted above, it may be higher due to your having done it indoors on a trainer rather than outdoors.
The good news is that you now have a baseline. More good news is that to improve for the immediate future, all you have to do is ride more. You wrote that you average 70-120 miles, but it's unclear as to whether that's your weekly or monthly mileage. If it's weekly, you're doing fine. If it's monthly, you need to make it weekly.
There's another way to test for FTP that uses eight minutes rather than 20. You'll need to find about three miles of road that's reasonably level or slightly uphill. Do a good warmup, then hit it as hard as you can stand for eight minutes. Ride slowly back to where you started and do it again. Using the higher average watts of the two, multiply that by .90.
Since you live where it snows, you'll be on that trainer a lot shortly. I recommend that you get a book that shows you what you need to do to improve. I'd go with The Time-Crunched Cyclist, by Chris Carmichael. The explanations are clear, and it's designed for folks who have 6-8 hours/week to devote to it. Riding on a trainer can be incredibly boring, and having interval workouts makes it go faster...and they also make YOU go faster. There are other books out there (most notably by Joe Friel), but they're aimed more at racers than non-racing cyclists who want to improve.
The execution of the test itself looked about right. Power was relatively steady, HR rose slowly towards the end. Good job on that part! According to the graph (right above the power graph, click on the "20 min" box), your max average power was 168. The rule of thumb for figuring FTP from 20 minute power is to multiply it by .95, so you end up with 160 watts (159.6). From what I've read, FTPs for active recreational cyclists are in the 150 watt ballpark, so you're not doing too badly. And as noted above, it may be higher due to your having done it indoors on a trainer rather than outdoors.
The good news is that you now have a baseline. More good news is that to improve for the immediate future, all you have to do is ride more. You wrote that you average 70-120 miles, but it's unclear as to whether that's your weekly or monthly mileage. If it's weekly, you're doing fine. If it's monthly, you need to make it weekly.
There's another way to test for FTP that uses eight minutes rather than 20. You'll need to find about three miles of road that's reasonably level or slightly uphill. Do a good warmup, then hit it as hard as you can stand for eight minutes. Ride slowly back to where you started and do it again. Using the higher average watts of the two, multiply that by .90.
Since you live where it snows, you'll be on that trainer a lot shortly. I recommend that you get a book that shows you what you need to do to improve. I'd go with The Time-Crunched Cyclist, by Chris Carmichael. The explanations are clear, and it's designed for folks who have 6-8 hours/week to devote to it. Riding on a trainer can be incredibly boring, and having interval workouts makes it go faster...and they also make YOU go faster. There are other books out there (most notably by Joe Friel), but they're aimed more at racers than non-racing cyclists who want to improve.
10-11-13, 09:41 AM
#34
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Palm Desert, CA
Posts: 2,504
Bikes: Speedvagen Steel
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 429 Post(s)
Liked 248 Times
in
156 Posts
Also a good call. I have TrainerRoad bookmarked and have a promo for a free month that I received with my power meter but was waiting for colder weather to try it out. Do you know if it works with a Garmin USB1 ANT+ stick? I have one here but heard that I probably need to get a USB2
10-11-13, 09:47 AM
#35
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Palm Desert, CA
Posts: 2,504
Bikes: Speedvagen Steel
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 429 Post(s)
Liked 248 Times
in
156 Posts
I found a 1.2 mile stretch near my house that is pretty much flat and went up and down it like 6 times. power dropped to 0 for a second when making the U turn but I guess I compensated by getting on the power soon and very hard so I could pick up the speed again. I did it at 10:15pm so traffic was not an issue. Good luck and let the suffering begin 
!!
!!As a relate aside as well, the FTP is only as valuable as what you're going to do with it. If you're using it to compare your wang with others, then good for you, but it then doesn't really matter much.
If you use it for training, it becomes a lot more relevant how you're getting it. While the 60min all-out test is technically the gold standard, it's very, very hard, and if you rely on that, odds are low you'll test sufficiently to track progress. I'm still trying to find the best one to use, but I'm leaning toward the 8min tests - it's not so hard that you killl yourself doing it, and thus are likely to use it a lot more. In my next cycle, this testing is supposed to happend once every 4 weeks without blowing me up.
If it's going to be for a TT or nondraft race (or even race estimation), though, you want as close to 60min all-out as possible if you're using advice of others of %FTP to race at.
Also note that your indoor power will likely be lower than outdoor power, and road conditions and temp will even affect your FTP so try and keep it consistent during testing.
If you use it for training, it becomes a lot more relevant how you're getting it. While the 60min all-out test is technically the gold standard, it's very, very hard, and if you rely on that, odds are low you'll test sufficiently to track progress. I'm still trying to find the best one to use, but I'm leaning toward the 8min tests - it's not so hard that you killl yourself doing it, and thus are likely to use it a lot more. In my next cycle, this testing is supposed to happend once every 4 weeks without blowing me up.
If it's going to be for a TT or nondraft race (or even race estimation), though, you want as close to 60min all-out as possible if you're using advice of others of %FTP to race at.
Also note that your indoor power will likely be lower than outdoor power, and road conditions and temp will even affect your FTP so try and keep it consistent during testing.
). But not using it for racing, really want to learn to train with it properly and grow both my ability and take best advantage of precious workout time. I think my original question was to understand the benchmark and if I had done something improperly since I read so many posts about people's wattage and it seemed so insanely high comparatively and I don't think of myself as a poor cyclist!
10-11-13, 09:54 AM
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Palm Desert, CA
Posts: 2,504
Bikes: Speedvagen Steel
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 429 Post(s)
Liked 248 Times
in
156 Posts
I found a 1.2 mile stretch near my house that is pretty much flat and went up and down it like 6 times. power dropped to 0 for a second when making the U turn but I guess I compensated by getting on the power soon and very hard so I could pick up the speed again. I did it at 10:15pm so traffic was not an issue. Good luck and let the suffering begin !!
!!As a relate aside as well, the FTP is only as valuable as what you're going to do with it. If you're using it to compare your wang with others, then good for you, but it then doesn't really matter much.
If you use it for training, it becomes a lot more relevant how you're getting it. While the 60min all-out test is technically the gold standard, it's very, very hard, and if you rely on that, odds are low you'll test sufficiently to track progress. I'm still trying to find the best one to use, but I'm leaning toward the 8min tests - it's not so hard that you killl yourself doing it, and thus are likely to use it a lot more. In my next cycle, this testing is supposed to happend once every 4 weeks without blowing me up.
If it's going to be for a TT or nondraft race (or even race estimation), though, you want as close to 60min all-out as possible if you're using advice of others of %FTP to race at.
Also note that your indoor power will likely be lower than outdoor power, and road conditions and temp will even affect your FTP so try and keep it consistent during testing.
If you use it for training, it becomes a lot more relevant how you're getting it. While the 60min all-out test is technically the gold standard, it's very, very hard, and if you rely on that, odds are low you'll test sufficiently to track progress. I'm still trying to find the best one to use, but I'm leaning toward the 8min tests - it's not so hard that you killl yourself doing it, and thus are likely to use it a lot more. In my next cycle, this testing is supposed to happend once every 4 weeks without blowing me up.
If it's going to be for a TT or nondraft race (or even race estimation), though, you want as close to 60min all-out as possible if you're using advice of others of %FTP to race at.
Also note that your indoor power will likely be lower than outdoor power, and road conditions and temp will even affect your FTP so try and keep it consistent during testing.
And more to the point, the 20 minute warm-up should include one 5 minute interval, at all-out intensity. The FTP test is supposed to be a test of your aerobic system, but a 20 minute test can be skewed by initial recruitment of fast-twitch muscle fibers - this would not be a big problem in a 1 hour FTP test, but it can be for a 20 minute test. The prior 5 minute interval is to make sure that the 20 minute number is a bit more representative of your state of fitness. It hurts, but it helps.
And just a quick note lsberrios1 - the turn-around will definitely have an effect on your wattage and the kind of an effort you can put in. Indeed, making a u-turn is an important skill in out-and-back time trials. I suppose if you are consistent it will still let you set a benchmark for testing, but I do not think repeated u-turns will help you get a meaningful FTP number in terms of setting training zones - a quick break and then rapid acceleration will change your numbers compared to a continuous effort.
And just a quick note lsberrios1 - the turn-around will definitely have an effect on your wattage and the kind of an effort you can put in. Indeed, making a u-turn is an important skill in out-and-back time trials. I suppose if you are consistent it will still let you set a benchmark for testing, but I do not think repeated u-turns will help you get a meaningful FTP number in terms of setting training zones - a quick break and then rapid acceleration will change your numbers compared to a continuous effort.
10-11-13, 10:01 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 2,844
Bikes: '13 Spech Roubaix SL4 Expert
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
__________________
Cat 6 going on PRO....
Cat 6 going on PRO....
10-11-13, 10:16 AM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 8,546
Mentioned: 83 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I bet your 172 number is low. I think you didn't warm up enough and your effort was too low in the first half of your test, based on your HR. At the end, you should feel like you are going to barf, pass out or die.
The book you need is Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen & Coggan.
Buy the book, read the book, read the chapter about FTP testing twice, do the FTP test in the book, then you will have a preliminary FTP number you can train with - but you'll still need to do the test again pretty soon, because there's a learning curve to actually performing the test.
Time Crunched is good for training plans if you are actually time crunched, Friel is too confusing for a beginner-to-setting-up-training-plans. There are lots of plan options out there, i would start with one of the ones that Allen & Coggan (or friel) publish on the Training Peaks site (you do have to pay), or just pick a book you like and use it.
I like testing on the trainer, since it's a totally controlled environment and you don't have to limp home after you do your test, you are already there. My trainer tests are usually higher number than my outdoor tests, but that's unusual. My highest numbers come from uphill bike races.
Testing on courses with change of grade makes it really difficult to get a steady number. Small changes (u-turns, stop signs, hesistations due to traffic considerations, passing other cyclists) - are unpredictable and make your test number suspect. Testing hurts so much, you want to get done and know you trust the number, otherwise it's a waste of time & energy.
The book you need is Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen & Coggan.
Buy the book, read the book, read the chapter about FTP testing twice, do the FTP test in the book, then you will have a preliminary FTP number you can train with - but you'll still need to do the test again pretty soon, because there's a learning curve to actually performing the test.
Time Crunched is good for training plans if you are actually time crunched, Friel is too confusing for a beginner-to-setting-up-training-plans. There are lots of plan options out there, i would start with one of the ones that Allen & Coggan (or friel) publish on the Training Peaks site (you do have to pay), or just pick a book you like and use it.
I like testing on the trainer, since it's a totally controlled environment and you don't have to limp home after you do your test, you are already there. My trainer tests are usually higher number than my outdoor tests, but that's unusual. My highest numbers come from uphill bike races.
Testing on courses with change of grade makes it really difficult to get a steady number. Small changes (u-turns, stop signs, hesistations due to traffic considerations, passing other cyclists) - are unpredictable and make your test number suspect. Testing hurts so much, you want to get done and know you trust the number, otherwise it's a waste of time & energy.
10-11-13, 10:27 AM
#39
OMC
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 6,960
Bikes: Specialized Allez Sprint, Look 585, Specialized Allez Comp Race
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked 116 Times
in
49 Posts
Does the Chris Carmichael book focus on power as well? That mileage I quoted was weekly, but as mentioned I think I get out for a lot of miles but truthfully I don't know that I maximize them well. Plus I used to put in a lot of miles for weight loss and my understanding at the time was to keep very comfortable spinning pace to work off the weight.
"Just riding along" (JRA) is the best way to maximize weight loss, since your body burns proportionately more fat at that level of effort. If you do a lot of it - say, up to twice your current mileage - it works well to increase your endurance base. When you hear or read about people in "base period," this is what they're primarily doing.
__________________
Regards,
Chuck
Demain, on roule!
Regards,
Chuck
Demain, on roule!
10-11-13, 10:31 AM
#40
OMC
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 6,960
Bikes: Specialized Allez Sprint, Look 585, Specialized Allez Comp Race
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked 116 Times
in
49 Posts
I bet your 172 number is low. I think you didn't warm up enough and your effort was too low in the first half of your test, based on your HR. At the end, you should feel like you are going to barf, pass out or die.
The book you need is Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen & Coggan.
Buy the book, read the book, read the chapter about FTP testing twice, do the FTP test in the book, then you will have a preliminary FTP number you can train with - but you'll still need to do the test again pretty soon, because there's a learning curve to actually performing the test.
Time Crunched is good for training plans if you are actually time crunched, Friel is too confusing for a beginner-to-setting-up-training-plans. There are lots of plan options out there, i would start with one of the ones that Allen & Coggan (or friel) publish on the Training Peaks site (you do have to pay), or just pick a book you like and use it.
I like testing on the trainer, since it's a totally controlled environment and you don't have to limp home after you do your test, you are already there. My trainer tests are usually higher number than my outdoor tests, but that's unusual. My highest numbers come from uphill bike races.
Testing on courses with change of grade makes it really difficult to get a steady number. Small changes (u-turns, stop signs, hesistations due to traffic considerations, passing other cyclists) - are unpredictable and make your test number suspect. Testing hurts so much, you want to get done and know you trust the number, otherwise it's a waste of time & energy.
The book you need is Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen & Coggan.
Buy the book, read the book, read the chapter about FTP testing twice, do the FTP test in the book, then you will have a preliminary FTP number you can train with - but you'll still need to do the test again pretty soon, because there's a learning curve to actually performing the test.
Time Crunched is good for training plans if you are actually time crunched, Friel is too confusing for a beginner-to-setting-up-training-plans. There are lots of plan options out there, i would start with one of the ones that Allen & Coggan (or friel) publish on the Training Peaks site (you do have to pay), or just pick a book you like and use it.
I like testing on the trainer, since it's a totally controlled environment and you don't have to limp home after you do your test, you are already there. My trainer tests are usually higher number than my outdoor tests, but that's unusual. My highest numbers come from uphill bike races.
Testing on courses with change of grade makes it really difficult to get a steady number. Small changes (u-turns, stop signs, hesistations due to traffic considerations, passing other cyclists) - are unpredictable and make your test number suspect. Testing hurts so much, you want to get done and know you trust the number, otherwise it's a waste of time & energy.
Seriously, valygrl makes good points about the learning curve involved and things that can influence the outcome.
__________________
Regards,
Chuck
Demain, on roule!
Regards,
Chuck
Demain, on roule!
10-11-13, 10:43 AM
#41
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Palm Desert, CA
Posts: 2,504
Bikes: Speedvagen Steel
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 429 Post(s)
Liked 248 Times
in
156 Posts
I found a 1.2 mile stretch near my house that is pretty much flat and went up and down it like 6 times. power dropped to 0 for a second when making the U turn but I guess I compensated by getting on the power soon and very hard so I could pick up the speed again. I did it at 10:15pm so traffic was not an issue. Good luck and let the suffering begin !!
!!As a relate aside as well, the FTP is only as valuable as what you're going to do with it. If you're using it to compare your wang with others, then good for you, but it then doesn't really matter much.
If you use it for training, it becomes a lot more relevant how you're getting it. While the 60min all-out test is technically the gold standard, it's very, very hard, and if you rely on that, odds are low you'll test sufficiently to track progress. I'm still trying to find the best one to use, but I'm leaning toward the 8min tests - it's not so hard that you killl yourself doing it, and thus are likely to use it a lot more. In my next cycle, this testing is supposed to happend once every 4 weeks without blowing me up.
If it's going to be for a TT or nondraft race (or even race estimation), though, you want as close to 60min all-out as possible if you're using advice of others of %FTP to race at.
Also note that your indoor power will likely be lower than outdoor power, and road conditions and temp will even affect your FTP so try and keep it consistent during testing.
If you use it for training, it becomes a lot more relevant how you're getting it. While the 60min all-out test is technically the gold standard, it's very, very hard, and if you rely on that, odds are low you'll test sufficiently to track progress. I'm still trying to find the best one to use, but I'm leaning toward the 8min tests - it's not so hard that you killl yourself doing it, and thus are likely to use it a lot more. In my next cycle, this testing is supposed to happend once every 4 weeks without blowing me up.
If it's going to be for a TT or nondraft race (or even race estimation), though, you want as close to 60min all-out as possible if you're using advice of others of %FTP to race at.
Also note that your indoor power will likely be lower than outdoor power, and road conditions and temp will even affect your FTP so try and keep it consistent during testing.
And more to the point, the 20 minute warm-up should include one 5 minute interval, at all-out intensity. The FTP test is supposed to be a test of your aerobic system, but a 20 minute test can be skewed by initial recruitment of fast-twitch muscle fibers - this would not be a big problem in a 1 hour FTP test, but it can be for a 20 minute test. The prior 5 minute interval is to make sure that the 20 minute number is a bit more representative of your state of fitness. It hurts, but it helps.
And just a quick note lsberrios1 - the turn-around will definitely have an effect on your wattage and the kind of an effort you can put in. Indeed, making a u-turn is an important skill in out-and-back time trials. I suppose if you are consistent it will still let you set a benchmark for testing, but I do not think repeated u-turns will help you get a meaningful FTP number in terms of setting training zones - a quick break and then rapid acceleration will change your numbers compared to a continuous effort.
And just a quick note lsberrios1 - the turn-around will definitely have an effect on your wattage and the kind of an effort you can put in. Indeed, making a u-turn is an important skill in out-and-back time trials. I suppose if you are consistent it will still let you set a benchmark for testing, but I do not think repeated u-turns will help you get a meaningful FTP number in terms of setting training zones - a quick break and then rapid acceleration will change your numbers compared to a continuous effort.
I bet your 172 number is low. I think you didn't warm up enough and your effort was too low in the first half of your test, based on your HR. At the end, you should feel like you are going to barf, pass out or die.
The book you need is Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen & Coggan.
Buy the book, read the book, read the chapter about FTP testing twice, do the FTP test in the book, then you will have a preliminary FTP number you can train with - but you'll still need to do the test again pretty soon, because there's a learning curve to actually performing the test.
Time Crunched is good for training plans if you are actually time crunched, Friel is too confusing for a beginner-to-setting-up-training-plans. There are lots of plan options out there, i would start with one of the ones that Allen & Coggan (or friel) publish on the Training Peaks site (you do have to pay), or just pick a book you like and use it.
I like testing on the trainer, since it's a totally controlled environment and you don't have to limp home after you do your test, you are already there. My trainer tests are usually higher number than my outdoor tests, but that's unusual. My highest numbers come from uphill bike races.
Testing on courses with change of grade makes it really difficult to get a steady number. Small changes (u-turns, stop signs, hesistations due to traffic considerations, passing other cyclists) - are unpredictable and make your test number suspect. Testing hurts so much, you want to get done and know you trust the number, otherwise it's a waste of time & energy.
The book you need is Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen & Coggan.
Buy the book, read the book, read the chapter about FTP testing twice, do the FTP test in the book, then you will have a preliminary FTP number you can train with - but you'll still need to do the test again pretty soon, because there's a learning curve to actually performing the test.
Time Crunched is good for training plans if you are actually time crunched, Friel is too confusing for a beginner-to-setting-up-training-plans. There are lots of plan options out there, i would start with one of the ones that Allen & Coggan (or friel) publish on the Training Peaks site (you do have to pay), or just pick a book you like and use it.
I like testing on the trainer, since it's a totally controlled environment and you don't have to limp home after you do your test, you are already there. My trainer tests are usually higher number than my outdoor tests, but that's unusual. My highest numbers come from uphill bike races.
Testing on courses with change of grade makes it really difficult to get a steady number. Small changes (u-turns, stop signs, hesistations due to traffic considerations, passing other cyclists) - are unpredictable and make your test number suspect. Testing hurts so much, you want to get done and know you trust the number, otherwise it's a waste of time & energy.
@valygrl, did you ever end up going electronic?
10-11-13, 10:49 AM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 2,844
Bikes: '13 Spech Roubaix SL4 Expert
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Also, just noticed that you only warmed up for 5 minutes. That is too little. Should do more like 20 - 30 minute warm up with a high intensity 5 minute interval. This is the way my coach told me. I rode 20 minutes at z1, means slow pace high cadence or recovery mode. Then at minute 20 I upped it a notch to z2 (steady endurance effort). At minute 22 upped it to z3 (tempo), here you will start to feel the burn. Minute 24 ALL OUT! until minute 25. On that 24th minute I used my anaerobic capacity 182+ bpm.
After you are done with that 25 minute block rest 5 minutes in zone 1. Don't stop but rather just coast or pedal with very low wattage and high cadence. And guess what's gonna happen at minute 30... yup you guessed it. GUN IT!!! Don't gun it 100% from the beginning though. do something (perceived effort) that you think you can hold for 20 minutes but that by the end of those 20 minutes, maybe minute 19, you wished you were dead.
What is your current Max HR? From that number I'd do 90 to 95% steady effort. Say, my Max is 190. I tried holding on to 175 until the end. Since you are bit older than I am i'll assume you can do 178-180@ 100%. Then shoot for 168+/- from beginning to end. Beware, YOU WILL SUFFER. But don't give up. Most of that pain is mental anyway. I can tell you that during the first 10 minutes my legs were on fire from the first minute (5 min interval in warm up already painful). At minute 15 your legs are the least of your concerns as the pain crawls up your stomach into your sternum... minute 18??? just hold on to the bars, you are no longer riding the bike but merely hanging on to it while pedaling. One thing I loved about it? Being able to zone out, breath slowly while hearing your heart beat at 180bpm inside your head. I get shivers just thinking about it.
Here is a little motivation though ... just thinking about it makes all the pain go away!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4b4DJFStVQ
After you are done with that 25 minute block rest 5 minutes in zone 1. Don't stop but rather just coast or pedal with very low wattage and high cadence. And guess what's gonna happen at minute 30... yup you guessed it. GUN IT!!! Don't gun it 100% from the beginning though. do something (perceived effort) that you think you can hold for 20 minutes but that by the end of those 20 minutes, maybe minute 19, you wished you were dead.
What is your current Max HR? From that number I'd do 90 to 95% steady effort. Say, my Max is 190. I tried holding on to 175 until the end. Since you are bit older than I am i'll assume you can do 178-180@ 100%. Then shoot for 168+/- from beginning to end. Beware, YOU WILL SUFFER. But don't give up. Most of that pain is mental anyway. I can tell you that during the first 10 minutes my legs were on fire from the first minute (5 min interval in warm up already painful). At minute 15 your legs are the least of your concerns as the pain crawls up your stomach into your sternum... minute 18??? just hold on to the bars, you are no longer riding the bike but merely hanging on to it while pedaling. One thing I loved about it? Being able to zone out, breath slowly while hearing your heart beat at 180bpm inside your head. I get shivers just thinking about it.
Here is a little motivation though ... just thinking about it makes all the pain go away!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4b4DJFStVQ
__________________
Cat 6 going on PRO....
Cat 6 going on PRO....
Last edited by lsberrios1; 10-11-13 at 10:52 AM.
10-11-13, 10:58 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
This is a bit off topic so sorry, but this statement about virtualpower seems to get repeated a lot and can certainly be a true statement in some situations but as a blanket statement it is false. About a year ago I borrowed a powertap and on a cheapo CycleOps mag trainer calculated the power line for it. My wife borrowed a powertap from a friend recently and just yesterday I used it on the same trainer - again a year later. Out of curiosity I calculated the virtual power using the formula I came up with a year earlier and ran a comparison chart. The redline is calculated/virtual power and the blue line is the PowerTap data.
A trainer can be as accurate and produce as repeatable results as a PowerTap for a fraction of the price if you have a basic understanding of your trainer and the variables that influence it. The statement of "numbers are only valid if you're using a power device" is false even if it can be true in certain instances. Although I would agree that indoor numbers aren't necessarily transferable to outdoors even if you are using the same PowerTap both indoors and outdoors.
So if you have a trainer and want to use it for power training indoors it is extremely valuable so long as you have a basic understanding of what you are doing.
A trainer can be as accurate and produce as repeatable results as a PowerTap for a fraction of the price if you have a basic understanding of your trainer and the variables that influence it. The statement of "numbers are only valid if you're using a power device" is false even if it can be true in certain instances. Although I would agree that indoor numbers aren't necessarily transferable to outdoors even if you are using the same PowerTap both indoors and outdoors.
So if you have a trainer and want to use it for power training indoors it is extremely valuable so long as you have a basic understanding of what you are doing.
If you're lucky, your trainer will well approximate a trainer curve, but there is a lot of variability, even in the most consistent testing one, the KK. (Trainerroad tested them extensively.)
I have a well-regarded one, the Cycleops Fluid2, and I've correlated the virtualpower with 3 similar calculated power curves I found on the web, including the one that Trainerroad uses. I have a powertap as well, so I can compare realpower to virtualpower. And on my Cycleops (one of the best regarded trainers), virtualpower was anywhere from 40 to 80 watts (!) higher than real power as read on the powertap.
It didn't make any difference for training with trainerrroad, as only the relative power is needed, but unless you can reference your trainer to a true power device, use caution thinking virtualpower = realpower. It generally does not, even for the KK or Fluid2 trainers.
10-11-13, 11:05 AM
#44
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,302
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1447 Post(s)
Liked 724 Times
in
371 Posts
That's not the intent of Coggan's chart. The Chart is the most misunderstood, and misapplied piece of information regarding training with power that's on the internet.
To the extent the chart has use, it is comparing yourself to yourself to establish a power profile.
What you want to do with the chart is determine your w/kg at the various types of power output, i.e. maximum, 1 minute, 5 minute, FT.
It doesn't matter if your FTP tests out as Cat 5 or Cat 1. That's really not useful information.
What can be useful is to see for example is that your FTP is in the Cat 3 range, while your one minute power, and sprint, test out untrained, or vice versa.
From that you can indentify strengths that can be raced, and weaknesses that need to be trained.
Where you are from Cat 1 to Cat 5 is determined on the road, not with a power meter.
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
10-11-13, 11:09 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 2,844
Bikes: '13 Spech Roubaix SL4 Expert
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Very true... I have a 3.2w/kg FTP that should put me in upper cat 4 lower cat 3 and just a few weeks ago I got seriously smoked on a cat 5 crit lol..
__________________
Cat 6 going on PRO....
Cat 6 going on PRO....
10-11-13, 11:16 AM
#46
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,302
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1447 Post(s)
Liked 724 Times
in
371 Posts
It would be interesting to know how your 10 second, and one minute power compare to your FTP.
It's likely that you need to work on shorter intervals, and recovering quickly from shorter intervals to improve your crit performance. (that and just do more of them.)
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
10-11-13, 11:20 AM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 2,844
Bikes: '13 Spech Roubaix SL4 Expert
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That's most likely due to the nature of that course, and your lack of race experience. But it also illustrates a point about the Coggan chart.
It would be interesting to know how your 10 second, and one minute power compare to your FTP.
It's likely that you need to work on shorter intervals, and recovering quickly from shorter intervals to improve your crit performance. (that and just do more of them.)
It would be interesting to know how your 10 second, and one minute power compare to your FTP.
It's likely that you need to work on shorter intervals, and recovering quickly from shorter intervals to improve your crit performance. (that and just do more of them.)
__________________
Cat 6 going on PRO....
Cat 6 going on PRO....
10-11-13, 11:53 AM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
That's not the intent of Coggan's chart. The Chart is the most misunderstood, and misapplied piece of information regarding training with power that's on the internet.
To the extent the chart has use, it is comparing yourself to yourself to establish a power profile.
What you want to do with the chart is determine your w/kg at the various types of power output, i.e. maximum, 1 minute, 5 minute, FT.
It doesn't matter if your FTP tests out as Cat 5 or Cat 1. That's really not useful information.
What can be useful is to see for example is that your FTP is in the Cat 3 range, while your one minute power, and sprint, test out untrained, or vice versa.
From that you can indentify strengths that can be raced, and weaknesses that need to be trained.
Where you are from Cat 1 to Cat 5 is determined on the road, not with a power meter.
To the extent the chart has use, it is comparing yourself to yourself to establish a power profile.
What you want to do with the chart is determine your w/kg at the various types of power output, i.e. maximum, 1 minute, 5 minute, FT.
It doesn't matter if your FTP tests out as Cat 5 or Cat 1. That's really not useful information.
What can be useful is to see for example is that your FTP is in the Cat 3 range, while your one minute power, and sprint, test out untrained, or vice versa.
From that you can indentify strengths that can be raced, and weaknesses that need to be trained.
Where you are from Cat 1 to Cat 5 is determined on the road, not with a power meter.
If you've got the W/kg of a cat5, there is no amount of road technique and drafting that will get you to win (or even hang on briefly) to a Cat1-2 field. Similarly, if you're truly testing Cat1 and above, you probably won't learn a whole lot racing and crushing Cat4s who have so much less W/kg than you that you can be really sloppy with racing tactics and still grind out the win just by using power without technique/drafting.
And obviously, it's a good reality check for those that are interested roughly in how strong those 'fast' guys really are.
10-11-13, 12:00 PM
#49
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,302
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1447 Post(s)
Liked 724 Times
in
371 Posts
^ knowing that your FTP is lower than other people in your Cat, doesn't change anything. It just tells you that you need to raise your FTP, which presumably you already knew.
Knowing that as a relative matter your 1 minute power is much better than your 5 second power may tell you want to take 1 kilometer flyers.
And if you know your 5 second power is quite good, but your 5 minute and FTP are low it tells you that you may want to sit in as much as possible and contest the sprint.
And it identifies what to work on.
So I get back to the point that the purpose of the chart in the book is to identify relative strengths and weaknesses, not to establish a pecking order.
Which is precisely what Coggan says about his own chart:
Aside from satisfying people's natural curiosity, though, such category-based values would seem to have limited practical use - after all, the best measure of a rider's competitive ability relative to that of others is their actual race performance, not their power output. If, however, valid standards were available for power across different durations that represented different physiological characteristics or abilities, then it would be possible to identify a particular individual's relative strengths and weaknesses based on their "power profile". In such an analysis, the primary comparison would therefore be the rider against themselves, and not (directly) against others. Such information could be then used to help plan an appropriate training program, evaluate the effectiveness thereof, and to possibly identify events where an individual might be expected to achieve the greatest success. My goal was therefore to develop rationale guidelines that could be used for this purpose.
https://home.trainingpeaks.com/articl...profiling.aspx
Knowing that as a relative matter your 1 minute power is much better than your 5 second power may tell you want to take 1 kilometer flyers.
And if you know your 5 second power is quite good, but your 5 minute and FTP are low it tells you that you may want to sit in as much as possible and contest the sprint.
And it identifies what to work on.
So I get back to the point that the purpose of the chart in the book is to identify relative strengths and weaknesses, not to establish a pecking order.
Which is precisely what Coggan says about his own chart:
Aside from satisfying people's natural curiosity, though, such category-based values would seem to have limited practical use - after all, the best measure of a rider's competitive ability relative to that of others is their actual race performance, not their power output. If, however, valid standards were available for power across different durations that represented different physiological characteristics or abilities, then it would be possible to identify a particular individual's relative strengths and weaknesses based on their "power profile". In such an analysis, the primary comparison would therefore be the rider against themselves, and not (directly) against others. Such information could be then used to help plan an appropriate training program, evaluate the effectiveness thereof, and to possibly identify events where an individual might be expected to achieve the greatest success. My goal was therefore to develop rationale guidelines that could be used for this purpose.
https://home.trainingpeaks.com/articl...profiling.aspx
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
Last edited by merlinextraligh; 10-11-13 at 12:04 PM.
10-11-13, 12:47 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Again, agree, but his advice is really aimed specifically at serious road racers doing technical racing like crits and pack-heavy road races.
If you're the 99% of riders who do not fall into this category, you do NOT need to tease apart your 1s/5s/1min power, and can strictly go off your FTP for both training AND TT/road racing very successfully.
Just because you don't know your 1s/5s/1min power vs FTP differential doesn't mean you're not using power correctly, particularly if you don't do a lot of criterium or group race riding.
If you're the 99% of riders who do not fall into this category, you do NOT need to tease apart your 1s/5s/1min power, and can strictly go off your FTP for both training AND TT/road racing very successfully.
Just because you don't know your 1s/5s/1min power vs FTP differential doesn't mean you're not using power correctly, particularly if you don't do a lot of criterium or group race riding.