So based on that, an estimate of your current FTP is 255W. If you're training based on an FTP of 280, it's set a good 10% too high. That is a very substantial difference that you would notice when doing aerobic length interval workouts (especially sweet spot/threshold with repeats), because it essentially puts your target power a full zone too high.

I think 255 might be a bit high for a few reasons. First, that 20 min interval is right at the beginning of the ride - meaning the rider's full anaerobic capacity can be used to generate power. I also see a dip in HR towards the end, implying a drop off in power generation, although it's hard to tell from a screen cap from Garmin's site as there's not enough detail. Terrain and/or traffic could have been an issue, but that HR dip does imply that the early parts of the interval were overdone. Third, outside of the final burst, power levels look like they trend downward over the course of the interval.

All those are consistent with anaerobic power generation adding to aerobic power. But we're trying to measure purely aerobic power.

I'd call it 245W if I had base it off just this one ride. But again, it's only one 20-minute interval. I've done FTP tests where I couldn't hold 90% of an FTP value that was known good for 10 minutes, much less 105% for 20. Some days just suck.

Agreed. I think dunbar has a pretty good short-term anaerobic capacity (I think that's what Coggan is getting at with FRC in the next release of WKO+) and a relatively weaker aerobic capacity.

The test was also done on a pretty fair grade (11.2mph average speed) so he might have been more in the "climbing threshold" kind of range that some trainers reference -- low cadence above-threshold efforts that can be sustained for a fair bit.

Yay!! Data! On my phone so it's hard to see what that curve says at an hour. 20min @255 corresponds to 242 FTP (95% of a 20 minute effort). Getting winded at 80-90% of FTP is what we've been saying. That would get you to the point where it's hard to talk as soon as you cross 190 and into the 200 range. That's normal.

Congrats. You have the same kind of anaerobic engine that I have. I believe that's what I called and one of my first posts. Assuming you can eventually get your weight into the 160 range you can be fairly competitive in cat 5 crits.

For the record that qualifies as a gross over estimation. 40 points on 240. That comes out to 16%. Your training targets should be substantially changed. You will also see much better gains now.

I also think 255 is probably a bit high. Take a look at the cumulative six weeks power curve. At 1 hr, Dunbar is right at 200 watts, substantially below the tested 255. That supports the theory that Dunbar has a good ability to use anaerobic power to maintain a higher power output over a shorter interval effort and helps explain why he is having trouble maintaining a conversation during what he describes as moderate efforts.

Also, and this needs to be said, FTP is nothing more than a point for individual measurement. I have a rather low FTP, but it has not held me back in racing.

I just took a quick look at FRC. How is it different from AWC (anaerobic work capacity)? AWC has been in GoldenCheetah for quite a while now.

I think that's likely a product of his training regimen. He's not doing any longer z2/3 rides where he's sitting at, say, 80% of FTP for 90 or 120 minutes with little to zero breaks. I seem to remember he posted that he doesn't ride where he can go non-stop for more than a few minutes at a time, making it really hard to both develop and measure the ability to actually generate steady long-term aerobic power.

I'm pretty much the exact opposite - good power numbers, crappy results.

It was 20min @ 268, for an estimate of 255 (95%).

I know Coggan claims it is different, but I don't remember the details -- it's been a while since I watched the webinars discussing the next version of WKO+. Conceptually they seem very similar to me.

If you are interested, there is some discussion of FRC vs AWC over on the Wattage group (a Google group that Coggan is quite active on). There was also recently a big thread on the difference between FTP and CP60. FWIW, in both threads there is a mix of genuine intellectual discussion and unproductive name-calling, and no clear definitive answers.

Love how the whole conversation changed after 8 pages when the data finally came into play. Let this be a lesson to future posters to just open with the data from the get go.

I haven't been on wattage in quite a while; I'll check it out.

The impression I got from all of the WKO4 webinars was that the WKO models are better and different mathematically (certainly a necessary assertion for a patent). But from a practical point of view, given the imprecision of the human machine and its day-to-day variation, I'm not sure there's a significant practical difference for most cyclists. I'm pretty sure there isn't for me.

i did say it in my numbered points about FTP on one of the first few pages.

Agreed on the hour but he's said he doesn't have power data for serious rides over an hour in length so it's kinda what we got to go with.

Dunbar - keep building the power files and populate that curve over time. It will help you identify a lot about your own psyiology and capability.

Haven't been on there since I became a powertap dealer and powertaps stopped being so maintenance heavy.
Would agree with your patent assertion and general conclusions for riders.

Totally missed that on my phone, my apologies.

Late last summer, I was ready to snatch the pebble from my master's hand. The backstory: he got me started cycling. Riding with him prior, when he was in shape and I was not, would drive me nuts when we climbed big steep hills. I'd be dying, and I'd look over, and he'd be barely panting. Or the SOB would bust out in a STORY!

So fall comes around and I'd gotten all obsessed with riding and caught, then passed, his conditioning level. It helped that he went backwards due to getting sick, traveling, etc.

So we did my hilly 50-mile route, that I'd been pounding every other day like clockwork for weeks, and about 3/4 up a particularly nasty wench of a hill, I'm fine but he's clearly suffering, and I said: so, tell me a story!

It was, like, so cool.

Getting better at pacing myself. Averaged 285w for 20 minutes up the same climb today. Started slightly under target power and didn't feel like I was dying half way up this time.

Was looking forward to your update. Thanks for keeping the thread going.
Where is the climb, by the way?

A BF member suggested it to me - Mandeville (aka Mandeville Canyon Rd) - is a popular climb with roadies in the Santa Monica / Brentwood area. One of the few places you can go 20 minutes uninterrupted around here.

Here's a video of the climb (not my video.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_wQniTxqoQ