People are wildly overestimating what the average joe can attain for an FTP.
14 Likes
Agreed - 4 w/kg FTP is a pretty serious milestone that many (most?) cyclists will never approach
7 Likes
I like to think I live a relatively dedicated to cycling lifeā¦ although there are areas, especially in nutrition, that I have been making an effort to improve. With all that in mind, I topped out at 3.8w/kg last year and hope to improve on that this year. 4w/kg isnāt ānormalā, its great!
2 Likes
I remember reading Coggan thought 4 W/kg could be attained by the āaverageā person with training.
1 Like
I guess the question is - are they still āaverageā people when they suddenly start optimising their lives and focused training 8 hours a week?
1 Like
I interpret average relating to their innate physical ability, not necessarily their motivation or dedication to training.
1 Like
I think there are two types of limiters that prevent people from hitting various fitness goals.
Everyone focuses on the first of these - physical genetic limitations. I think this is what Coggan (and others) mean when they say that the āaverageā person can obtain a certain milestone such as 4W/kg. Essentially what I think they mean is that your genetic limit as an āaverageā person should be above 4W/kg
The one that they donāt often focus on are lifestyle or motivational limitations. These are more varied and are very different.
For instance - youād never assume that someone with a completely full work and family life who can only train 90 minutes a week would be able to hit 4W/kg - no matter what their genetic potential might be. Doesnāt matter how structured their training is, 90 minutes a week simply isnāt enough.
Likewise - youād never assume that someone with all the time in the world to train, great genetics, but no mental toughness to complete hard workouts would hit 4W/kg. Say they rode 20 hours a week but anytime they had to do anything at threshold or above they just gave up because it hurt too much and they couldnāt push through. You wouldnāt expect great performance gains and theyād top out at a big aerobic engine and no ability to increase their actual threshold.
Same thing with the kg side of the equation - they could ride all the time but if they eat crap and weigh 250 lbs itās going to be pretty hard to get the power necessary out of their body.
So I donāt think it is fair to say that any person can hit 4 W/kg. Surely you could say that their genetic limitations are probably not what is holding them back but that doesnāt mean that the other limiters arenāt just as real and every bit as limiting as the potential genetic ceiling
6 Likes
Not any person, just roughly 50% 
Joking aside, I completely agree with you.
Seeing all these bigger guys close to my weight does make me wonder if iād have the same power i have now without my upper body mass. Iām only 5ā8" and trying to get down to 68kg. If i can get there losing body fat only iād be about 9% currently sitting at 69.5kg and 11% so i have some skin i can pinch but after 3 to 4 lbs those pounds are going to be hard to lose. At my frame though i definitely only gain 5 to 10 watts per training block.
2 Likes
One of the things that I love about this topic is that for non-cycling friends / family, they think Iām the fittest, most dedicated amateur athleteā¦ but Iām usually bringing up the rear in 4th cat road races and crits (UK equiv of Cat 5 in the US!). Love it though.
22 Likes
This is so true! Anyone racing, regardless or category, is typically more fit and training more than anyone they know.
If you ride a bike more than a couple hours a week youāre already an outlier in many respects. If you ride over 8-10hrs ānormalā people think youāre some kind of professional level athlete.
7 Likes
TBH, I was speaking of raw power more than w/Kg. I think 3.8 or so w/kgis definitely doable for the average committed rider. I think 300 watts as an FTP is ludicrously overstated. 260-280 maybe
1 Like
The problem with this, at least for me living in Chicago, is that base phase is almost always during the winter ā and in the winter it is very, very difficult to target weight loss because my overall lifestyle becomes much more sedentary. There are no long walks with the dog, or days playing with the kids at the beach, or the quick jog after work, or bicycling here-and-there around town.
The only activity I generally get during the winter is the time on the trainer or at the gym. In the summer, there are longer weekend rides and all of the other ancillary activities that help with weight loss.
All of this is to say nothing about how the diet gets crushed around the holidays . . .
3 Likes
I think youāre making a common mistake in conflating weight loss with activity level. Really you lose weight in the kitchen, not at the gym.
I find base season (winter) the easiest time to control my diet (and yes - my total caloric burn on the bike is lower in the winter, same as most people) because it is in social situations where I struggle with my diet and those are reduced by the same sedentary trends that you see.
If youāre really struggling with weight Iād suggest you take a hard look at where your calories are coming from and work on adjusting your input instead of your expenditure. Sure - increasing cycling volume will help with weight loss but until you have your diet under control youāll never really have a good handle on your weight.
5 Likes
I agree - I find weight much much easier to control in the winter. My workouts are generally quite tightly controlled (AKA TrainerRoad) and I know what kind of food intake I need to fuel my workouts. In the summer there is a lot variability and I usually end up eating quite a bit moreā¦
1 Like
Bbq and brews season is harder to control weight for me, especially because all the salty snacks make my weight fluctuate a lot during the week.
Wait . . . I actually have a pretty good handle on my weight 
I never said I didnāt! (gasping with feigned indignationā¦)
I just said that I donāt really lose weight that well during winter/base phase. Iāve lost over 40lbs in the last 3 years, so I must be doing something rightā¦
1 Like
Do you guys (the smaller <70kg) also have problems to stay on front of a faster groupride?
Like our fast ride is around 36-39 km/h. on flat ride
I get smashed. And the bigger guys can stay much longer on the front.
1 Like
From my local racing experience, 300-320W FTP seems to be attainable by any reasonably-trained cyclist (almost irrespective of height)
I think this sentence needs a bit more explanation. I would argue someone going through a series of plans would be reasonably well trained but that does not guarantee a 300 plus FTP.
Good point. This metric is different for everyone.
By āreasonably well trainedā, I mean someone that races at a fairly high local level (in Aus Iād call that B-grade local racing or higher. In US, I believe thatās equiv. to cat 3? or higher) and also has at least 4-5 seasons of actual structured training under their belt.
I say āreasonablyā, because it is difficult to become a highly tuned athlete on only 2-3h of training a week - which is what many with families and full time jobs can achieve while maintaining a good bike-family-work balance. However, in comparison to the general population (or a new or non-racing cyclist) these āreasonably well trainedā riders will usually be seen to be hardcore, committed cyclists.
Donāt get demoralised, just keep working at it and find a way to make it fun! Celebrate the little wins and improvements. Donāt make your cycling purely about hitting a number, make it about enabling you to enjoy what you want to do more!
W/kg and raw watts are just numbers. If youāre in it for racing, there is more to racing than just the numbers. If youāre in it for getting PRās, finishing a fondo or just beating your mates to the next street sign any improvement should give you more motivation and cause for a pat on the back. 
2 Likes