Exactly this 
I use 5 min power (MAP) for VO2Max taken from my latest Ramp Test
LT2 from my latest TTE KM FTP test
LT1 from DFA-a1 test
I figure the numbers are âgoodâ enough for an amateur to base some training decisions on and assess progressâŚ
Your actual 5 min MMP is almost assuredly higher than your 5-min power from a ramp test, and likely by a significant amount. I donât recall exactly, but the last time I did a ramp test with a 5-min MMP test in the rough schedule vicinity, the difference was like 20W, or about 6%.
Otherwise I think what you wrote is at least a decent proxy for this for field testing.
done that a few times - its just about the only âenduranceâ workout I can manage indoors!
I did a big volume of z2 and z3 work the last 3 months. My z3 work was above my DFA-1a LT1 HR, but 3 months of solid work at 10-15hrs per week gave me a +30w increase in max 5 min power and +10w on my 20 min test last week. Zero work >85% FTP. That was after a lot of easy z2 work last year as well.
Just transitioning to a block of HIT work now but will be be doing some more work just under the LT1 HR when I feel fresh enough and it wont compromose the HIT work.
I expect (hope 
) you are correct. Just having not done any large efforts of VO2Max work just yet I used the 5min power no from last ramp test (which I did as a follow up to the KM Basline Test) to validate my FTP.
A lot of 3-4 minute results in this thread:
but context is everything, so maybe if someone went out and targeted a 5-min all-out the feedback in that thread would be different.
Maybe Iâm the n=1⌠but weâve talked a whole lot about how TR never has you do all-out efforts, so in any event the average TR user probably has no idea what their actual MMP is at a lot of levels.
yup. I like to think of rampâs MAP as a ceiling on 5-min power, but these have historically been one of my weaknesses, and I donât have a ramp test close enough to a 5-min all-out effort.
This is very encouraging, Iâm on a similar path, but volume is very low about 4-5h a week right now. I will ramp it up once I can go outdoors. My target events are in July. That being said I started doing a bit of tempo, using HR limiter (160bpm). I had my first session on Monday. I was afraid it was going to suck, but It felt really easy on the legs and breathing.
So if you got to 75% of 375W for VT1 wouldnât that be World Tour Pro level?
I asked in the thread on MAP but there is something Iâm missing about these âtranslationsâ from VO2max to power.
(Sorry for cross posting but wasnât sure if youâre tracking the MAP thread)
Just catching up. Thanks for flagging. Reading the other thread it makes sense. I was (blindly) following Alanâs numbers.
Sounds like 75% FTP for VT1 will be a good proxy.
The ongoing education and learning on this forum is excellent 
Does the LT1 HR goes higher with training, or is it just the wattage that you can put at the same heartrate?
The second one.
It was all here right in our noses.
The issue with that study is that lt2 wasnt reported, just tte at 88% vo2 max. With how they define lt1, it is going to overestimate it using 2 minute steps so it would have been beneficial to see the estimate for lt2 using the same protocol.
If you look at the 30 minute bout at 80% of vo2max, even the high lt group was mostly around 2.5 mmol, which could easily be above lt1 for most people, or at least the very top of it if you want to say it is a range from baseline up to 1 mmol above it, assuming their baseline was 1.5, its still on the high side of that threshold. Then 88% vo2 was approximately mlss, so still a fairly normal distance between the two.
At the moment, Iâm enjoying the new Skibaâs book, it has a ton of references and it has a good blend of theory and practice. He doesnât seem to make any distinction between LT1 and LT2, his model of physiology has LT, CP and Wâ. It appears that in very well trained cyclists (w/kg >4.5), the distinction of LT1/LT2 is useless and correlates ok with FTP.
The usual caveat is that all these LT analysis are conditional on the testing methodology used.
He says this or you are saying this?
Iâm paraphrasing, but Skiba is saying this and he is supporting it with the study I referenced.
I guess the revelation is that LT1 = LT2 for highly trained athletes.
I donât have full access, but it is discussing ftp = lt2 in well-trained cyclists, but ftp is lower than lt2 in recreational cyclists.
Cp is generally a little higher than lt2, as if you try to maintain power at Cp, you will be above Cp about half the time and experience increasing lactate concentrations.
Cp is used because it is easier to measure, lt2 is still a bit of a black box while lt1 is fairly easy and reproducible to test.
I have been trying out with estimating Cp with the 3 minute all out test, which is ime less taxing than the ramp test but is still quite demanding. Then i subtract 15 watts to use in tr for setting my workouts. Been working well so far, but vo2 work at 120% of that number is not freaky feasible since it is 20-30 watts higher than my 6 minute best.
I listend to Skiba on a podcast recently (That Triathlon Show probably). I seem to recall him saying that LT1 wasnât a factor for him. He also prescribes middle intensities.
I have the new book on order.
