This has probably been answered before, but I can’t seem to find it searching through here and via the article.
Is there a rule of thumb of how long you need to go before TTE for the test to be valid? Do you need to get through the first ten minutes at 92-95% target FTP to be valid? What about the 15mins at target FTP? Or do you need to start ramping before the test becomes accurate? etc
I’m just thinking if someone truly overestimated their FTP they might not make it very far into the test, but still take average power, which would be pretty high.
On the flip-side, severely underestimating the FTP could result in too low of an FTP because the large portions of your average power come from the 10min at 92-95%, and 15min at 100%. If you sail through those and the ramp test, it would be way too low.
TL;DR: Is there a way to know if you over-estimated or under-estimated your target FTP based on how far into the test you got?
Most excellent question! There are two things happening. First is fatigue (around and below FTP, more or less) is pretty much caused by glycogen depletion, as we’re not over FTP we’re not creating metabolic byproducts that might inhibit contraction. So when we train TTE out, we may or may not be getting the slow component effect of utilizing larger motor units (which may or may not be less efficient) so we are potentially aerobically training larger motor units, as well as filling them with more glycogen. The other thing we’re doing is increasing fat mobilization and oxidation, as those two things (probably more the latter since most variable state training will vastly improve the former in large motor units already without extensive FTP work) will be the big determinants of TTE.
Me too. I have done the Kolie Moore tests in erg and tweaked up and down the Erg watts but now I understand this is missing the point. It really is not anywhere, imo, near the same as using slope or resistance mode and concentrating on how you feel. Tweaking erg mode you end up focusing on that or just settling into a comfortable power / rhythm and end up no really focusing on how you are feeling compared to resistance mode for example.
I did have a nit to pick. They talk about the tolerance of a power meter as if it is the same as repeatability. If the tolerance of all power meters is +/- 3%, I can’t imagine it swings by 3% (if calibrated) from ride to ride, especially at nearly the same power. Within a power meter, I have to think the repeatability is much better than that.
Of course, all this is moot, because we all know that FTP is “the number I entered, based on how I think I would have done if, you know, I really tried.”
Slightly off topic.
My conclusion from reading this thread: The TR ramp test leads to overestimated FTPs. Thus a lot of the TR plans Sweet Spot workouts are actually more like threshold. My n=1 agrees with this.
To me that raises the question: If a more realistic FTP is obtained from KM or similar. How will this play out with the TR plans? (you would be constantly training at a lower intensity) Are you better off sticking with the ramp test and the plans, and just knowing that you cannot necessarily use that FTP to pace races/efforts?
The ramp test overestimates ftp, if you are fairly strong anaerobically. For strong aerobic “diesel” type riders, it will probably underestimate.
I think the main consequence is, be ok with adjusting the intensity of the TR workouts so they are achievable. Depending on the rider type you are, that might be the majority of the workouts under and up to ftp, or the workouts over ftp. You also might just fall in the middle, and they all work ok too!
With regards to this thread, if you actually want to be able to hold your ftp number for a long time, for example for a 25mile/40km TT, you might be better off doing a long form ftp test.
For me personally, it definitely overestimates, but not to the point where I cannot complete workouts. I follow the low volume plans, and sprinkle on some outdoor rides.
My main point is this, would I see a greater benefit if I did indeed reduce the intensity? ( I complete all workouts, but sweetspot often pushes my HR into the threshold zone, and my RPE is high).
If you are completing all workouts then there is no reason to reduce intensity…when considering adaptations. If, however, you want to improve, say, recovery and fatigue, then you probably could reduce intensity by a few points without any detriment to performance benefits.
Re: the above, I think both KM and Coach Chad have stated that being off the mark by a few % points isn’t going to drastically alter anything. This is something I’ve tried to cultivate this season, development of RPE rather than strict adherence to power numbers. That, and knowledge that if I’m in the ballpark, I’m going to be getting most (if not all) the adaptations – esp. sub-FTP zones.
Well, that’s what I ended up doing regarding the ftp test…
I’m not following a TR plan now, they didn’t really work for me
(Not quite sure if we had a slight misunderstanding - I didn’t mean fudging the test numbers, but the workout intensities, which are by default a fixed % of your ftp. The % might be wrong for someone and need adjusting. It’s a consequence of TR basically using Coggan’s classic levels)
If you are doing LV SSB plan - you will be probably able to do every workout and recover between them. The problem will start with something like suprathreshold or especially when you will do longer threshold workouts like 3x20@100% FTP - if your FTP is off they would become suprathreshold that will kill your training and recovery. If your FTP is properly set and you go with something like 97%-98% of FTP for these workouts - they suddenly become easily doable and you will be able to also work more on your TTE and recover properly. So it all depends how you train, your volume and work type.
