That’s for good reason, though. People who are new to structured training tend to see more rapid fitness gains. Gains in FTP correlate very strongly will many other fitness metrics that you can think of. Typically new athletes will see their power curve rise, their endurance increases, etc.
The only other universal metric that I see is consistency.
Other fitness metrics become relevant when you are more experienced, more fit (so that your FTP gains are small and changes in fitness are not necessarily expressed in a higher FTP) and your training becomes more specific. E. g. my gains in a polarized base block are very different from this I typically see in a sweet spot base block.
To the best of my understanding all other relevant fitness metrics are
highly personal and tied to a specific fitness goal,
often harder to measure (think TTE tests),
require experience so that the athlete picks the right metrics (which includes the event type, strength vs. limiter, etc.).
That’s precisely my point, and I get it, someone who just started riding 6 months ago will not have a full picture. I’ve been riding for almost 10 years and I don’t have a full picture.
My problem with being blind on FTP is that you’re training for a 20-minute test, that’s it. You can do a hell of a 20-minute power number training for it, aiming for an increase in FTP. But that’s not the way a real-world ride works. If I look at my numbers now and at the beginning of the season, they are all worse now, but I’m faster than at the beginning of the season. Why? Probably lack of test, and I don’t care. Probably my TTE, repeatability, or numbers after 1000/1500KJ are really good, but those numbers don’t correlate with FTP, so it seems my FTP is lower, but I’m fast.
To summarize, I don’t like the “get faster”, and “I increase my FTP in 40w” argument of sales, although I have to be honest, I don’t see a better sales point than this, I just don’t like it, and that’s probably the reason of posts like this. My FTP decreased using TR, this is garbage, it doesn’t work, don’t use it, etc…
I think the misunderstanding is what testing is for: it is to optimize your training. What optimal means depends on what you consider important. If, except for FTP, you don’t track anything else, you don’t know whether you are improving or not.
You write that you are faster now than in the beginning of the season even though your FTP has decreased (that’s now I interpret “they are all worse now”). How do you know? What metrics do you track that tell you you are actually faster?
You can only track progress if you test for metrics that are relevant to your performance. If you don’t test TTE, you simply don’t know whether your endurance has improved. And you get faster, because you specifically train for those metrics. If the only metric you follow is FTP, then this is your sole measure of success. Absent other metrics, you will tend to judge success and failure by what happens to your FTP. That’s not a flaw of the concept of FTP, it simply means you might not track all relevant metrics, you actually got slower — or both.
What metrics are relevant in your riding? If you don’t know, I suspect you are not getting much faster. Not that I have a solution nor did the discussions on this forum unearth a single metric as universal as FTP. If you are doing crit racing and are a sprinter, extending your TTE from 50 to 70 minutes is likely a very bad use of your time. I wish I knew of a second simple metric that was relevant for me.
Segments times, numbers after X KJ and keeping the fastest group ride until the end.
Ex: my best 5 minutes this season was 368w. I haven’t tested it again, but I did 323w for 4 minutes after 1.5 hours of a very hard ride. That, in my little world, means faster to me. I’m doing good numbers AFTER RIDING MORE THAN AN HOUR OF HARD RIDE, and not getting outside, fresh, warm up, and boom, 5min test and done.
There’s a huge difference between those two efforts.
By the way, I did my PB 2 hours of power 40 days ago. 258w.
It’s not that I’m not measuring, it’s that I don’t care about the FTP being precise, stagnated, or even dropped at this point.
You need to pick the right metric for you. Why is 5-minute power after a fatiguing effort relevant to your riding? You need the right quantitative goal before you can optimize your training and judge success/failure.
You need to track those metrics regularly and consistently. Ideally, you want a test protocol that takes out as many factors as possible. (Which is why FTP and TTE tests are a thing.)
If you don’t track any metrics regularly, you might still have fun riding (which is totally cool), but you actually have no idea whether you are faster, slower or have stagnated in ways that matter. Getting power PRs or other PRs is cool, yeah, but perhaps you could actually be a lot faster than you are now.
In my experience, it really pays off to alternate my focus season-to-season from building a broad power base (that fits with more endurance, longer TTE, etc.) and the next I increase the height of my power tower. Most people plateau if they just repeat one approach season-after-season.
no no, I got your point, and we are totally on the same page.
In order to measure something you invariably need the first measure and the second, pick whatever works best for you, or is aligend with your goals.
I’m not doing it, because I don’t want. I’ve been riding long enough to know myself and I’m fine with that in the current situation. I know I could do a lot better with a few things dialed, I just don’t have the desire now, my life is in a delicate situation and just riding my bike fast enough is what I need to calm my mind.
Again, we’re totally in agreement, and my point is toward the idea that not even tracking anything is still good enough in some situations, but the opposite - being solely focuses on FTP increases - is a bad habit.
But that’s only my 2 cents, and possibly, I’m totally wrong. heheheh
I also wonder if your lack of desire to track FTP has resulted in a skewed view of where your fitness really is right now. You say your FTP has dropped, but if you’re not actively tracking it in a consistent and accurate manner, maybe it’s not exactly where you think it is…
Either way, it sounds like you’re doing well and enjoying riding which is the whole point.
Ok, then we are on the same page.
(I did not want to come across as needlessly antagonistic, sorry if I have.)
I’d rather people enjoy riding their bikes even if it comes at the cost of some watts or seconds here and there.
I would put it more broadly and say that riding should be fun.
If riding becomes a chore, it defeats the purpose. If chasing an FTP becomes frustrating, because you feel like you can never reach it, then by all means, stop chasing numbers. Plus, even if you reach your arbitrary goal such as FTP >300 W or 4 W/kg, there is always the next goal around the corner, which get progressively harder. Many more people can achieve 4 W/kg than 5 W/kg.
That is my summary my friend, you really nailed it.
And my arguments are intended to achieve those who find themselves struggling because their FTP has dropped or stagnated. There’s way more out there than FTP.
If pursuing a FTP increase has became a painful task, stop it! The likelihood that this person will stop riding soon is high, and that’s what I don’t want. I don’t want people stop riding because they are frustrated for not achieving 300w FTP.
This is the reason I’m so vocal is this argument of stop chasing FTP increases at all costs.
I don’t know many riders that train specifically for a 20 min test or any other type of test. FTP for most is a number to define their training across all aspects (at least that’s what I do).
Its pretty crucial to me and underpins how fast I am across most training zones. My FTP is currently 20 watts less than this time last year and guess what? I’m slower over most time durations for relative effort and guess what? It correlates pretty close to how much lower my FTP is.
It was maybe a poor wording. What I meant was, if you’re aiming, only or primarily, an FTP increase, and the test is based on a 20min test, your efforts will be towards and around this time target.
Testing 20 min pretty well doesn’t correlate, necessarily, with an increase in fitness if measured in other ways such as fondos, for instance.
Again, I’m not against the use of FTP as a measure, nor do I despise the fulfilment feeling of seeing a good FTP increase. What I’m against is being blindly focused that you only are a better rider if your FTP has increased.
You are spending about 90% of your time in z1/2 with most of that being in z1.
I would not expect any ftp increase with that type of work unless one was very new to the sport or doing a massive increase in volume compared to before.
Are you doing any workouts around FTP? Anything in the 90% range or higher with longer intervals? Something like 4x10, 3x15, 2x20 that type of stuff.
