Hi all, I recently moved to TR after a 4 week training program on Zwift and deciding I wanted more. I’ve been cycling for around a year but never really done any structured training.
I did ramp tests before and after that Zwift programme and went from 231->243w.
A few days later, I started TR, did the initial ramp test and got 197w, I dismissed it as a bad day and stuck with 243w.
I did a week or two of TR workouts before stopping it to do the Festive 500. After 4 days recovery, I decided to get started on a new TR plan and took another test, this time 213w.
While I’m thrilled that I improved on that first TR test, I’m a little confused on how to take the difference between Zwift and TR. I don’t care about absolute figures, just being at the right level for training. The only thing that has me doubting the TR figure is that I did a load of workouts at the 243w FTP already and while they were hard, I was finishing them ok.
Is this disparity normal? My main concern here is just building some confidence in the TR figure. How do I get that?
That will give you a value for comparison with no additional effort.
As to comparing tests between TR & Z, you have to recognize that there are some notable differences between each app and their respective tests. The TR one is “scaled” steps at 6% of the starting FTP value for each increase. Zwift has two versions that each has a fixed wattage increase at each step. This difference along may lead riders to get different results as the demand and timing for the test will vary a bit.
Beyond that, it’s necessary to consider your trainer, mode used (ERG, Resistance, Slope/Level/Standard), and the gearing used for each. Even in ERG and the identical gearing between apps, TR & Z handle ERG just a bit different and some people report one feeling easier/better than the other. Main point being that equipment and test implementation differences must be reviewed closely.
Then there’s the time perspective where there are nearly endless variables between any “then & now” comparison, even if you kept every variable identical. But the reality is that I suspect training status, nutrition, sleep, etc. must also be closely considered vs assume “equal”.
Don’t think of FTP as a static number. At best, any FTP test gives you a snapshot of what the underlying phenomenon was at that moment, as defined by that test. An hour/day/week/month later, it is likely a different number, and different testing methods will yield different results.
If you think of FTP as an operationally determined measure within any given training system, and that number produces training at a sustainable, yet chalenging level, you’re where you need to be. Use a Zwift number if you’re using Zwift to guide your training. Use the TR number to guide your TR training.
It’s worth considering that the TR AI FTP should get more accurate as the sample gets larger, and that fluctuations between tests should minimize and you give TR more data to work with. Compare that to, say, a 20 minute test that is done once every 4-6 weeks, and represents the results from one test on one day rather than an evaluation of dozens of hours of your riding and millions of hours of other riders’ riding.
Crux of the matter, if you’re using TR, trust that algorithm, answer the questions consistently after each workout, and the system will give you workouts at an appropriate level, regardless of what the FTP number is.
They are different tests. I used to be able to pace the 2x20’s so well as an FTP test that i learned to basically hack it because i knew what to expect. when i switched to the ramp my FTP was off but learned to pace that. Its just a different ramp rate like Barry mentioned and it takes some getting used to.
