For some perspective, my max 5 min power for the ramp test was 240. While last 5 min and max power was 300w during the end of the 20 minute effort and with no prior training versus a solid 6 week block under my belt now. Heck my 5 minute clearing effort avg was 249 during that test. Thoughts?
I really think having both a lack of solid aerobic base and simultaneously no vo2 max efforts diminishes the value of the ramp test. For example during my SSB I plan that I just completed, my heart rates were nowhere near what I would expect from SST work. More in the high Zone 2, low zone 3 hr zones per my experience.
@dbf Any thoughts on the validity that having a way under trained aerobic system coupled with lack of VO2 training effecting ramp validity?
JWent with another Ramp test, but bumped my estimated FTP to 240 as opposed to the 188 it had the other day. Retested at 233, with maybe another minute in the tank to be honest. Max HR was the same, still not within 10 bpm of 20 minute test. A marked improvement for sure. The main effect though was larger steps and thus less aerobic energy burned before the hardest ramps. Not sure what to make of it still. I might wait 2 days and bump the ftp again and test one more time.
Should I bump ftp and test again or do a 20 min test? I’m not asking because I care about the number itself, but because I just finished a sweet spot base and the efforts were too low I feel and want to target the right adaptations.
First - I agree that the 20min info from those races isn’t the best way to measure my 20min power due to each of the races structure. Several races were sitting in, several were short hilly circuits (so downhill/uphill constantly), and crits are their own beast - and absolutely none of them included long breakaway efforts (not for lack of trying!)
Trying to find representative 20min efforts is bit difficult after Jan/18, as that’s when I moved out of SSB and into short power build and then rolling road (with outside rides coming into play during RR phase). I do have two 20min tests from earlier to compare to though: Nov. 7/17 (start of training) with a 265 20min avg and then Dec. 17th at 279 20min avg. Post that 2nd test I completed SSB II (HV), which includes “fun” workouts like Eclipse+3 (4x 20min @90%), which were tough, but workable. Which is a long way of saying that at least in late January, I believe I had a reasonable aerobic base (relative to my ability).
More important to this thread’s conversation - these prior tests, completed workouts, and virtual races all informed me well enough to NOT lower my FTP setting after my ramp tests suggest I do so. I basically looked at the result - said “you’re drunk TrainerRoad”, and either bumped my FTP up ~5w or kept it even, depending on exact period. Also important - I was able to complete the following plan’s workouts, so I did not appear to overreach.
The issue for me now is that I am coming off a summer of relatively unstructured training, and a fairly poor end of season crit (low avg power, but more importantly I had absolutely zero kick - it really was a hanging on exercise instead of racing on my preferred terms). Essentially I’m not sure where my body is at. Given that prior ramp tests did not inform me well as to my training zones, I am a bit reluctant to to use their suggested FTP from that, and am keeping it at a slightly higher level for now. My worry is that I could still even “undertrain” at this level and given I am doing Traditional base for the next couple of months (doing a super-base lead in this year), I don’t really have any workouts that I’m used to as fitness markers to feel things out for quite some time.
For you, since things are starting to get close to where you feel they should be - I’d almost take the approach of not-retesting and instead training at your own estimate of FTP. You’ll be retesting in 4-6 weeks, and it sounds like your personal estimate isn’t too far off where the test is pegging you. You’ll know within a week or so of workouts if the estimate is too high.
I’ve…had thoughts on this. I’ll stay on the sidelines for now; I’m sure the FB group readers are sick of me writing about this LOL.
Lots of interesting comments tho. Keep 'em coming, I really find this interesting stuff. But I’m kinda weird in liking to get in to the weeds, so to speak.
That is the key in my opinion, the goal of ftp testing protocols is to:
estimate your current fitness
setup training zones
Its up to you to decide which protocol does the best job, or to use the default and override as you see fit.
My own experience is that 8 and 20 minute protocols do a good job (for me). Last year I field tested at 8min, 20 min, and 60 minute in a 3 week period. All three done outside under ideal conditions - felt fresh and those were true maximal efforts. For me they were all close - 278W vs 274 vs 269 (8min*.9 vs 20min*.95 vs 60 min) - but that isn’t true for everyone. I’m satisfied the 8 or 20 min tests are interchangeable, at least for me.
Ramp test accuracy for setting training zones? I’m cautiously positive although jury is still out in my mind. A few notes about that:
On the positive side, ramp test training zones ‘feel’ correct - workouts are hard but doable. And last week I saw a 6% ftp bump after finishing SSB1 mid. That aligns with previous bumps in ftp during SSB. And performance in outdoor rides is consistent with current ftp, although that is more highly subjective and not reliable indicator.
However back in May I did ramp test and the following week did a 10 mile TT. Unfortunately due to allergies, that TT wasn’t a max effort and results were 236W vs 220 vs 209 (ramp vs 90% of 8 min vs 95% of 20 min). My next ride after TT has “lead legs” in the title so it wasn’t a good week. So this ramp vs field test comparison is inconclusive, although the results align with expectations of a sub-maximal TT effort.
I think there’s your answer! If you feel you left something in the tank, especially as long as a minute, it should warrant a retest or you at least know your FTP may be reading low. If I were you, I would probably just start nudging up my FTP based on how the coming workouts feel and plan on executing on a more accurate re-test in 4-6 weeks as your plan calls for.
ie: you’re probably close enough to your “true” FTP to accomplish what you need to.
As a coach i am a big fan of testing and of powertraining.
Unfortunately these 20 min FTP or ramp tests misses its target - ballparking your FTP - yes. But is it a good indicator for most ? I have stopped using this as a coach.
Most of my clients have earlier overshooted with these tests.
I have been trying new tests this year and have had great success with 35 -70 min tests. If a client is new i take a lactate ramp test first to see where he/her is to start their FTP test. Then I take the test based on the lactate test. After that i take powerprofile test ( with 15 sec sprint, 1 min anaerobic capacity and 5 min Vo2max )
The zones belove FTP i set to the zones Hunter Allen and trainingpeaks describe and the zones above i set to the powerprofile results…
get in touch for more info If i can be any more help to you.
Good point here James, as the TR Ramp test has steps of 1min and not 3min.
I stand to be corrected, but the Ramp or VO2 max test developed by Prof Tim Noakes used 3min ramps instead of 1min ramps. It would be cool to have this variation in TR that a beta sample group could also use it to estimate.
I would assume though that the TR guys tested this method and found the 1min preferable. May be related to the accumulated TSS for 3min ramps vs 1min thus defeating the purpose of a FTP test which still allows for some riding afterwards.
I think these test will never be a one size fits all solution.
I find I’ve got a better tolerance to VO2 or Maximal efforts versus Threshold. Thus I find the Ramp ‘easier’ to complete than 20min test.
However, it would be useful if along with setting an FTP score one could also perform a PPT and could apply those metrics to a programme it would be more tailored to the individual if they so wished.
I’ve not yet performed my own PPT, this is schedule for after my A race in a few weeks. I’m quite interested to see what my profile looks like to set my next plan according to my shortfalls.
Thanks for the correction. I’d prefer to be free from nits .
But I guess the point I’m trying to illustrate is that although the various tests are good estimates of Functional power, they’re not one size fits all and it may be possible to overshoot in relation to the expectation of the plan which the FTP is to be applied.
Would be nice to have a couple of other tests as benchmarks.
It would appear that each test willbe more accurate at different pointsin your cycle. I’m now off the opinion that the ramp test still underestimate your fitness if you haven’t been doing a fair amount of suprathreshold work.
I personally never had a problem pacing the 8 minute tests but doing the second one could be a bit daunting. After my end of season test i did ssbi to try and maintain ftp until starting back with some harder work. With no vo2 work and relatively lower tss fitness dropping shouldn’t be a surprise, but my ramp test reduced it by 9 watts. Funny thing is that i just got a kom on a strava segment the last week and beat my previous best by 30 seconds with a 15 watt higher average (7 min down to 6:30) the previous best was set during my specialty taper. I don’t think my repeatable 8 min best would have dropped by that much.
I just did kaweah, and hr was between 5 to 10 beats lower than my previous times when looking up my y ride history. lll be doing my first vo2 session on Monday, if that is also just as easy I’ll probably bump up the setting by 5 watts.
.