Boooo… I liked the original thread title!!!
1 Like
The actually thread title never changed.
But I removed the quote from the OP.
Except here we kind of do! We’re that awesome!
4 Likes
I think people are missing the point when it comes to FTP and testing. Basically, it’s all relative. And comparing methodologies doesn’t really matter. Sure you could try to correlate ramp test to 8 min to 20 min but in the end it really doesn’t matter. The number you come up with is just a number to base your training plan off of. It’s locked to you and you only. You can’t compare your number to other people’s because there’s so many variables factored into their number. So settle on a particular testing protocol (ramp, 8 min, or 20 min) and stick with it. Don’t get fancy.
1 Like
I hate the FTP testing /the end. If a platform can work out when your FTP increases without needing to test, that’ll probably be a winner.
3 Likes
TR has hinted they’re headed in that direction.
3 Likes
My son’s did the Zwift ramp test yesterday, and I am not impressed. It did not take into consideration their current FTP at all and started them at their current FTP within 1st couple steps. My boys are in the 100-125 FTP range. Had one of my boys do ramp test on my TR account and delete test later and TR is much better like we all know. Just my 2¢.
1 Like
Yup, I expect some interesting results for those on the outside ends of the bell curve. Likely worst affected will be those with low FTP. The start level and fixed 20w steps may lead to premature failure. But that is just speculation on my part.
Exactly right. My sons tests lasted less than 10 min including warm-up that was way too high for a warm-up at their level. Zwift may make it better, but TR is much better. If I want eye candy, I can tie Zwift into the real work I’m doing in TR. JMO.
It is nice when you get an alert from Training Peaks to say your ftp has increased. Normally when I have done a time trial and then I ignore it as I have not done a 5 minutes all out beforehand.
1 Like
I wonder if this will be at all similar to what Garmin does with their metrics and gives you recommended FTP’s after rides?
Like people have said, TR are apparently trying to implementing this, and there’s a Garmin app that estimates it based on a few max efforts.
But you’ll need to go to exhaustion to get an accurate FTP whatever the method. I get the impression some people think they can do a few sweetspot intervals and it’ll randomly give them a new FTP…
1 Like
I’m thinking it will be much more involved than what Garmin is doing. TR can see every trainer workout you do, if you take breaks/backpedals, if you raise/lower intensity, cadence trends, hitting TSS weekly targets, workout substitutions, ect. It could also take your sleep, nutrition, weight, age and other self reported metrics to coincide with their other data. There are countless “big data” points to draw from depending how in depth TR wants to get. For example, if you’re in week 3 of Build and have nailed every workout or possibly even raised intensity, a TR popup could suggest “Looks like you’re getting stronger, raise your FTP to XXX? Yes/No”
1 Like
I did TR and Zwift ramp test and both are matching,
My oncle used to do this test with British cyclist in 2007 so it’s nothing new lol
I don’t get that video. What should have been done is each test separately (and rested) to exhaustion. Doing them simultaneously is kinda pointless. Each test uses 75% of your best 1 minute power, so of course they will be the same. What is different is the starting wattage and step increases. So the question is if you do the Zwift protocol versus TrainerRoad will the end results be the same? 
For my TR ramp test it will take me 19:00 to reach 384 watts (17 watt steps) while in Zwift it will take me about 15:00 to reach 380 (20 watt steps). Then TR ups me to 401 at 20:00 (new FTP) while I reach 400 at 16:00 on Zwift. I have to believe working 4 minutes less I would be fresher on Zwift.
2 Likes
Off topic a bit, but it seems like a lot of people here subscribe to both TR and Zwift. Out of the handful of cyclists I know personally, I’m the only one using TR. I might try out a free trial this week and run them simultaneously. I know it’s only another $15 a month, but for those who are using both, do you believe you’re getting your money’s worth?
Honestly I could live just fine without zwift and it really isn’t worth it, I ought to cancel. I did, but then I signed again thinking I’d do some semi-regular races or possible group rides with guys on my club. I’ve done like 2 races but otherwise just let it run while I do TR and try and manipulate my laps so I can bag an orange jersey. But the way I have it isn’t visually engaging (it’s on my desk which is kind of at 2 o’clock position)
2 Likes
My brother lives across the country and encouraged me to sign up so we can ride together. it’s a 3 hr time difference so I already know it’ll hardly ever pan out. I am curious though because i’ve started watching pov crit races while getting through the TR workouts. Seems like it could be pretty engaging.
- I asked about this. He did it that way to confirm the function/calculation aspect. At the time he did it, I don’t know if the official calculation for the Z version was posted anywhere. Either way, he did it as a validation between the two for the basic approach.
- Yup, he agrees to that, and said as much when I asked about it.
1 Like