Zwift's New Ramp Test (FTP)

I think TP uses an impulse response model. I wouldn’t ignore it straight out! You might not be pushing your training levels up as fast as they could be!

The important part of FTP is the absolute number so you know where to target your training zones. Comparing FTP is a silly hobby on the internet simply because people have nothing better to do. FTP (and W/kg) is a predictor of success, but there are so many factors that it will rarely line up cleanly.

2 Likes

In XCO racing when I was 2.3 w/kg with a 193 FTP I was beating guys at 2.9 w/kg with a 260 FTP (according to their TR account). So yeah I’d agree, the numbers are great online to those that need that validation, but they don’t always play out come race day. I equate it to matching stats in sports teams, the supposed “better” team doesn’t always win. Too many other variables.

I think the video title is accurate. It’s was more about the differences between the two and I outlined that in the video clearly I think.

You do make some valid points, but it’s not for me to determine if TR or Zwift test is flawed or not. I did outline that it starts as a free ride and 100 watts but no body seem to mention the free ride portion and how that could also effect the final results.

Anyway, I’m curious to see the amount of videos that will come out in the next few weeks of athletes trying to run through both tests and compare the results and see their findings.

100% love both but Z could be $10/mo, the extra 5 tacked on bugs me.

I did the Z ramp today, came out with 276 watts. Last TR ramp was 280 and training has been a bit spotty (2wk cold) since so I test the same on them. Personally I like the 20w jumps and the Z ramp test better but they seriously feel the same. The last few minutes hurt!

2 Likes

To be completely accurate I would also say that you would have to be blind to the platform being used. A bias towards Zwift or TR, even if subconscious could affect the result.

1 Like

I don’t think they are independent any more. I’m sure I heard an announcement on something that said that Zwift help financially, there was also some reason around GDPR in Europe that they tried to distract us with.

Correct, ZI now gets some funding from ZHQ.

https://zwiftinsider.com/ (See the bottom of the page)

Well, if TR isn’t I’m pretty sure Zwift isn’t either. :rofl::rofl::rofl:

1 Like

yeah, @bbarrera, get those little shavers in a crosswind and make them work. You evil dude.

1 Like

Most group rides around here are in the hills, where I get dropped off the back a lot. Just returning the favor on the flats!

1 Like

Nothing like getting called out by the legend @GPLama! Love your channel - keep doing what you do!

To answer your question, you are right my boys are younger and compete in the local Interscholastic NICA MTB series. They are 10 and 12 which obviously doesn’t fall into the studies. My boys may not be the norm, but they like to train indoor/outdoor and compete against one another on Zwift/outdoors. Even as young as they are, they enjoy seeing their FTP increase as evident that they are getting better! It’s neat to see them get on the trainer when they want to and have fun when they can’t ride outside due to weather.

Overall, I was only wanting to point out that right now the TR ramp test is more accessible across the board since it will start you at half of your FTP you enter or gives you a ball park FTP based upon sex/age to start with. I know my wife’s FTP is about 110 based upon a 20min Zwift FTP test. If I had her to run the current Zwift ramp test - she would kill me! Same goes for my Dad that turns 66 this week. He is about 150 FTP at moment. Starting at 100FTP for first ramp seems a bit harsh.

I agree that the previous FTP should probably not be taken into account for the next FTP test due to not knowing if you have been consistently training or not coming into the new test. You don’t know how much you may have slipped. I had that experience with my 1st TR ramp test in January. Plugged in my Zwift 309 FTP from the summer and was met with a shorter TR ramp test result of 261. I only see your previous FTP being beneficial in what FTP to start with for warm-up and first step in a ramp test. And, really, that is only to save time for the test overall I assume. I wonder if the results would be more consistent/accurate if we started a ramp test ultra low FTP, making the FTP ramp test last longer overall? Just a thought.

1 Like

I just don’t understand what is the point in comparing Z and TR’s ramp tests results when what really matters is the way the platform will use it to line out their training plans.

For me, TR’s ramp test results works great as an input for their training plans and it makes sense specially with the tests done during beta phase when they were validating ramp tests results with actual workouts.

I don’t Zwift so i can’t comment on them and i don’t know if they did some type of validation to their ramp test but as long as their workouts are in line with their own FTP calculation methodology, who really cares someones ramp test results on Zwift is X and TR is Y?

2 Likes

Based on @GPLama ‘s comments on the latest SBS cycling pod there may be a lot of cycling coaches out of a job soon as the AI used by TR, Zwift, Xert, Garmin and Co will design optimal plans based on previous power data :grimacing: was a brilliant listen. Will likely get to the point where we won’t test anymore anyway.

1 Like

Coaches that are just scheduling workouts are already out of a job. If a coach isn’t adding something additional on top from a relationship aspect, they probably don’t have many clients at this point.

As for the AI/machine learning, there is a lot of hype and not a lot of results yet. Certainly not to the point that would replace structured assessments. There is not a single product on the market yet that is even what I’d consider 25% of the way to being a minimum viable product for “adaptive training”. It will happen eventually, but it’s further away than people think. But that’s just my opinion as someone who works with high level ML engineers regularly.

Also: if someone isn’t willing to empty the tank and give a max effort to get an FTP, chances are they have different motivations entirely that might be better served with a different type of experience.

5 Likes

I’m no expert but it would appear to me that for average folks who are not racing frequently or willing to do fairly frequent testing at a full range of duration, the data is not going to be good enough to use AI to come up with high quality program and adjust it on the fly. At least not whereas you’d be getting anything much better than a good off the shelf plan.

I love trainerroad, but my “winter” data vs my “summer” data look like two completely different riders. Its not because the TR plans are bad, its just that I have very little maximal data getting in there in the winter and what there is is solely FTP tests, not full range power profile tests. Personally, while I enjoy maximum efforts during races and group rides and do enough varied stuff to get a decent power profile, I have no interest in repeated full range power profile testing on the trainer just to feed data into an AI program. Be careful what you ask for :wink: If you are not willing to test a lot, the current version just might be good enough!

As a side note, in the long run Zwift may end up having an advantage in this space as they are collecting a full range of maximal data for folks who race or do the hard group rides.

3 Likes

TR is hinting at going in the opposite direction, no more testing and using your performance on your workouts to adjust your FTP.

No more of an advantage than any company that authenticates with Strava’s API and pulls in ride history (i.e. everyone). If you’ve sync’d your Strava account with TR and you ride on Zwift and send it to Strava, TR has the data. Zwift also has the data that you ride on TR, but they don’t have the advantage of knowing what the workout was supposed to be (similar if you do workouts on Zwift, TR won’t know what the workout was exactly).

TR has the biggest advantage of any company on the structured data front currently.

Exactly. You really don’t need AI to make a training plan for the average person, and their FTP doesn’t have to be perfectly set. They just need to do the workouts and they will be better off than 95% of the people training out there. You could probably just remove the FTP and the wattage entirely and they would get faster.

For an advanced rider, if they aren’t willing to do assessments but they want high level guidance, I’m not really sure what to tell them other than HTFU. In order to win, you have to be willing to empty the tank.

4 Likes

All true. Unfortunately it’s the average person (enthusiast level) that seems to be most concerned with FTP and wattage. If coaches and apps can’t deliver more watts (or whatever metric of improvement they offer) they may struggle to maintain users. Unfortunately there’s not much sex appeal in selling the idea of consistent training, adequate rest, and common sense nutrition.

The people who I know personally that worry the least about numbers day to day tend to be elite athletes.

1 Like

It’s like personal finance. Make more, spend less, invest the difference. Can’t sell a lot of books or charge high commissions that way unfortunately.

1 Like