- My FTP ramp test results are generally too low (I believe my FTP to be higher than tested)
- My FTP ramp test results are generally too high (I believe my FTP to be lower than tested)
- My FTP ramp test results are about what I expect (The ramp test approximates my FTP well)
Being relatively new to TR and the forums, I’m loving the dialogue. However, it does seem like there is a lot of discussion of late around the FTP ramp test and subsequent results:
Poor Ramp Test
Great Ramp Test - Over Estimated FTP
FTP and Ramp Test mismatch
I have my opinion on the test, but am very interested to see where the community falls.
So with a simple click, where do you fall in the spectrum of FTP Ramp Test results?
Maybe a confounding variable is a rider’s phenotype?
As an all-rounder (mostly crit racer) I find the ramp test to be quite close to my past tests at similar points in the season with a 20-minute test. I’m guessing higher FRC riders probably find the ramp test results accurate to slightly over, while TT specialists and lower FRC riders tend to find it accurate to slightly under.
Where’s the “I never test”?
Everyone has an opinion an any test they do. Almost no one ever simply accepts results as they are and moves on.
What were you high/secondary school grades? I bet you thought some were higher than deserved whilst others you were done down because of x
What was you last race result? I bet it was the weather/food/low level infection that tweaked it
It’s just human nature to go through this post factum justification, it has no bearing on the veracity of the test protocol though.
It’s not a question of any one test so much as it is a question of potentially, which test fits me/you best?
As Chad points out in another thread (quoted above), there are other testing options, so it’s interesting to me to think about why one may choose one test over another. Sufferfest uses 4DP, Zwift seems to adhere to the traditional 8/20 tests, TR uses the ramp test. There are reasons that each brand uses their own testing protocol, but it doesn’t mean that all testing protocols are the same or would yield the same FTP estimates.
There is a goodness of fit here that to me is of interest. Measures of goodness of fit typically summarize the discrepancy between observed values and the values expected under the model in question. The generic advice is to “pick one and stick with it,” which is an option, but not necessarily the best option. If you choose a testing protocol that for whatever reason best matches your FTP and you stick with it, that would yield better results than just picking any one and sticking with it.
In a perfect world, they would all be reasonably close. In reality, personal training history, physiology and psychology lead to varying results. That’s why people should test a bit, find the one that suits their situation, a stick with it from that point forward.
I see a fair bit of FTP test surfing with people jumping from wave to wave. I think that is counterproductive in many ways.
And by “find the one”, I mean try any and all FTP test methods. See how they give you an FTP and if that leads to productive workouts, and then stick with that particular test.
I never recommend to blindly take one and not look at the results.
Slightly guilty of test surfing. My plan now is to do the ramp first (which for me comes in too high) accept the FTP and then use that as my target for the 8min in my next session. Right now I’m sitting on a 267 from Sun., pretty sure I can’t match that on the 8mins ( or any subsequent Thresholds or VO2 max). 8 min booked in for tomorrow. Let’s see…