The Bell curve of cylists - how fast are the average TR users?

Yep there are!
@Kilaka I haven’t seen any bell curves for women, I’m still working off the Coggan power chart


Good point :+1:

Thought folks would find this interesting, I found this a long time ago and always comes to mind when people are thinking where they are. ANyhow, in this slowtwitch thread, Dr. Coggan figures that the average joe could achieve 3.9w/kg Interestingly I’m at about 3.9, so while I want to maximize FTP, I’m not really fretting about going over, I may be at my limit for that and can improve my ability to suffer over shorter durations.


I do the opposite - I round up to the nearest 100 to punish my body for having the temerity to get sick. Stupid body.


@Nate_Pearson mentioned the 3 W/KG average on the latest podcast. I assume that is men and women together. Would love to see the breakout average of men vs women! I am sitting at 3.8 w/kg and my GF is at 3.3 W/KG. In terms of percentile related to our respective genders, I wonder who is higher??


I just saw this thread and I can shed some light on it :slight_smile:. Remember, this data is for SELF REPORTED FTP and Weight. I suspect this can be a lot more accurate if we threw out FTPs where people can’t complete workouts and we suck in weights daily from scales.

So I imagine this is a little over reported.

FTP/kg Buckets for Men

FTP/kg Buckets for Women

Other insights

The average women on TR is about .25 watt/kg lower than the average man.

Only about 7% of users are at or above 4 watt/kg (seriously good cyclists, probably top local tier, Kona qualifiers).

Less than 1% are above 5 watt/kg (the true elite, national champs and pros. Even lots of specialty pros (like sprinters) aren’t above 5 watts/kg)

As you can see it really starts to drop off quickly after 3.25 watts/kg. Every bit you can gain after that you’re become more and more on the pointy end of things. Combine that with good race tactics and race specific training and you can do really really well.


Cool to see. Thanks for sharing the info

Thanks for this @Nate_Pearson; it’s interesting (and motivating) to see where I am on the curve!

1 Like

I suspect a bunch of people over exaggerate their FTP/kg when you talk to them. It seems like EVERYONE is above 4 FTP/kg but the data seems to indicate otherwise.

Maybe it’s just the fast people are the most vocal and visible.


Pulling in weight automatically. Brilliant idea. When’s that happening then :wink:


Having listened to a lot, lot m, lot of podcasts on power meters before I bought one, I don’t think there’s enough consistent accuracy between setups to compare - this is unlikely to affect the averages in the charts above - but on an individual scale I could go from 3.20 W/kg to 3.52W/kg by simply changing my power meter and be within industry parameters. Then there’s the accuracy of scales and daily weight variation…

It’s interesting to see the averages, but I stick within my own numbers to gauge success.


A bit disheartening to find I’m (slightly) above the TR average and yet consistent at getting spanked in local races :joy:


Please suck in weights from scales earlier than planned…know its on the long term plans, short term would be far better :wink: Having my head unit automatically updating in already great, trainer road doing same would be awesome and also make your data even more accurate.


I want this feature too. Our web backend team has a solid roadmap coming up and this is one of the features we want to implement. There are a few things that make more sense to do earlier than this at the moment.


:+1::+1::+1: Great to hear, cheers

Very true @JoeX

I own 4 different PM’s of 3 different brands (and a Direto smart trainer) and my wife has another PM on her bike which I’ve used occasionally. They are all in the same ballpark number wise but all slightly different.

To misuse a phrase about watches and time…

A man who has a Power Meter always knows his FTP. A man with more than one is never sure :grinning:


This. And also I find women don’t talk about their training numbers in the same way so it all remains a bit vague and mysterious!


I race a ton locally in 4/5 and the more I look at these stats the more I think the FTP number is a little Quixotic. Either people are eating burritos and not telling us or they are posting the FTP they aspire to, lol.

Any evidence men are more likely to exaggerate? I’m thinking a higher proportion regularly dropping intensity and/or failing workouts.


We’re working on a metric to define failed workouts. This could be cross referenced to see if certain higher FTPs tend to fail more workouts or if men fail more compared to women.

This is all going into another feature we’re working on.

There’s so much interesting stuff we can do!