Am I wasting my time on TR? Update: no

100% agree.

I’ve said elsewhere (Can’t remember if it’s here or a different post) that I believe there must be a confidence interval to the AiFTP detection. I am NOT an anaerobic athlete so am probably close to the 95-96% of their mark, and others might be bang on or even slightly above it.

I do think doing 2x20 off the gate if you haven’t done this before might not be a true method to see if it’s your FTP. Even mentally - but working up to it in a 2-3 weeks - if you can’t do it - than yes it’s not your FTP. But some people say 30 minutes - 70 minutes can be your threshold - not necessarily an hour.

Many, many people on TR plans would not be able to do 2x20 at the TR Training FTP. Most probably have TTE in the 35 min range, at best, at those numbers, and for many it’s probably not even that at the TR number. It’s why a few have taken to calling it “training FTP” or “training number” because the fact is, ramp test and AI FTPD numbers are overestimated (sometimes grossly) with respect to many people’s actual Functional Threshold Power. As always, YMMV.

I agree. My ego AiFTP is 313, but there is NO WAY I could do that for 20 minutes. I do it at 95% of my AiFTP which is about 297. so my ACTUAL FTP is probably 300-305 - because I can complete those workouts for extended threshold blocks (if I have enough calories). But damn that frickin ego…

Back in my TR days, I would ramp test at 280+, couldn’t hold it for long. The following season on my own, I would test FTP at 285 but hold it for 50min. It wasn’t fun having the same FTP for a year, but in reality, I didn’t. :rofl: And then I was actually able to go up from there… amazing what training long duration stuff at proper numbers will do.

It’s one of the issues ONLY chasing FTP gains as a measurement of progress. but the PLs don’t track time in zone as accurately as legitimately as doing longer and longer blocks in zone. The PLs are a proxy for this - and I get why they have so many varied workouts - they are more interesting with the small changes in power - or the sprints mixed in, etc… but people feel like they “stagnate” if they don’t see the FTP increase. And after the first months of starting structure or off the couch those huge FTP gains are gone from one block to the next.

Good luck with your race. One observation on outside workouts: I find it very difficult to hit or maintain the required intensities even on z2 rides Sadly for me there’s no substitute for the trainer, especially on something like White +5.

Ha! I tested this out a couple of weeks back as I was concerned that my FTP might be inflated, not for any particular reason, just because I’d not been served up any Threshold intervals beyond 12 mins.

I binned whatever I was supposed to be doing and subbed in Gray + 5 (2 × 20 mins at 100%)

Got it done. :sunglasses:

Nice work! Certainly not meant to be a blanket statement for all users. :slight_smile:

There were a few workouts that Chad T and others said were good checks if your FTP was set correctly. Anyone remember them?

Lamark 4x10 at threshold.

I’ve recommended Lola in the past. Essentially a short build into 30 min at threshold. Good proxy for the shortest version of Kolie Moore’s FTP protocols.

Before we get into what many athletes commonly experience when having a hard time maintaining power targets - I looked specifically at your history of doing recovery and endurance rides outside, and you generally do a pretty good job of staying in that zone!
There are things we can work on to make that power a tiny bit smoother when riding outside to stay a little more compliant to that zone (which we’ll get into!), but comprehensively, you’re meeting the goals of those endurance workouts outside pretty effectively.

For educational purposes, we’ll also discuss what other athletes may encounter when having a hard time with power targets outside while we’re on the topic of workout compliance.

First: it’s important to identify that it’s not expected, nor reasonable, for your outside power profile to look perfectly smooth, so lets cover a few different scenarios during which you may not meet power targets for outside rides, when it’s okay, and when it may be impacting your success in getting faster.

1. You’re trying to be near the target, and mostly there, but your power profile has lots of ‘spikes’.

When attempting to meet a power target, what we’re trying to avoid that can result in a lot of spikes are instances of ‘chasing the power’, where you look down and see you’re off target and try to compensate with a surge, overshoot, and feel like you’re constantly adjusting.
A common misconception for outside workout is that you should be monitoring your head unit every second of the interval in order to get that smooth power profile, which is not the case (and is also dangerous!). Instead, just glance down at the timer briefly every 5ish seconds for those shorter ones to make sure you’re meeting target power (and to check-in about how much interval time you have left), and using feel to really practice settling in once you know you’re at power.

Knowing what your threshold power, for example, feels like after confirming on the head unit and then consciously trying to hold that by feel takes practice, but also involves not surging/coasting to level it out once you realize you’re off target. Gradual, minor adjustments when aiming for a power target are key, and doing so smoothly is a SUPER valuable skill to practice!

Finally, making sure your head unit is set up in a way that enables clutter/distraction-free visibility when trying to hit power goals is key in achieving this. There are some screen setup best practices for you here: '‘Garmin Workout Sync Best Practices’

2. With the terrain I’m working with, it’s not possible to follow that zone exactly.

Thats okay; in some instances.
Based upon the workout typed, its tricky to know under which circumstances it’s critically important to stick to the format of the intervals with a high degree of compliance, and when its okay to be flexible and extend rest/time between intervals.
Some workouts require you to be strict in the timing of the efforts, others not so much, where the goal should always be to prioritize the work intervals assigned instead of overall time or TSS.

These guidelines should help you differentiate when there needs to be rigidity in the workout, or when you can make loose changes if needed, as it does scale differently based upon the work.

  • Endurance/Tempo: Accumulating time without interruption at a specific intensity is a key tenet of prescribed Endurance and Tempo work, so if the interruptions you are experiencing are frequent, either restart the interval when circumstances allow you to be consistent, or just loosely keep track of time lost from interruptions and add them on to the end of the interval.
  • Sweet Spot and Threshold: These systems rely upon accumulation to achieve the intended goals of the workout, so brief interruptions are okay, but if they grow in frequency throughout the workout, you may be missing the intended gains of the work.
  • VO2max: VO2max intervals generally aim to increase the time you spend at peak aerobic uptake, and this is accomplished in relatively short intervals. Since these intervals are so short, and since rest has such a big impact on resetting your time at peak aerobic uptake, you’ll want to stick to the assigned work/rest time pretty firmly.
    This also applies with slightly less severity to rest between intervals, so if you need to take more time between sets to get to a good spot, thats okay.
  • Anaerobic and Sprint: These intervals are very short and specific, so sticking to the structure is key.

3. Im too tired/too bored to keep it in the zone prescribed.

-Can you not maintain endurance power targets because you’re fatigued?
That’s okay! Don’t push it, cut the ride time short if needed, answer you post-workout survey honestly, and focus on big recovery.

-Can you not maintain endurance power targets because it’s hard to make a ‘smooth’ power output?
Endurance is a pretty broad zone between 55% - 75% of FTP, so your fluctuations in power are totally fine, as long as you’re staying within that region and keeping the overarching goal of the workout in mind.
Things like getting out of the saddle for a couple seconds after a stop sign (and getting out of endurance zone as a result) are okay, as long as they aren’t standing-start big gear sprints for fun (lol), which brings us to:

-Can you not maintain endurance power targets because its ‘boring’/there are too many sections on your ride that you cant help but go hard on?!
Not good :laughing:. As we covered previously, all of these workouts are assigned with so much intention; even the ‘easy’ ones. The best way to make sure you don’t nail your super tough workouts is to not follow the plan when chill or achievable workouts are assigned.

I know firsthand how stressful it is for some athletes to feel as though they’re not maximizing workout time by having to do ‘easy’ workouts, that they’re not as important as difficult workouts above your current Progression Level, or that you’re not using training time effectively to improve quickly enough.
In reality, a ‘no pain no gain’ approach when it comes to workouts is a great way to burn out and plateau in your fitness. It takes a lot of patience and control to lean into those endurance rides and stay in that zone, but they’re crucial in moving you forward in your overall fitness and progressions long-term. Save those form-sprints and PR climb attempts to integrate into another workout instead!

All this considered, I don’t think you should opt to: ‘I have to do endurance workouts inside’, and instead could look like: ‘how can I approach riding outside differently to make this work for me within my training plan."
Take a look at some of the principals in the ‘Tips For Safe Outside Workouts - TrainerRoad Blog’ as well, and see if it makes a difference for you during your next couple workouts. As always, feel free to DM me if you have specific questions from your calendar for any workout’s outside ride approach, if you need me to glance at your power profile for an outside workout as a ‘compliance check’, etc. We’re here to help!

Scheduled Lamark this morning for nostalgia’s sake. It’s 4x10 @ “FTP” with 2 minutes between intervals. The 10 is not where the difficulty lies, but rather the 2. Barely enough to blow my nose, wipe my head and take a drink. That said, not once did I feel like I was “suffering.” I can’t even really say I was uncomfortable. Yes at times my “negative assessment machine” brain would tell me to switch it off once or twice during the third and fourth sets, but overall it was just work, not pain. Heart rate steady and never above my assumed threshold. I do think it’s fine to use progression levels to get to Larmarck knowing that this is what I would consider the minimum needed to be confident at your FTP and probably even this isn’t quite good enough from a TTE perspective. I will be continuing to work on that at the expense of FTP bumps. Might have been even easier if I didn’t do it at 5am fasted.

Very nice work on Lamarck. Looks like you had even more in you than that. I find the TR workout level calculations to be accurate. In my experience, once you reach a threshold level of about 7, you are ready to bump your FTP a bit. Lamarck comes in at 4.9, and from what I’ve read on this forum, each level is worth about a 2.4% bump. I think completing something like Elijah is a good confirmation of your FTP. That would be roughly equivalent in difficulty to completing Lamarck after bumping the intensity by 5%. Based on your workout description, you may already be there or close to it.

I’ve never done Lamarck, which was a suggestion by Coach Chad on an early podcast: Lamarck and FTP - #10 by Nigel_Doyle

My go-to has always been to do 30-70 minutes at threshold, without breaks and with a negative split where I typically reach my threshold HR after 10-15 minutes. My original threshold heart rate was based on a Friel 30 minute test and refined on similar long(er) efforts. Essentially a Coggan performance test or more recently a Kolie Moore style test.

Hm, I associate the pain I feel on a hard session, long ride, or hard ride generally as a positive. I’ll be uncomfortable now, but later, I have the option to turn that suffering into fitness if I so choose. Swapping out “challenging” instead of “painful” isn’t going to help me, personally.

I do think that historically, the term suffering has been over-used in cycling. I remember a lot of ads back in the mid 2000s, to even just a few years ago, that highlight the ragged cyclist dirty and dusted from a “dreadfully long ride” - (Rapha). There was/is a bit of romanticizing pro-like training which as we all know is silly for folks with different abilities, available training time, or even talent.

Not every session should be painful, (in fact, as we all know, most should be quite comfortable!) but if a cyclist describes a break-through workout and used that word, I wouldn’t find it sad. I’d think, “yep, they’re doing it right.”

Stay for the discourse. I, for one, am very interested in sports psychology.

@russell.r.sage , @WindWarrior , what do you guys think of this workout, regarding good idea of FTP? Especially the way my HR reacts to the O/U?
Carpathian +2

Carpathian Peak +2 by varmstrong at Thursday, Aug 18 2022 - TrainerRoad

These are 16 Minute intervals that average out to exact FTP

I dunno, the TR scaling for HR makes it hard to see anything. And my over-unders don’t look like that. Carpathian Peak +2 - does it vary between 95% and 105% FTP? I did it a couple years ago using TR app (Kickr direct-drive 2017, Erg, PowerMatch) and putting it on a 95-105% color grid:

It looks similar to my outside rides at threshold.

Have you ever done a long effort at threshold? Do you know your usual threshold HR? Mine varies a little by time of day (lower in morning), cadence, and inside vs outside.

Here is a late afternoon 32-min pacing effort from earlier this year, ftp had been set at 264W and after this effort my coach bumped it up 8W.

Power view:

Slightly more variable power than inside doing Carpathian Peak +2 but basically the same.

And HR view:

My lactate threhold HR (LTHR) is pretty solid and stable since 2016, plus or minus a few beats per minute depending on a few factors (morning-vs-evening, outside temp, etc.).

A couple weeks before I did a 10+ minute pacing effort after 90 minutes of other work, it looked like this:

the instructions for that are to aim for where you perceive a 20-min TT effort to be - I did 11 min at 290W, which if it had been a 20 minute TT that would tell me (95% of 20-min works for me) to go out and shoot for a 275W long effort.

I could show longer 50-70 minute efforts, they all look similar. These benchmark efforts are done a few times a year and usually preceded a week or two by a shorter 10+ minute pacing effort to mentally reset what it feels like to do a longer ftp pacing effort.

Going back to this question, here is a similar workout from 3 days ago, its a 4x8-min at 92% with 4-min rest between:

Its 92% and as expected doesn’t hit LTHR, with recoveries taking about 45 seconds to drop back to upper zone2 HR. Normal cadence.

I reliably see this type of HR response, inside or outside, but of course its flat around here, plus access to good long uphill options, which makes it easier to do “erg-like power outside.”

What I learned in 2016 - get familiar with how your HR responds to longer threshold efforts, and use that to establish your LTHR and judge shorter efforts. This has been my human intelligence (“HI”) FTP detection and has worked well for me for years (and for 3 years cross-referenced and confirmed by Garmin Firstbeat ftp estimation which I receive at least 4 updates a month).

Hope that helps.

Yes, 95% and 105%.

I have not done an actual true effort to determine my heart rate because there are just so many variables. Are you supposed to be “tapered” for efforts like these? I have been too busy training and the only time I taper it is for the last few races.

I did do this effort in a race recently:

Not the clearest breakdown, but that was upper SS effort. Not full threshold effort, I could have gone a bit harder but this was the first main climb of the race and I didn’t want to kill myself. I was also by myself in the front so I was able to pace it the way I wanted to. I tried to keep my HR at around 160 and I was able to do so.

You probably want to avoid the extremes (perfect taper/too fatigued), as the estimates will be heavily biased.