The PDC and MMP dont always match though (for all durations.)
If you’ve feed the model with enough efforts yes.
You can just look at the MMP and see the maximum time 4w/kg of what you’ve actually done. Mine is currenly a few seconds over 5 minutes. Lol.
I hope to get to 4w/kg for 40 minutes plus this season at the age of 51, but my process goal is to train consistently with volume and then what will be, will be.
I used to do a weekend long tempo ride with a guy who was early 50s and had a bit over 4 w/kg ftp. He was a cyclist for his entire adult like tho and likely much stronger when in his younger years.
It’s a very good model as long as it’s fed good data. You can easily overestimate your FTP for example if you don’t have enough max efforts at shorter durations, which would underestimate the anaerobic contribution for efforts from 20-60 minutes.
How short should these efforts be? My 2min power at the moment is only slightly less than my all time high but below that my recent bests are much much lower than my all time bests
I’d do 30 seconds, 1 minute, 3 minutes, and 5 minutes, then look at the normalized residuals and see if there are other areas you should test.
Thanks I recently set PBs for just about every duration > 2min (except 60min), maybe I should try for a 1 min all out and hope my mFTP doesn’t decrease too much 
This is so true 
. I recently updated my PDC by doing season best efforts from 30 seconds to 3 minutes and my modelled mFTP dropped 6 watts which is actually what I think my FTP is.
Anything less than 30s needs to be done outside imo.
My Pmax is lower than normal because the weather has been crap and I have not been out this Winter/Spring. Cant be arsed to change the carbon wheel brake pads to winter wheelset. 
I’ll hold out and go out on some carbon training wheels. Too many wheels… most crap.
PS… killed my nice alu race wheels last summer, so only have CX alu for winter which are great but need to swap brake blocks… and I’m to lazy after using energy for training. 
I use WKO5 and do the Kolie Moore style long format FTP test (usually 35-40 minute effort). After that test WKO5’s mFTP is usually bang on with the FTP test. I don’t find that shorter efforts influence it that much. I do try to keep the model fed somewhat by looking at what the normalized residuals chart needs.
Man, that seems backwards to me. FTP is primarily an aerobic metric. The shorter the interval you are using the estimate your FTP, the more you are bringing anaerobic contribution into the picture (which varies so much by person that percentages are guidelines at best). The longer your “test” effort, the less the anaerobic contribution can skew the number.
As an athlete who focuses on long sustain efforts/events, I find that long intervals (multiple hours) serve a much better proxy for FTP compared to short stuff. I never have a reason in training or events to do a 5 minute or less “all out” interval. Even if I’m doing vo2max work at 5’, I’m doing multiple intervals and that makes it quite a bit lower than a 5 minute max effort.
-21 W for me 
You are looking at it incorrectly and mixing two ideas.
If the model has no short efforts or they are under reality then the model will show a greater Aerobic capacity, hence mFTP will be over stated as it will assume a higher amount of the watts are from the aerobic contribution as the data it has shows you have a smaller anaerobic contribution than reality.
The model is still using long efforts to assess mFTP, the short efforts are contributing to the power curve for varies durations, it makes prefect sense.
Power at pretty much any duration is made up of aerobic + anaerobic contribution.
You are basically saying the same thing but dont realise it.
The model needs efforts are various durations its not using a single test effort long or short, I think that why it seems backwards to you, its not.
Go and do a long max effort and get those watts back… 
I have a rest week 
but I think that was also the best time for going all out for 1 minute
Or go all out for 30 mins and report back.
Yeah maybe those who want to target 4W/kg, must report on the duration they are able to hold it. Then a league table of their actual performance can be drawn up others targeting 4W/kg.
My coach uses critical power so he asks me for 3-5m and 12-16m efforts quite regularly - I liked by the way.
With these efforts done, intervals and WKO5 pretty much are spot on, which is also aligns with critical power model. I’m not 100% sure but I believe wko5 is basically a critical power model, isn’t it? Intervals I know I can set the curve I want to use.
Definitely. If you think of FTP as having a power and a time component then you can multiply them together to get a nice ‘work capacity at FTP’ metric.
Yeah, I still don’t get it. It’s probably because I personally see ftp being underestimated in intervals.icu because I don’t do max efforts on short stuff. This chart below illustrates the issue very well. My focused efforts are all greater than 1 hour, so I don’t appear to really get “credit” for those. Intervals pegs my FTP at only 289 and the only reason it gave me that was because I did a 60’ interval at 289 (which was high sweet spot, not threshold). If you believed the 289 estimate, my 3 hour power is around 95% of FTP (a bit of a reach). I guess my point is that you can definitely overestimate FTP from short efforts where anaerobic can be a decent amount of the contribution. You get out over an hour and anaerobic becomes such a small percentage of the contribution that it can’t sway the number.
Regarding Intervals I get your point.
WKO isnt the same though.
