Forecasting future FTP using AT and AI FTP

:rofl:

1 Like

Those are the ones who are more important to predict. If your FTP changes by only a few percent your workouts won’t really change by much but if they change by a large amount it can have a great influence on how you train. Plus a prediction of a large growth can help people who are new better apreciate TR so become long term subscribers and help them figure out the best training load for improvement. (ie. compare the predicted FTP gains for low volume vs mid volume)

Exactly. I’d be super cautious introducing this feature. Or made it available to those who’ll tick a box under a
Statement from TR team that the predicted FTP is pure speculation. Otherwise I see a barrage of complaints heading their way…

1 Like

I’m confused by what you’re trying to get here. You do get those changes with a re-assessment every 4-6 weeks. Knowing if you’ll get that much now, which is just really a WAG has no real impact
on the training you should do.

And a 2-3% difference in intensity is a really big deal. It makes a huge difference in workouts - without AT I’d often start failing workouts coming off a change like that.

Guessing what fitness changes will be is irrelevant. What we really want is actually sustained 2-3% growth. Compound that for yourself over a year or two and you’d be extremely happy.

I do not understand, from the podcast I had an impression that FTP estimation feature is already available, but clearly it is not, because today is my ramp test day and it looks like I have to do it because there is no estimation option available.

On the other hand, I think Garmin, has already been doing FTP estimation for a few years. Before I started using TrainerRoad, I did my own intervals with Garmin and from time to time it suggested me a new FTP settings.

This is what is available right now:

1 Like

Oh, is this a different topic? “Future FTP predictions”? I do not think I heard about it even on podcast. Sorry, if I was mistaken.

Right, there are two different things, that I touched on in another topic today.

  • FTP Detection = FTP estimate at the day the tool is used ( now ).
  • FTP Prediction = FTP estimate at some date in the future ( weeks or months ahead ).

We have Detection right now, while Prediction is something still in the oven and yet to be offered.

And yes, this topic is about the future forecasting, prediction of FTP.

1 Like

I see, I thought FTP Detection is the Ramp Test. When you use AI it is “FTP Prediction”. Then the difference is called “Prediction Error”. I am sorry I am a Machine Learning Engineer this is the terminology Engineers use. :slight_smile:

You can argue about that term use with TR then :stuck_out_tongue:

I am just using the terms they have selected and how they choose to use them (per their published articles and forum info as already referenced).

There definitely appears to be a lot of sophistication behind it. Nate talked about it in the other thread discussing Analytics.

It sounds, to me, like it will be using WL V2 and will factor in overall TSS/volume (as scheduled) and will be able to utilise outdoor rides etc etc. I don’t think it’ll be cookie cutter based off of x% per block, but that’s me reading between the lines.

Either way it sounds glorious to me. I can see the issues mentioned about failing, but to me it’s hugely motivating.

I think this may actually be demoralizing. Suppose I look into my potential future FTP and realize I have no chance of making it to the podium. Do I need to even start? Maybe relaxed riding in the park will suffice to support my health… What would motivate me to still progress if I know, it will be in vain?

Indeed. Maybe what we really need is a forecast of where we will be if we partially follow the plan and another for if we were to couch surf?

That’s a perspective thing. Chances are you know if you are, or know if you aren’t, in with a shout.

For me, I don’t have a chance of winning races around here. I’m racing myself and getting faster all the time.

3 Likes

Different strokes…

  • Some will see a low prediction as a challenge and attack it.
  • Others will see it as a limiter and consider not trying.
  • Then we will have people happy to have exceeded that projection.
  • While some will lament not measuring up to it.

The possible outcomes are many, and not everyone derives the same motivation (or deterrence) from information like this. As with any piece of data, it can impact us in various ways, and at least part of that is who we are and how we look at info like this.

I do admit to some curiosity and reservations about it on a large scale, but we don’t really know much about it yet to make much of a call yet.

If the future FTP prediction is accurate and you trust it, then you know you cannot do better. Maybe it’s time to stop wasting time and do something more productive. I don’t know… it’s like watching a match where the result is known. There should be en element of unpredictability, a range may be. You should keep that “growth mindset”, you know…

1 Like

But what is not “growth” about trying to nail every single session and hit that FTP “target”? Or trying to hit that target, with the idea that it’s step three on your six year plan to your goal FTP.

I see what you’re saying, but I think there’s very few people training consistently that will never see an increase in their goal number :man_shrugging:.

It’s never in vain. I’ve won races when I wasn’t the strongest and lost races where I was amongst the fastest. You’re forgetting the huge role of tactics, positioning, course, and race dynamics.

Unless it’s pretty steep, watts per Cda is king, not watts per kg. And if you stay in the group, position well, and get others to close gaps, you can stay with and beat people who are a lot stronger than you.

2 Likes

I think you have a good point here - showing it as a range might be better. That way all of us optimistic types can focus on the high end number, work and recover as hard as possible to get there.

I’m sure. At the same time, I’ve personally gone through great measures to model something, only to discover something fairly simple that in retrospect is quite obvious. And my hunch is that the sophistication is needed for cases where things don’t go to plan more than do.

It also seems that the intention is to better tailor training plans. In that case, I think a lot of sophistication is needed - addressing the issue of sustaining progression rather than periods of drops or stagnant fitness.