Did SSHV 1 and 2…and got a lovely 11-12% drop on ftp…
Last ftp was on zwift =(
Going the wrong direction I suppose
Did SSHV 1 and 2…and got a lovely 11-12% drop on ftp…
Can you clarify…
- When and how many times have you tested in TrainerRoad, and with which protocols, and with what power measurement tool?
Reason for asking? If you are not comparing the same exact test protocol, on the same exact platform, you are introducing variables into the data, that may well make them no comparable.
If you are looking for help in analysis and setting a direction from here, you need to provide more info about how you completed the training, recovery, nutrition and such. There’s nothing in your short info above that can be used to help.
Edit to add search results for similar “FTP Drop” threads.
Did you do a Ramp/FTP on TR before you started? Or use an old number from Zwift?
Did you get faster on the road?
How did your hard workouts go? If you nailed all your workouts I would be very surprised if you dropped that much FTP. Hitting things like over unders at your “correct” FTP is pretty telling. If it was 10-12% too high, you would definitely “struggle” through over unders. If I was 10% over my FTP and tried one of those I would legit want to die
You don’t appear to have done SSBHV1 and 2…unless this isn’t you?
I used a old number from zwift that was obtained during a race
I did does workouts 90-95% ftp…with some leg pain…but completed it well…
I used my flux s… I only calibrated it once when new… I did the 8min ftp test…I did the 90-95% of the workouts… felt some leg pain… put did ok with 3x20min SS that is currently my ftp… could it have something to do with erg mode and not on erg mode?
My first number came from a zwift race…
You can’t compare the ftp number from the zwift race with the 8min test in TR. They don’t measure the same thing.
From how you describe your workouts, I’d guess your old ftp setting was correct, or even slightly too low.
I’d either repeat the test (or do the ramp test) or just manually add a few W to your old number and carry on.
im adding 5w, thats a 1-2% power increase… moving on to buld phase… WO today is 7x5min at v02…so i will for sure feel if im off target or not… targeting HR around 90-95%Max and spinning around 85-90rpm…
i also feel that my flux s doesnt read correctly on non-erg mode… ( just based on feelings)… googled it up… and didnt obtain nobody talking about it so…
There’s your answer. Each TR phase starts with a ramp test.
Just something to keep in mind, high accuracy power meters have a 1-2% error, so your “additions” are still within manufacturers error. Basically, 5w is grey area and really as long as your pushing hard in your workouts you should be good to go. Also note that the FTP number itself is not the whole picture. Unless you want to dick measure, theres more to a racers fitness and strength than just FTP.
I am still unable to understand how you lowered your FTP but pushed much higher FTP in over unders. Perhaps you are a machine and you are better off gauging your FTP by feel. As long as your workouts remain hard you are fine. If your more suited to sprints than TTs, your strengths will be geared for your events. You cant expect 2 different athletes doing 2 different events that have the same FTP to be identical, let alone be able to push the same workouts at the same RPE
pushed much ftp in over-unders?? I did SSHV…there are no Over-Unders…the ftp teste placed my ftp where I did my sweetspot power… I managed well 3x20min at that power…so I suppose the ftp test was measuring wrong
Try the ramp test? Duno bud, I think you need to explain exactly what happened and all the specifics for someone here to help you. From how I read it, its basically “I got a low FTP but it should be higher compared to zwift” and TBH that tells us nothing, similar to “my race went bad, what happened”.
He used a ftp from a zwift race when he started TR. After completing TR base, he did the 8 min TR ftp test, and it was lower than the zwift number.
Yes, but we dont know if he did the test on power pedals, power metes, virtual power, what kind of race it was, how his training went, did he have to dial the workouts down all the time, did he nail all workouts or bail out on them, is it in aero or road position, did he switch bikes, did he switch his setup, did he swap trainers midway, like all these are factors that could impact it, not to mention if his ftp test was accurate (did he feel like it was accurate or did he sandbag it).
All I can says i that if his training went well and he stuck with his training at his high power, his power likely did not drop by much. Either that or he worked on sustaining power instead of raising his ftp.
There’s a lot of information to soak in with regards to the meaning of FTP and how to use them.
For the purposes of using TrainerRoad, all you have to know is that it’s just a baseline measurement used to dial in your TrainerRoad workouts.
Don’t compare your TrainerRoad FTP to test results from other sources, and definitely don’t compare your TR FTP to someone else’s. Only use it to compare you to your historical self to gauge progress, and always test using the same protocol.
Just to add on to the other good advice, here (especially that of not comparing different test protocols across different applications / devices / trainers), I take the possibly controversial tactic of generally not dropping my FTP.
I mean, if I were sick or injured and came back after months of rest, then I would take the test and accept that result, sure. But if I’m following plan and finishing my workouts without full on “I have to stop” failures, then I don’t drop my FTP. At worst, I would leave it exactly as is. If I was feeling defiant I would still add 1 to 2 percent and see how the subsequent phases of training felt.
totally agree, if one is doing SSB HV and not failing any workouts, I think it’s basically impossible to go backwards with FTP. I think it’s always good for folks (esp if they use HR along with power) to take a high level look at HR during intervals at the beginning vs the end of a program, at worst there would be no major change in HR response over intervals that avg around 90% and at best you’d see some reduction in the interval HR.