Referencing the article posted by @stevemz had a different calculation for FTP based on VO2max values. It looks like the 5w/kg matching up with 70 VO2max is calculated with 85% fractional utilization and 24% gross economy, so not much room to go up (although 1% change in either fractional utiliztion and gross economy change a lot in the equation it isn’t quite clear how trainable they are), but definitely room lower (22% gross economy bumps the 70 VO2 athlete with 85% fractional utilization at 4.55 w/kg)
From what I understand, fractional utilization is a lot more trainable than gross economy.
There is also a lot of evidence recently that VO2max is more trainable than previously thought (I’ll have to dig up the papers) and also that by increasing training density, you can also eliminate non-responders to training.
This combination of factors suggests that most folks have more capability for improvement than they might think, although it doesn’t answer the question of for how many folks a particular w/kg is possible.
5 Likes
Two things to raise FTP (looking in very very broad terms):
-
enough volume of work below the aerobic threshold to bring the calcium-calmodulin pathway up to peak efficiency (as much long steady distance as you can handle and not compromise recovery).
-
enough volume of work just below, and a small amount of work above, the maximal lactate steady state to maximize the AMPK pathway (two days “hard” each week, enough of the combination of intensity and density to stimulate adaptation without compromising recovery).
Do those two things right and you get the adaptations to raise FTP as high as it’s going to go.
Nothing new there – ride a lot, and do a couple of “hard” days each week. Anything else is a compromise…sucks…but true…
21 Likes
+1. I have a number of friends newer to riding but, new to all things training. They are all the same. Almost paralyzed to ride for fear of doing something wrong. So many complicated questions that have zero actionable applications I literally tell them just what you wrote. Obviously I try to help them the best I can and go too deep to help them understand some concepts. But, sometimes less information is better it seems. Me included.
5 Likes
+1 sometimes you just have to STFU and ride your bike
6 Likes
As I was watching some of the crit videos on the trainerroad youtube channel yesterday I realized something.
If I were to ever get to 5 w/kg without losing a ton of weight… I’d have to get the same FTP as Pete. Just really puts things in to perspective of what sort of bike fitness that is. Of course the power profile would be different but would still have to be pretty close in the 3-5 minute range!
I have paid attention to TE recently and figured out that there is huge gap when riding indoors and outdoors: my outdoors TE was between 90-95% and indoors between 68-78%. Indoors I cannot get it as high - maybe peaks of 80%. Same bike, same power meter - respectively TE source (Favero Assioma - shown on Lezyne Super GPS).
Have you noticed a difference indoors and outdoors?
ALL of This^^^^^^^^
Could not have said it any better. Work hard, Play hard, Enjoy life and family!!
1 Like
If you blew a 61 at 180-185, you are probably close to 70 at 155-160
1 Like
Honestly, I don’t think genetic is the dominant factor in reaching the 5w/kg. I’m pretty sure if we look at historical data of people who blame it on genetic, we’re going to find much more obvious reason why they are not at 5w/kg. Not enough KM, not enough TSS, not enough intensity, name it…
Nobody is born at 5w/kg, you grind your way into it. You need multiple successive seasons of about 10000 km and minimal complete let down.
- Consistency
- Height / Weight ( i get there is a genetic component of that aspect)
- Genetic
5 Likes
Who is the heaviest guy doing 5w/kg? Who is the tallest? At 6’ 4", 188#, 50 y/o, and 12% body fat dexa, for guys like me it’s just not gonna happen. But what are the upper limits?
Thanks. What you’re saying is interesting. Where would you put VO2max workouts?
just sharing, FTP development of a non-(but-sort-of-semi)-pro, >5 W/kg, competitive rider (long distance, podium in races like Ötztaler):
I know most of this discussion is around single sport cyclists, but I did start thinking that 5 W/kg was approaching domestic pro levels for a triathlete. So I did try to look it up and found this interesting chart. 5W/kg for a moderately sized triathlete is pretty good on an international level. I did notice that most of the guys listed are over 70 kg, so their FTP is over 350. I remember a friend of mine scoffing at Conrad Stoltz’s FTP numbers being just over 5 w/kg saying “That’s it?” since he was probably thinking of some of those 5.5-6 w/kg guys as being world class. So yeah… any of us tri geeks trying to approach the 5w/kg threshold are aiming for the ultimate pointy end of the sport… but you have to remember how fast those guys/gals can also swim/run much faster than most AG athletes.
3 Likes
Congrats!! whats your height??
Regarding race weight, I recall a podcast where they mentioned that top elite racers (Froome et all) have a height (in) to weight (lbs) ratio of 1:2. So you can look at that as your benchmark for the “race weight” and once you are there build further in the Watts side of the equation.
Isn’t that kind of like BMI? Like it doesn’t work for tall people? 6’ 3" guy (75 inches) needs to weigh 150 pounds…
I think Bradley Wiggins was like 6’3" and listed at 152 lbs at one point in his racing career. But I agree it doesn’t work well for tall/short riders.
What do you do when you realize you will never hit 5w/kilo? Why do you continue racing when you know you will never be fast enough to be a factor in a race? I don’t know what I’m doing on the bike right now, looking for something cycling related to matter.
It’s not that linear. I could be 5+ watts but too heavy to be a real threat on substantial climbs. A rider with a lesser watts/kg could be a better climber and desender. I’ve got a lot of work to do on the flats.