Yes, they are actively working on it.
Nothing magical about it - Itâs an intuitive response to tests, efforts, workouts etc that inform perception.
Nothing magical about knowing or not knowing what you can sustainably hold.
Just as a ramp test, or a 20 minute test, or a Kolie Moore test doesnât magically give you an accurate result - all of these tests are just different protocols used to inform your likely FTP to be used as a training metric.
There is also no one true FTP, I donât believe this. It probably fluctuates day to day depending on fatigue/recovery - although given it fluctuates quite closely.
Also, do you not do a lot of longer threshold and 95% SS intervals? I definitely do 
1 Like
No but I do use Golden Cheetah and WKO to double check and testing as verification.
Thatâs the problem and design behind many applications (Zwift, TP, Garmin, RGT, etc) that continues to blur the line with the 95% of 20 minute MMP and those that insist on a set time component to a physiological marker (just go back above in this post and youâll find plenty).
2 Likes
Magically feel? For me on long pre-test pacing efforts, it takes 5+ minutes of being around ftp for HR to reach steady state around 158-162bpm. Start conservative and it can take 15 minutes. Here is an ok but conservatively paced effort from 2+ weeks ago: Where did you ride OUTSIDE today (2022) - #60 by WindWarrior
Once HR is around steady state, the fun starts with 1+ minute increases in power (~10W increments) and if HR drifts up its a tell. Its all about being able to tightly control power and knowing that HR can lag by 20-40 seconds, so I need to push a higher power for 1+ minutes before seeing a HR trend. The longer I go, the more I can feel breathing (& HR) increase when going over, so by 20 minutes into a 30+ minute effort then I try and pay attention to breathing as well.
1 Like
Yes of course, part of this intuition is using data from these software, TT or race efforts, even chasing a KOM (If its a threshold-is effort) all can be used to inform your perception of ftp.
Itâs definitely not like the 20 minute tests gives us all a perfect result - we all know this isnât the case, Kolie Mooreâs test doesnât do this either - But we can use this data to inform our perceptions and the sensations we feel of riding at our FTP.
Iâd like to hear more opinions though - maybe I am wrong - maybe perception isnât enough and some test is going to give me a more accurate number - Kolie Moore definitely cuts it closer than Ramp Test for sure in this case.
âTraining is testing and testing is training.â - Dr. Andy Coggan
One of the benefits of doing long, sustained efforts at or near threshold, or âall-outâ efforts of 40-60min is that you develop a feel for MLSS, which is then applicable in all kinds of riding where you canât stare at your power meter. Itâs not magic. Itâs just experience with those efforts. You can tell when youâre accumulating more lactate than your body can clear/tolerate, and so you back off, push up to that edge again until you find the range where youâre at MLSS. I never come out of one of those efforts going, âMy FTP today is 284W.â Instead, I come out going, âEh, 280 or 285 feels about right.â And thatâs plenty accurate enough. Coupled with the knowledge of âfeelâ, thatâs more valuable than an exact number anyway. (Then you can go back and look at your data and confirm what you were feeling⌠or not.)
After doing enough of this kind of work, I think a number of riders can figure out their threshold and feel it within the first 10-15 minutes of any given sustained effort.
4 Likes
Or you can just go out for a hard hour ride/race and use the NP to validate your FTP or do a 40km TT. Dr. Coggan cited 7 means of estimating your FTP. Only two are structured testing. Learn how to read your PDC is by far the easiest for me and occupy two of the seven sins.
2 Likes
I generally have a rough idea what mine is just off feel.
2 Likes
Why does it always feel like âUse x test to validate what you think your FTP is, as its better then rampâ with the assumption that everyone already knows their ftp which is what is needed to be able to do the test. That assuption is great for some and may even be a needed thing at the higher end of the sport but isnât really a good assumption for everyone.
Feels like arguing that everyone has a FTP over 3 watts/kg as Iâm pretty sure all those who say its easy to know their FTP by feel also have a FTP above that
This makes me think you believe the FTP is defined as whatever you can hold 40-70 minutes
Your LT is your FTP and âmost peopleâ can ride at their FTP for 40-70 minutes âwhen restedâ and âwhen cool enoughâ etc etc. Letâs say itâs 100 degrees, you will probably struggle to hit your numbers, your HR will be way higher than normal at any given power, and so on. But your LT (and therefore FTP) didnât change. You just couldnât perform at your best on this day.
2 Likes
A potential problem with testing based on power or RPE (feel) is the mental component. Sometimes athletes will undershoot their physiologic capacity because of mental weakness. If that is suspected, a good MLSS test can help separate legs from brain. If you can identify a problem you can take a shot at addressing it.
This works in reverse as well. If an athlete is convinced his/her FTP is 350, but their MLSS is 325, then they have actionable data. As an example, this type of thing is relevant if pacing a long TT by power.
I donât mean to push MLSS testing as that has its own issues. But in some circumstances quantitative data can be useful. Mostly, be aware what you feel may not be what you can do. And RPE is not always telling you the truth.
Carry on!!
1 Like
I wish that was true. Mind hasnât been in/above 3 for the last five years due to injuries. My best was only around 3.2 but Iâve been looking at my PDC since 2015 and took a good 2-3 years before seeing that dip. The tools are out there and some like Golden Cheetah is free.
So do 2 tests, which canât really be done in a row cause the first will wear you out too much to do the second right after. Oh wait, the ramp test isnât accurate as is being claimed so the first non ramp test will be wrong and youâll need at least a third test. By that point I would think, "If I just did a ramp test I could be training and not worried about the results of the test.
As to getting easier going forward. So far for me long sweet spot intervals donât feel much different from long endurance intervals for the first many minutes, just I can keep going on the endurance intervals. Seems like those who say its easy to go by feel are those who can go by feel.
Or another way to look at this. If youâve reached the point that further improvments will be small, sure maybe a ramp test isnât the best and youâll know your FTP even if you canât go by feel because it shouldnât be very different. If you havenât reached that point cause you have been lazy before this and just starting structured planning, ramp is perfectly fine. Even if wrong youâd probably have a hard time doing a more accurate test and your ftp will hopefully be changing enough that even if the test was right it will be wrong next week anyway so better to get on with training.
2 Likes
My 0.02$ is pride is preventing a lot of people to make good choices. The allure of having that slightly higher FTP number is too enticing!
If one pays attention to the workout text prior to the workout, and more importantly the text prompt during the workout and act accordingly, a lightly elevated FTP would no be a problem.
Itâs all there âif you feel XYZ increase/decrease intensity etcâ
1 Like
Iâll throw in my personal FTP test
I generally hate testing, so I invented my own protocol.
The Bandit Protocol.
There can never be enough protocols 
First, I personally believe this testing is best done outside. On the bike you race, with the power meter you race with. Make it valid to your actual real world performance.
Be very careful with temperature. If itâs hot, as you overheat your performance will suffer. You could use that result as your âheat FTPâ. Essentially, what it would be at that temperature. Personally, I prefer it cool. The reduced cooling during climbing means the temperature needs to be a lot colder than many think. Best performance would be in the 13-16c degree range. Even colder on a MTB with the reduced speed.
Whatever the temp, your result is relative to that temperature. So, if you live somewhere hot, or only race in the heat. No problem. Youâll just test a little lower than youâre ultimately capable of.
Find a steady low grade hill. Your favorite one. The angle you enjoy the most. It will need to be at least 3mins of steady gradient. 4mins is better, 5mins probably optimal, although for 5mins, less fit riders will likely fatigue too rapidly.
I like 3mins myself, thatâs plenty to get me where I need to be.
Wear your HR monitor, if you have one.
Take a guess at your FTP. Iâm sure anybody reading this will have a pretty good idea.
Simply ride repeats. Very steady each time. I display 3sec power, 30sec power and HR. Or just do laps with average power. However, if you do use laps on your computer, remember, going 50w harder for 30sec at the end to get the target number will ruin the data. Weâre interested in the power and the HR.
Warm up for a considerable time. Maybe, a full hour. Z2, bring the power up very slowly to tempo for a few minutes when youâre close to the hill. Fuel and hydrate correctly.
Simply start your first effort about 20 or 30w under what you think is your FTP is.
Ride the hill, super steady, watch your HR carefully. Take a mental note of what it peaked at. Take a very diagnostic approach. Feel your breathing, feel your pedaling technique. Keep your ideal cadence. Just nice smooth power.
Roll down the hill. No hurry at all. Relax. Take a drink, have a candy. Chill. Give it a minute or two at the bottom to rest, then go again. 10w higher power.
Repeat.
You will soon get to the point where you can feel a kind of sustainable high power. Power that you could maintain for 30-45mins, for real. Itâll likely be 10w less than your ego tells you. The repeats beyond that donât last long. I usually do two above my FTP. The 2nd, which is 20w over it, is very obviously over it. Youâll feel it rapidly and see it in the HR response.
Pay very specific attention to the HR. Knowing your approximate threshold HR is an incredibly valuable metric.
Take your new found approximate FTP and approximate and threshold HR and experiment with training. Try some longer intervals. Youâll learn rapidly if you need to tweak it up or down a tad.
I suspect most people will get within 10w with this technique. Particularly, if you donât let your ego have any say in the matter.
The bonus of this technique, you wonât be very tired when youâre finished. So, you can add in a nice long Z2 ride or whatever you want after completion.
Iâm a small 60kg rider so 10w increments work for me. Iâm also very familiar with my performance and perceived effort. It usually only takes 4 or 5 repeats to get it sorted. I know itâs not 300w and itâs not 200w. So, Iâm starting at 230w, to be conservative and feeling it sits somewhere between 255w-265w.
When I do the 270w repeat, Iâm starting to feel less in control, Iâm certain Iâve gone past it when I do the 280w repeat.
That works for me. Itâs almost fun, a billion times less painful than a ramp test and for me, vastly more accurate. For interests sake the ramp test gave me 277w . Well overestimated.
For bigger or very strong riders, it could be 20w steps. To be fair, once youâve completed this test or have other data, a 5 repeat step covering 50w should be enough to cover every rider.
If you repeat the protocol, do it at the same time. Say, after a rest day. Same amount of caffeine, same fueling etc. Ignore Strava segment times. They are totally irrelevant. Too many variables. Donât even look at them.
Finally, be conservative. Itâll likely be the step under the one you want it to be. Equally, it might be in between a step. Now weâre talking about 5w. Iâm sorry to say that it just isnât that accurate. Nor, does it need to be.
This is not an all out protocol, like a ramp test, you will feel like youâve barley gone hard. This is why youâll think itâs the step above the actual number. If it is, fantastic. Youâll find out soon enough.
Pick the honest repeat. Train off it. Adjust it.
Try it again after a training block. Hopefully, itâs up.
Enjoy 
1 Like
You approach is similar to what pros do. Once you know what it feels like itâs easy to get it close enough for training. And everything else is probably over-precision.
How pro cyclists test their fitness, with UAE Team Emirates â Rouleur (as posted in the Pro/Elite thread)
2 Likes
Great article.
Totally agree on the over-precision. People think theyâre launching a life critical mission to Mars. It really isnât that complex.
I will say. I donât know what the ramp test is supposed to be testing, cause it sure ainât testing FTP. Taking a fixed percentage off the final minute of a different test, seems like a fantastic way to pile error on top of error.
Itâs also a fairly brutal test, simply to work out FTP. Particularly, for anaerobic sprinter types.
3 Likes
As many of us have said, the ramp test is designed to estimate map, and it does a pretty good job of it. But any training stimulus designed to change the slope of your power duration curve will then make estimating a single constant percentage of map less valid.
Short power, sustained power are both designed to change your pd curve. Just like kolie mentioned in the podcast, short duration repeats might also be a strong anaerobic stimulus and can allow for an increase in map, but an ftp that did not change or maybe got lower. This has been my experience in the past doing the tr designed build and specialty plans. My 2x8 results never increased and i though i was doing something wrong during the test because they actually got harder and the delta between the two increased. Makes sense now though.
2 Likes
I probably have far more modest goals than many here and donât like getting too far in the weeds trying to sort out whether my ftp is too high or low by 5-10 watts or more. If my workouts feel sufficiently hard I assume Iâm at least in the ballpark with my ftp
3 Likes
I think @Nate_Pearson has said it multiple times here in the forum or on the podcast. The ramp test is designed to set appropriate ranges for the TR workout and plans. Call it ftp, ramp test result, or something else. Based on their data, this test and the result gave the majority (not all!) of people a score that worked well for creating the right zones.
But he also recognized that it wasnât perfect and some people over tested or under tested. Hence they work on AT. As he says, ramp test + AT = best results. They arenât in isolation. If you way over or under test it make take AT a little longer to get the right workouts for you.
Now comes predicted FTP which removes the ramp test. Itâs all an evolution. And as many people on the forum have said most of us here arenât professionals. Consistency i and a plan are the most important things. Not getting an exact ftp number.