Kolie Moore on the ramp test

Yea, I agree that the baseline should be that. My initial thought would be that training at a FTP that’s 10+ watts above your actual threshold is gonna induce too much fatigue that would cause you to skip/fail workouts eventually, which would lead to less frequency. Whereas an FTP that’s 10+ watts too low would never cause that without outside factors.

2 Likes

Kolie is active in another community im part of so I know many of his feelings about this stuff lol

I’d agree in part, but I think there’s value for ramp testing for new folks who have no idea about pacing or anything like that. It may be imperfect but it gives folks a ballpark. As folks learn themselves and choose to either manually adjust their target or do longer tests, then they can refine their target.

My one fear with adaptive training is that progression levels can mask some incorrect FTPs, like if you can’t ever do the sweet spot of 3x20 and it isn’t due to lack of time, I’d argue your target is off. But that’s just my feeling on that

8 Likes

To be fair, even if we haven’t seen this question (Hi/Lo) posed as I mention, I think the aspects and results have been mention at least indirectly if not directly in the many other FTP threads. But I think they get lost in the FTP mess.

That’s why I have considered posting a more restricted question that just focuses on the training process and results.

  • Too High: likely leads to non-functional overreaching, burnout and over training in the worst cases.

  • Too Low: likely leads to slow fitness improvement or plateaus.

I’m sure there are more considerations, but those were some quick ones I had.

1 Like

And I would say it matters more with the experience of the rider. A new rider I think I’d want to have them train lower. You’d still get noob gains but less likely to burn them out on training. Whereas an experienced cyclist you could err more on the side of training at a higher ftp.

3 Likes

Imagine the difficulty of us actually having to use our own brains!! :thinking: :upside_down_face:

5 Likes

I’d ask a different question:

For what aspect of your training is FTP a useful guide? I use MLSS to guide threshold work. For VO2max have changed to RPE, HR and Breathing rates. For endurance and foundation building, I use LT1.

Anything more than three zones and I’m too easily confused.

(OK, five because recovery day and sprints could be counted)

6 Likes

I agree with you, but then you end up not using TR workouts at all, and make all custom workouts.

3 Likes

Yes. I don’t use ERG mode though so the workout player is just an interval timer. I use some workout templates and also have a series of custom stuff in workout creator. FreeRide also gets used a lot.

When I’m just riding and not training, typically do the same workouts over and over. Or “trainnow” just to see what it suggests.

Ramp test is a vo2 max test. On average, people tend to have a ftp that is a certain % of vo2max. The purpose of most training aims to increase the % of vo2max that ftp is at (for example, raise ftp from 86% to 90% of vo2max).

Yes, ramp test is not a great ftp test because it’s a vo2max test that will not capture changes in ftp if vo2max is unchanged.

A longer steady state test like a 20-60min all out test is a much better way to estimate ftp power (lactate threshold).

4 Likes

Feeling like the ramp test is short changing you and leaving you with a feeling like you took a short cut home on a beautiful sunset evening…?

Not sure if you’re an outlier who falls out of the 75% spectrum of the test?

Dont really want to go as hard as you can for 20, 30 or 60 solid minutes?

Go the other way…

Go out and ride hard for 2 hours! . Use VO2, threshold, sweet spot, endurance. In any sequence you feel like. BUT… No visible metrics except ( your current speed ) and ride time. Doesn’t matter if you averaged 100 watts or 290 watts.

Come home and take your best 50 minutes of the ride.

Done.

That was fun.

A bike ride.

And an FTP measurement.

Decide what zones you’d like to improve on and come up with a plan or follow one of the plans provided.

There’s lots of ways to skin the threshold cat, but the ramp is not good for many reasons. The topic is a reheated dead horse at this point.

For example, I recently did two ramp tests about a month apart. Max 1-minute power was 290 watts on Ramp1 and 315 watts on Ramp2. The measured VO2max was about the same. However, if you look at my gas exchange, my RER through the tests didn’t really change much, so threshold hasn’t improved. Only power at VO2max showed improvement.

I’ve also done ramp tests where power at VO2max and VO2max didn’t change, but RER improved, so threshold increased. You probably won’t see that with only power unless you’re doing CP testing or similar.

If I didn’t use any other means of threshold estimation, I’d be failing workouts and wondering why the ramp test sucks. It’s not that the ramp test sucks. You just can’t expect it to be your primary “measuring stick”.

3 Likes

I believe this is a false statement. As you can be more off on a ramp test at certain times of a training cycle than in other. Example if you’re coming off a heavy vo2 block. You may test higher on a ramp test. More so than coming out of base season. I find that my ftp from ramp test or other test can be vastly different depending on what time of year.

Base season it can be off 0-5watts

During peak season it can be off 10-30

2 Likes

+1. I train for long endurance events and have probably an under-developed anaerobic capacity. My ramp test ftp: 203, yet the 20 minute test (granted it was taken a month later, but still - I didn’t improve THAT much): 220, and that was even low/poorly paced. It really is noticeable when you do a VO2 max interval and it feels like sweet spot.

Of course there are individual differences in what testing protocol is most accurate and gives you the most bang for your buck in your workouts. It doesn’t mean that one particular test is bad. Snowshoes and sneakers are both great footwear in the right circumstances.

listened to that when it came out and laughed - good episode and the guy talks sense and knows his stuff.

2 Likes

His SS vs POL Kayfabe (sp) cast was really good too.

8 Likes

I chuckled when he also said that if you didnt use a dodgy ramp test to set FTP then you wouldnt need AT :rofl: :rofl:

I’m amazed this podcast took so long to get talked about on here :wink:

5 Likes

Well, at least in this context, ie Kolie’s opinion, I’m pretty sure his view on FTP is that it s power at lactate threshold (MLSS). What your view of what FTP ‘is’, will affect your view of how to best test/measure it.

in the words of Kolie Moore at 58:30, referencing the ramp tests and workouts “if it works for you that’s great” and he thinks/guesses/expects about 40 to 55 percent of people will have an accurate FTP predicted by a (TR) ramp test.

If you go look into the science, there are a large number of studies on changing the ramp testing protocols in terms of step length (1 min vs 1.5 min vs 2 min vs 2.5 min vs …), and the power increase for each step.

Back in the 1990s, Ric Stern is the guy that noticed a lot of time trialists had an FTP of 72-77% of Maximum Aerobic Power (MAP) from a Ramp Test. He has a long-term view and very practical perspective on ramp tests, and here is his perspective on TR and Zwift protocols:

The first sentence has link to his ‘How To FTP Test’ post and that is a good read if you are interested.

FWIW the ramp test tends to under-estimate my FTP. So I dug into this topic a few years ago. My FTP as % of MAP is above average, so 75% of my 1-minute power on TR ramp protocol can be a bad % to get an accurate FTP estimate. My FTP as % MAP changes over a season, so there are times when 75% isn’t too far off (but still leads to under-estimating ftp).

3 Likes

this episode in particular or Empirical Cycling in general?

At least a year ago now probably we had a very long thread of his form of VO2 max training. Eventually devolved, and KM used to post too. He then asked mods to delete the thread which is rare.

1 Like

I think we are right on schedule.

2 Likes