Kolie Moore on the ramp test

[Quaestor]

@wake

Basically Xert, but with better labeling

Lol. I feel bad for these guys, they have a platform that basically is what ppl want and need, but can’t make it appealing.

I guess they are missing formal training plans for the squares that like that sort of thing…

[Nate_Pearson]

@patrickhill

@Nate_Pearson, I would think with the data you have, that it would be possible to come up with a custom percentage of max 1 minute ramp power for each user (by comparing your FTP prediction with the ramp test result - some of us do like to test). Mine is probably more like 72%, though it took a while to figure that out. I know you’re moving away from testing, but it would certainly help limit much of the bellyaching about ramp tests not being accurate.

Yup! This is on the list to do too.

Develop it for age/sex buckets for first sign up, then learn how each athlete does it.

We wanted to do this at first, but we didn’t have enough data. We’re collecting it now.

IE if you’re a 65 year old man, you might have a different initial Vo2 max PL compared to a 25 year old woman.

So we’d look at big cohorts first, then we’d try to learn it individually for the athlete. We do this to an extent right now as you raise your FTP but I think we can do it even better.

We might also be able to generate this from past power curves or a combination of power curves plus FTP prediction.

It might sound simple right now but it’s not a super easy problem to solve.

[empiricalcycling]

Effects of step duration in incremental ramp protocols on peak power and...

Determinants of endurance in well-trained cyclists - PubMed

[AlphaDogCycling]

@Nate_Pearson

combo of FTP, weight, and PLs

Does this mean you are adding the ability to track weight daily? Or better, pull it from other services (e.g., Garmin “health”)?

[enki42]

@Quaestor

Lol. I feel bad for these guys, they have a platform that basically is what ppl want and need, but can’t make it appealing.

Besides they have lots of issues too. Their individual workouts are great but they don’t have a good way to string workouts together. Last time I tried using it it was suggesting 3 hour workouts which was a hard no from me and when I gave it a time limit I was overtraining very quickly and not really recovering. Then when listening to their podcast it became clear they expect you to use a coach to set your workouts

[Quaestor]

@enki42

but they don’t have a good way to string workouts together.

IMO this is the job of the self-coached athlete and no platform can do that better than yourself.

[Nate_Pearson]

@AlphaDogCycling

Does this mean you are adding the ability to track weight daily? Or better, pull it from other services (e.g., Garmin “health”)?

We wouldn’t launch this without some sort of good daily weight tracking. Probably via Apple/Android health at first so anything you sync to that would come to TR (I think that’s how it works…I haven’t looked in a while).

[Larzi]

@enki42

Last time I tried using it it was suggesting 3 hour workouts which was a hard no from me and when I gave it a time limit I was overtraining very quickly and not really recovering.

I really like the analytical side of Xert and I think most of their modelling is spot on. But the training planning is weird. Perhaps some of it is tied to Lower Threshold Power being modelled as something you can do endlessly without getting fatigued.

[Quaestor]

@Larzi

Perhaps some of it is tied to Lower Threshold Power being modelled as something you can do endlessly without getting fatigued.

But, is there a true physiological restriction to do LTP, LT1, et al all day?..(provided you fuel appropriately and get your muscle-skeletal system prepared for that.)

[Larzi]

@redlude97

Have you tried? LTP for me and many others tracking LT1 with DFa1 are finding there is a pretty strong correlation. Like riding at low zone 3 high zone 2 it’s not all day pace but actually pretty hard endurance

@Quaestor

But, is there a true physiological restriction to do LTP, LT1, et al all day?..(provided you fuel appropriately and get your muscle-skeletal system prepared for that.)

Good points from both of you.

The LTP that Xert currently detects is within my zone 3. Now, I do feel I have a better base this season than I have had like forever so from that perspective it makes sense. Still, it’s certainly not all-day power - even with the right fuelling. Feels more like my “marathon pace” that I would be able to sustain for some hours.

But their definition suggests that LTP is the lowest threshold once all “Endurance Energy” (not even sure I understand what that is) have been spent. LTP in some ways sounds like LT1 but then doesn’t…

Probably a discussion I should have on another forum

Thanks

Also referred to as LTP , this represents a modeling artifact associated with the depletion of Endurance Energy. As endurance energy declines over the course of a long activity, slow-recovery / long-term fatigue takes hold and Threshold Power, High Intensity Energy and Peak Power decline. The affect of long-term fatigue manifests in reduced MPA and MPA that declines more rapidly. LTP represents the lowest possible value for Threshold Power when all Endurance Energy reserves have been depleted:

[tshortt]

@redlude97

I think it has more to do with them being very careful about what the data says before extrapolating out. As they said, its an artifact of the calculation that happens to line up with what people are using as LT1, but without strong physiological validation about what a test value tells you. For the first year on Xert I kinda ignored the number and continued to use Z2 for endurance, wasn’t until last year with much more information about training around LT1 did I shift, and it corresponds well to VT1(talk test) for me and like you I’ve felt like it builds a strong consistent base. Just different philosophies about what power data alone tells us about our training and capabilities.

So you use LTP from Xert to do a lot of endurance miles? (analogous to what folks have been doing with LT1 high Zone 2 training). Just trying to understand what you mean.

@Larzi

But their definition suggests that LTP is the lowest threshold once all “Endurance Energy” (not even sure I understand what that is) have been spent. LTP in some ways sounds like LT1 but then doesn’t…

I felt this way a few years ago and sort of still do. I’m ok with them not calling it LT1 because it’s not what they’re measuring. That makes sense. What I’m wondering is how does Xert suggest you use this number. Never quite figured that out before I gave up on it.

[mmiloou2]

I have a friend paying KM $450/month and he’s convinced by KM’s pov. I understand how it’s usually “too high” but some people do well in 20-60min (myself included). TR is big on SS and integrated the ramp test (old as dirt btw) to compute a value that makes all the workout work…
What you define as ftp shouldn’t matter so much as performance ability. If you tend to score especially high on the ramp test and are not much of an ftp rider you’re left with bragging rights and not much to show for it.
With a TR defined ftp, how many can ride an hour at 95%? What about 100%?

[mmiloou2]

Group workouts are interesting data to see how your friends respond… it’s really all over the place (due to gains, old ftp, inflated ftp; who knows)

[mmiloou2]

Nailed it! Also the body systems respond on zones (follow your model of choice) but it’s for sure not +/-1% or +/-1watt.

[Bioteknik]

I wonder if the higher failure rate was from the vo2 workouts or from the threshold ones. So just because the ramp test has a lower failure rate doesn’t mean it’s more accurate for determining ftp. Vo2max workouts from a MAP test should be pretty close to your abilities.

[jkc]

@mmiloou2

With a TR defined ftp, how many can ride an hour at 95%? What about 100%?

Considering MLSS or FTP is an exercise intensity that can typically be sustained for 30 to 70 minutes, what is the fascination with 60 minutes other than pushing it to duration someday while covering 40km in distance?

[Quaestor]

The problem is the compounding load with an over estimated FTP, the failed workout is just the tip of the iceberg.

[jkc]

Except by those who equate “about an hour” to exactly 60 minutes.

[F10naGodless]

I think everyone who is so sure the ramp test is inaccurate and they’re so interested in their exact true FTP should go to a lab and test blood lactate until they get it just right.

I’ve heard you guys discuss the motivations for the ramp test and AT on the podcast, read about it in your blog, and you have given more details here than ever before and I bet there will still be ppl basically questioning your honesty and integrity.

It’s one thing to say “I don’t think your product works as well as it should” and another to say “nope that’s not why you created it”.

[Bioteknik]

The way tr designs most of their training weeks you’ll have compounding load issues even if your ftp is set correctly. They’re almost the definition of doing too much hard work, but you can’t do the really hard work because you’re too fatigued from the kinda hard work.

Instead of fixing that issue, they just lowered the starting level, but the main issue is still there. After noob gains the plans will be a lot of kind of hard work, but now you might only be doing kind of hard vo2 as well.

So what I’m saying is the statements from tr aren’t actually supported by the failure rate, since the failure rate is confounded by several factors.

The ramp test + AT set ftp to an appropriate level for higher success rate for completing their plans, but that doesn’t means the plans are optimal.