Kolie Moore on the ramp test

[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.

[C_Nay]

Am I the only one that actually knows my FTP just by intuition? I mean you should be able to feel in your legs what’s sustainable aerobically for a longish duration.

Honesty is important!

I do think PL < 3 or 4 is misleading, I understand there will be some people that refuse to adjust their inflated FTP’s - hence TR providing these workouts, also it’s useful for days with less time, or days that you are carrying fatigue. But if you can’t do PL 3+ Threshold, its probably time to dial it down 5 watts, which honestly doesn’t matter, its just a number! And it feels way better nailing workouts than hanging on for dear life.

Ramp test protocol is great for beginners and casual TR users as their FTP will likely change very quick anyway, so an accurate test isn’t as important!

Or maybe I’m wrong - do you really need a test to know your FTP (if you’re not a complete beginner)?

[aydraper]

I think the biggest problem is that too many people choose mid and high volume plans. I agree those can cook a lot of people.

But if you choose low volume, use AT and just supplement with z2 rides I think it works for most people. A key point is though if you are supplementing with group rides, they are probably adding extra intensity. Swap the group ride for one of the intense workouts.

On MV specifically, I think the added Sunday SS ride hurts a lot of people. Which is why they toned it down. Doing the alternative endurance ride recommend is better. For me the optimal plan is MV but sub in the Sunday long ride. The intensity is actually lower than LW. And I can skip Wednesday if I need to. And swap the Saturday workout for a group ride if I want.

[AJS914]

@C_Nay

Or maybe I’m wrong - do you really need a test to know your FTP (if you’re not a complete beginner)?

Personally, I think it’s better to test. I don’t believe you guys who say you can magically feel your FTP unless you are doing frequent, longer threshold or 95% SS intervals. And if you are doing those, it’s basically like you are testing.

Last year, my FTP peaked at the end of July. I did hard group rides and mid-week maintenance intervals through September but my FTP drifted down by 25 watts by January 1st. I think that is pretty normal as you can’t stay at a peak forever. How many people can feel it without doing efforts that test it?

[Bioteknik]

That’s kind of the problem though, the mv and hv are still too skewed towards the higher intensity side. The hv plans look like they are trying to balance the demands better than before and use more variety so kudos to the tr team for that. The team has said why it is this way, so that is the better business decision if it keeps people with tr, I’m not sure if I can blame them if too many users don’t want to do endurance rides.

[jarsson]

@redlude97

Good thing the kolie moore protocol isn’t set at 60 mins then

KM protocol is just a protocol. He uses pdc and inflection point on the curve. Some people can ride 35min@FTP other 60min. And his protocols have different length for different athletes.

If you can hold the power for 35min - do extensive ftp training, if you can ride 60 - try on ftp or other limiters. You should be finaly able ride around 60 min at FTP but it’s not necessity for everyone. 40min will give you also good number for training.

[aydraper]

I think we are on the same page. The problem is people can’t help themselves and want to do more and more. And then burn out. My guess would be 75%+ of the TR users would be optimized in a LV plan with supplemented endurance rides if they have the time. I’d be interested to see what % of users choose which volume of plan.

I the TR team is doing a good of balancing the at times opposing goals: making people faster and keeping people on subscription! My recommendation is that LV should be the default setting and users have to actively select MV or HV, with appropriate warnings/caveats. I think asking people how much time they have to train leads many to get slotted into MV and HV. And anyone over 50 should not be given the choice to select MV or HV unless they do MV with the Sunday ride being the long ride.

[TooManyDogs]

@aydraper

But if you choose low volume, use AT and just supplement with z2 rides I think it works for most people. A key point is though if you are supplementing with group rides, they are probably adding extra intensity. Swap the group ride for one of the intense workouts.

Isn’t it on TR’s feature todo list to factor outside rides into AT?