Also agree. I am close to 4th decade. And that is why TR would never have the plans that would fit everybody… at least till they include some AI and something like iLevels that would calculate the intervals and then something like HumanGo from Alan Couzens that manages recovery 
Personally I think one problem is that TR doesn’t have anything close to a closed loop. Except with employees. Another reason why I think working with a coach can be quite useful.
Working with the coach is probably the way to go… but (my example) it is very hard to justify the cost (high for a really good coach) when I do not race … and I do not race, because I do not think my fitness is good enough to be something other than cannon fodder (I my country there are no categories so you race with ex-pros if your ftp is 360W or 150W) and to improve my fitness probably the best solution would be to hire a good coach - and the snake is eating it’s own tale 
I’m just trying to solve the resistance+cycling programming puzzle, our Wed night ride has some heavy 320-360W FTP hitters and one of them is a year younger! I was able to hang on for good portions when my FTP was above 260. To be honest I don’t care about racing except for hanging with the lead group on Wed night worlds.
In Hunter Allen’s own words:
It is absolutely critical when using the principles of training with power that you adhere to both the time and intensity components of Dr. Coggan’s Power Training Levels in order to train effectively.
1 Like
if you parse that like a lawyer, it doesn’t mean Coggan prescribes duration. Reads like halo marketing to my (former vp mktg & current sales nerd) eyes 
In fact Coggan is always quick to point out the training levels are descriptive not prescriptive, just further reinforcing (in my mind) that the prescriptive durations are from Allen.
My lawyer’s name is Occam.
I’ve got a TTE test this weekend. Have a feeling it’s going to be horrendous — I say 35min @ 280w. I’ll report back.
2021 starts Monday!
1 Like
Looks like I’m getting good at guesstimating my FTP.
35min @ 290w. 
Evidence that a month of anaerobic-only training is FTP detrimental.
I might have been able to struggle to 40min but why? It’s base season!
Time: down 22min (39%) from season high.
Watts: down 8% from season high but up 32% from season start.
I’d be happy with another 30% gain in 2021. 
2 Likes
Pretty substantial and quite surprising (to me) decrease of TTE. Another round of staying at home is upon us so 30% gains are possible…
The decline was almost all muscular. Cardio was fine but legs couldn’t take it.
My peak TTE/FTP came after my POL block so I had been doing a lot of riding.
This TTE/FTP comes after a month of doing FRC-only training, so maybe a TOTAL of 45min of work!
It’s kinda weird how you can just feel it slipping away…
Looking forward to getting back into the fray.
2 Likes
Very interesting - thanks for posting.
Not surprised, I destroyed my FTP with TR’s short power build plan last year.
I do wonder though if in your test, you actually were above FTP. I find the 10W increase without TTE increase interesting. I have a feeling that a high FRC would allow you to make it to 35min above FTP.
1 Like
Ah, now I see…there’s some confusion!
The “35min @ 280w“ was my guess at what the results of this test would be. The actual result was 35min @ 290w.
Both TTE and power declined from pre-FRC FTP.
I think I’m much better equipped physically and intellectually to raise all boats this season than when I joined TR in 2018. Fun times await!
I’m going to hijack this thread for one post, but don’t feel bad because my name is on it.
We’re gonna do an AMA episode on the podcast to celebrate 100k listens. Head over to reddit if you want to ask something, we are not taking questions here.
14 Likes
Hah, you even said the 280 was a guess…it was very late in ny excuse. 
Did the progression 1 version for the first time today, after doing a TR ramp test last week. While the results are pretty much in line, I do find the Moore test to be more ‘enjoyable’. Afterwards, you’re also done for the day, no need to tag on another (shortish) workout.
That said, is this test just another way to avoid the feeling of VO2MAX powerlevels…
Downsides to this kind of testing:
- conscious pacing versus simply pedalling until you fail
- estimating a target ftp versus making it past minute 19:30 in the ramp test
I’m especially a bit uncertain about point 2. If on a next test I make it way beyond my TTE, I have then improved my TTE but potentially also underestimated my FTP. If I bump up the intensity and don’t make it to my previous TTE I’ve done my pacing wrong/overestimated my FTP. This to me brings more uncertainty than simply trying to make it past the 19:30 mark in the ramp test, to see a (potentially substantial) increase in FTP.
On the other hand, looking at a comparison of power curves, the Moore test allows me to gauge power levels and TTE I normally only get to see/experience on really hard group rides.
Thinking about this I might go with the following approach: Do ramp test as prescribed by TR, replace next workout with Moore test to get a feel for TTE at the newly set FTP.
1 Like
I’m not a complete zealot to all things KM, although his FTP assessments do work better for me. I can’t agree with your above comment - reaching 19:30 on the ramp test is also the definition of a target to increase FTP. There’s a whole thread on “what’s your motivational 19 minute song”… etc etc.
Also I know FTP and VO2 max are inextricably linked, but why would you need to ride at VO2 max levels to establish FTP/MLSS?
2 Likes
sure, but my point is that one does not have to choose 19:30 as the target, that’s just inherent to the TR ramp test. In contrast, for the Moore test, you need to have a pretty good guesstimate of what your FTP is/might be before you start the test and then perhaps fine-tune a bit while you’re going. This requires a bit of experience and even then causes a bit of anxiety (at least in my case). That said if your initial FTP setting in TR is off then the 19:30 mark is meaningless too…
1 Like
The point is that you can not reliably determine FTP from VO2Max work. You might get the same results from both, but many people do not. People with strong anaerobic contribution get too high FTP from the ramp test and as a result, keep on improving their anaerobic system by doing all SS work over threshold level. Then the next ramp test gives even more inflated “FTP” as you’ve only worked on your anaerobic system and you will simply fail all your SS sessions.
This has kind of been beaten to death in this thread. One thing a few are overlooking is when coach Moore says he uses data from WKO5 to determine estimates and then validates the test in WKO5. The TR workout version takes an average, which is fine (I’ve used it myself), but not exactly the intent. A coach will look at test data and determine validity of that test and the estimate it produced. The rider him/herself may not know their FTP, but their data will reveal a good starting point.
WRT how that compares to the ramp test, it should be obvious: a ramp test can work for someone with zero baseline and no data. A coach without any data or history to go off of might use a ramp test to get a ballpark number to use. Others might use an 8-min test. Still others might use a “go blow yourself up” ride and interpret data from that, train for a few weeks, then test to validate that estimate. Lots of ways to skin the cat.
All of these methods - properly executed - will get you a number to train from, and all probably within a decent tolerance of your physiological capability. The difference IME with this test is you can get a good idea of your TTE at FTP, learn what FTP feels like (which is important) and gain more insight into your actual capabilities beyond just a number to train from. The question is: is that something you want or need?
7 Likes