So, if it’s taking best 1 minute (excluding spikes), It the test smart enough to consider what happened leading up to the best minute? For my first ramp test, I was a bit above targets and I think the extra fatigue hurt my final minute. In a follow up test, I was pretty much dead on leading up to the final.

For an extreme example - what if someone stayed at 200 watts regardless of the target wattage until the target is 500 watts and then held 500 for a minute or so. 75% percent of the last minute would be ~375 watts, but that’s not a valid test. Is the test smart enough to account for how well you hit target wattage leading up to the last minute?

The above example is extreme and unrealistic, but what if we looked at 2 different tests with the same ftp outcome as follows:

-test 1 - rider was ~5watts **low** on all the steps until the last 400 watt step (which he was perfect on for the full minute). FTP would be 300 watts.

-test 2 - rider was ~5watts **high** on all the steps until the last 400 watt step (which he was perfect on for the full minute). FTP would be 300 watts.

Assuming both riders were totally spent right at the end of the last minute @ 400 watts, I’d argue that test 1 slightly overstated the results and test 2 slightly understated the results. Their wattage leading in to the last minute are different by 10 watts and I think that’s significant additional fatigue for test 2. If the test wanted to account for this, it could slightly alter the 75% percentage up or down based on the % of target for the steps just prior to the best minute. Maybe it already does that, but I’m guessing this falls into the category of “good enough” without the adjustment.

ERG mode should help with the consistency here vs. target, but even that can be inconsistent with 1 minute steps depending on the trainer.