Done 
This is sounding similar to my story.
Started in Jan after a few months off the bike @ 154, made my way upto 210 in Aug, then seemed to crash despite following the plans consistently. I’m currently at 188.
Won’t go into full details (TLDR), but it’s taken me 11 months to realise that the 20min test is the better metric for me and that the Recovery Week (I’m on LV plans) does more harm than good.
2 Likes
You need to raise your FTP? Are your friends all Domestic Pros?
There is no way on Gods Green Earth that I could even come close to what you’ve achieved!
Hopefully you’ve received the advice you’re looking for in this thread? That aside, I just wanted to let you know that I think what you’ve achieved is pretty bloody amazing!!!
6 Likes
Haha! No but I think one of them thinks he’s my coach 
And thank you! Never too old 
Yes it’s been good advice. I’ve heard lots of times on the podcast that ramp test is not fun, but I was perhaps still unclear as to why people may underperform relative to what they achieve in their sessions (e.g. knowing that setting your FTP at what you achieved in the ramp test will mean you’re not putting enough effort in on the workouts), but now I’m clear on how to rectify the situation and hopefully get a more accurate turbo trainer-based FTP.
2 Likes
Here is an interesting article on FTP: The Physiology of FTP and New FTP Test Protocols
You can see how FTP is not necessarily tied to 60 minute power and can even be at 40 min power. All these tests are just taking the max power for some interval and applying a factor to get to FTP. But that factor is not the same for everyone.
To anyone saying you should raise your FTP, you should ask when was the last time they did 100 miles under 3:50.
Also if you are a small female, the FTP value will look low, but in W/kg you might still be up there.
You should only care about the FTP number to use for setting appropriate interval intensities. Just pick a test, over time it will tell you if you are improving and by applying your own factor you can get to the appropriate interval intensities.
3 Likes
You said that recovery weeks do more harm than good, does that mean you do not take a recovery week or do you do a little bit less? By looking at others like Nate they made continual progress from low 200’s watts gradually up by 20 watts each time, how can this be and I am up and down like a yoyo? I keep thinking if I could only work it out then I could build on it and this could motivate me better.
1 Like
sorry to ask what you learnt? because I still am in the dark as to the problem and how to resolve it. Can you help in any way?
1 Like
That’s for me. Everyone will have their own experiences, but I find myself really flat after a recovery week whilst doing the LV plans. After a weekend off (I ride mon, wed, fri) my legs are always fresh.
It would differ on mid/ high volume plans though, but might not neef a full week of low intensity.
Again, as mentioned earlier, finding the test that works best for you (and your riding) could help explain yoyo’ing power. Frustratingly, it’s all trial and error.
Somehow i missed the part where you mentiones the 100 miles in 3:48…
googles speed calculator
I mean… wow… this is impressive…
2 Likes
Thanks Johnnyvee - I’m not sure how to make the profile public from looking at your instructions, but never mind! My profile looks to be public but I could be looking in the wrong place.
I have looked at the bell curve article you posted, and that’s really interesting and also funny (regarding men messing up the stats!). I am not as bad as I thought looking at the bell curve, but still surprised that the ramp test doesn’t indicate my actual FTP (even looking at the bell curves as it’s likely to be the same for others too). And today, I’ll be upping my FTP again as TSS should have been 65 but was actually 81. This happens a lot!
Finally, you’re right, there are some seriously long rides in my calendar 
But that’s a topic for another day…
Thanks for the great links and I’ll post after my Jan 8/20 minute test if it was more accurate in setting my workout ftp
1 Like
Its just a number…
At the end…some people can push harder and deep much deeper on harder efforts, while other can go longer at a lower power that is closer to their FTP.
I would suggest trying the 20 min test. I bet you will get a number that is closer to your abilities than the ramp.
3 Likes
Yes, I really like the “progression 1” and have done it multiple times. I’m an ‘all rounder’ and for a ‘TT-er’ like the OP sounds like she is I think it would be a good choice (or just a 1 hour test at FTP?). For background I like the ramp test, and hate doing a 20 min test though it gives me a similar number to the ramp test.
" PROGRESSION 1, 40-50 MINUTES OR TTE + 10 MINUTES
-
- 10 minutes at 95 percent of target FTP
-
- 20-30 minutes at 100 percent of target FTP
- 10 minutes gradual power increase, if possible, until exhaustion"
I used WKO5, but if someone doesn’t have access to WKO, could they do one of these TP protocols and accurately figure out the resulting FTP in TrainerRoad?
1 Like
So the FTP is then estimated as the average over the entire workout?
It looks like that is practically as exhausting as doing FTP until TTE and the benefit over regular all out test is that it provides some pointers for pacing.
Hi Michelle,
Let me try and break it down for you.
At a top level you have two basic components of fitness:
| Type of Fitness | Metric | Test Protocol |
|---|---|---|
| cardio fitness | Max Aerobic Power (MAP) or ‘power’ at VO2Max | Ramp Test or 5-min all-out effort |
| metabolic fitness | Power at Lactate Threshold | blood lactate test |
Your cardiovascular fitness merely sets an upper limit on aerobic energy production. Kinda interesting, but kinda not, as by itself it isn’t a good predictor of performance.
On the other hand, your metabolic fitness or lactate threshold represents the % of MAP/VO2max that you can actually use on steady state efforts like 15-20 minute intervals or time trials.
Functional Threshold Power (FTP) is a great fitness metric because it integrates underlying components of your physiology:
- power at lactate threshold, which can be expressed as % of MAP/VO2max
- cycling economy/efficiency
Two classic protocols for field testing, without lactate measurement, your FTP are the 40k Time Trial and 20-minute field test.
The “problem” with the ramp test is:
- the ramp test is only estimating MAP
- your lactate threshold (LT) as % of MAP can and does change throughout the season in response to blocks of training
- time trialists generally have high LT as % of MAP
- TrainerRoad uses a fixed % of MAP (75%) and the ramp test by itself is incapable of providing a personalized %
Coach Ric Stern in the UK was working with time trialists and ramp tests back in the 1990s and ‘discovered’ that lactate threshold was roughly 72-78% of MAP. I’ve posted some articles he has written, along with his critique of TrainerRoad/Zwift usage of the ramp test. Let me know if you are interested in seeing that.
Hope that helps.
Cheers,
Brian
4 Likes
No worries! I am a “master” and age comes to us all! Interesting on the VO2max. I was tested as elite marathon runner back in 2003, and expected my test of 2016 to show it had dropped. It was actually the same, which was quite surprising. This was lab testing, and in the same lab test, I again woefully underperformed for the physiologist on ramp test. But what he did say is I can hold threshold for a weird amount of time compared to the bell curve he looked at. With that information, I decided that I probably would be good at long distance time trialling…so it was good information to find out Endurance definitely comes with age - and more so for women I understand. We have something going for us then!
2 Likes
Thanks Brian! This is really good information too. I’m definitely interested in reading the articles you have stated.
I guess going back to why I’m also posting, when you do a ramp or FTP test, what you’re trying to discover is a value that you should set in order to maximise any training benefit from the sessions that are set. So if it says sweet spot, if you hit the numbers you’re definitely working sweet spot, and VO2 Max, you’re working that system. If you’re having to guess your FTP, you’re having to mess around with setting your FTP until you break and can’t finish a session (therefore drop it) or frequently exceed the set values by 10% (raise your FTP). And if you don’t find the right FTP, you’re training an energy system which is not the energy system that the session prescribes. Is it better in this scenario to guess uber high and keep dropping it until you stop failing to finish sessions (but also risk over-training), or incrementally increase FTP until you pretty much hit the line?
Indeed! That is from Coach Joe Friel’s Fast After 50 book.
This is getting into coaching, and I’ll just say the handful of coaches I’ve talked with / emailed are of the opinion you should go conservative on FTP and “flex” your workouts based on how you feel. But I’m sure there are coaches that are hard task masters and might say the opposite.
4 Likes
In contrast to the 60 min test, I like the ‘Progression 1’ because you ease into things at 95% of FTP for 10 min rather than straight into riding at FTP, then you only ride at FTP for 30 min, then increase slowly beyond that until exhaustion. The 20 min and the 60 min tests require knowing what your target is for pacing and then trying to achieve it. The big ramp test advantage is that it doesn’t require any pacing or pre-knowledge of the estimated result. With the 20 min and 60 min test poor pacing can lead to a failed test and frustration. It seems like the ‘Progression 1’ is more forgiving of imperfect pacing (poorly chosen FTP target for the middle part) since is it only 30 min.
1 Like
Just curious… is 92% the standard percentage to use? Just asking because I’ve been getting a lil frustrated with my Ramp Test numbers and I’m debating if adding more volume is the solution or if I’m just a bad ramp tester and I should try one of the other tests.
You are a very experienced athlete and probably going off the zone it will be hard for you, as the zones are pretty broad. If you train at 100% or 95% FTP (so threshold) are there so completely different adaptations? And 5% FTP difference is a lot with high FTP, that you probably have. If you set your FTP too low (so let’s say 2-3% too low) you are working more aerobically at the threshold and you simply can go longer. And duration always trumps the intensity.
With your phenotype probably no TR workout, other than TT speciality will be enough to provide enough SST or Threshold adaptation for you. Why? Because if your TTE@FTP is let’s say 60 min, so to provide proper stimulus your workout should be at least 3x20, 2x30 (60 min TiZ) or longer (5x15,4x20). There are not such workouts in TR plans. And how do you guess your FTP? The long workouts are great for that - change the erg mode to Resistance/Level mode and simply go by feel. If the intervals feel “too easy” go harder or go longer.
I am number guy and I love everything that is quantified but after some training, I start to value feeling more than numbers - the numbers start to be confirmation of my feeling, not the main driver.
Too high FTP causes a lot of problems if you want to properly stimulate your adaptations with SST and threshold by going longer. Why? Because (probably) to receive good adaptations you should do 2x40@SST (let’s assume 90% of FTP). If you are off it becomes 2x40 threshold - quite hard workout (And probably you can do this looking at your results).
I am not a coach, and not very experienced user - these are my experiences from training and research about this.
1 Like