Right now we are just using the results from my last INSCYD test to determine training zones, etc.
1 Like
So you’re using ‘base’, ‘medio’, and maybe FatMax? Where does medio put you in FTP/TrainerRoad terms? IF .84? IF .85? (I don’t think he uses FTP too much but I’m guessing you still roughly know your FTP).
Reason I ask is I really exploited the medio zone this season for some really good improvements over 3-4hr rides. Middle of medio put me at .83 IF, an intensity I would have rarely (never?) ridden prior to that (in a sustained way). Was able to do a ton more work.
I am using FatMax and medio zones almost exclusively.
As far as a percentage of FTP in relation to TrainerRoad… that’s an interesting question.
When I stopped using a dedicated TR plan (I still am a subscriber and use the software and many of the workouts) my FTP according to the TR ramp test was 303W. The middle of my ‘medio’ zone according to INCSYD was 230W. At that level, my medio workouts were at 75% of FTP.
HOWEVER, my threshold power (different from FTP) according to INSCYD was 275W - and according to that number, my medio was 83.6% of threshold.
I have since gotten fitter, and my “true” threshold power is now somewhere just north of 280W. How do I know that? Because all of the software that Steve uses (WKO5, Xert, etc.) was telling him that I have a true threshold of 280 – so he prescribed a workout for me where the instructions were to ride a 280W for as long as I could. I made it for 1:03 – it was absolutely brutal, but also kind of cool (once it was over) to know I could hold that wattage for a true hour. Something I know for a fact I couldn’t have done before.
Right now, in the base phase I’m in, we are using 280W as the anchor to base all of my training off of. We are going to be doing some balance point testing coming up to further refine the training.
What I have really learned through all of this (I think) is that I was over-achieving on TR FTP tests, and as such I was over training… and getting all sorts of fatigue and symptoms of over-training that I constantly had to work out of…it was very frustrating.
My personal opinion is that my anaerobic contribution to my fitness was very high, and allowed me to over-test – but it masked an underlying problem which was a not-quite-as-developed-as-it-should-have-been aerobic system.
Hope some of this is helpful.
17 Likes
Same for me I think. The TR ramp test yields an FTP that is too high for me, not something I could hold for more than 25-30 mins.
I’m not in the middle of a TR plan right now, but when I was earlier this year, I found the workouts with longer threshold intervals (like Lamarck) and VO2 max intervals (like Spencer) to be very difficult - either I’d feel very fatigued for a few days after them, or I’d dial down the intensity.
For my next TR plan, I’m going to subtract about 5-7% from my ramp test FTP and go with that for workouts. And add 1-2hrs of volume, schedule permitting.
Big difference, and shows why some FTP tests can give poor estimates depending on your physiology. It also points out that its possible to individualize the test. While your ramp tests will greatly overestimate FTP, my ramp tests can sometimes greatly underestimate FTP. We are at opposite ends of the bell curve!
All FTP tests (ramp, 8-min, 20-min, 40k TT) are well intentioned and attempting to give good estimates of your Threshold Power. The problem is you do not fall into the “average” for TR ramp testing (which is really a maximum aerobic power “MAP” test).
The TR ramp test uses 75% of 1-min best power, you could make TR ramp test give good estimates by using 68% instead of 75%. That would make it unique to your physiology, assuming TR 303W was at same time as INSCYD 275W.
Another interesting longer test is Kolie Moore’s new testing protocol (on TP blog).
Or just keep INSCYD testing 
and avoid the pitfalls of being self-coached!
1 Like
Can you share a link to this? I couldn’t find it…
1 Like
easy to miss - you are suppose to do a long and thorough warmup before doing the test.
A few other ideas… here is what I’m doing right now:
sorry you have to click the image to see the two Monday tests.
And another idea:
In my opinion, TR ramp test is good for estimating max aerobic power (5-min vo2max power). That MAP is not repeatable vo2 workout power, its best 5-min. Based on that opinion, I primarily use TR ramp test for 5-min vo2max power although sometimes it gives good FTP estimates and other times I have to use a different multiplier.
I created a TR workout for the Baseline test a few weeks ago so I could do it in Erg mode but haven’t got round to it yet.
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/workouts/524937-baseline-ftp
If anyone wants I can try to share it.
1 Like
here’s my custom baseline test, with a short warmup and it assumes I’ve already done a longer warmup:
I’ve been following Steve Neal on his online forum (monthly fee). Where he assists people with the training but isn’t coaching them with daily workouts. The ramp test he uses starts at 100 watts for 10 minutes, then increases 25 watts every 3 minutes until failure. The highest step you get to, as long as you can hold 1 minute of that step, is your MAP. Then you perform a 30 minute aerobic test at 80-83% of your HR max from the ramp test and compare the two wattage numbers to create a ratio. That gives you an aerobic / MAP ratio that you can compare during training cycles and determine training strategy. They then use percentages of MAP and Max HR achieved to prescribe training intensities.
This makes a ton more sense to me than using estimations of FTP based on percentages…and then applying percentages to that number to get your zones.
We’ll see…I’m impressed and it resonates with me so far.
13 Likes
As in, the second test happens immediately after the ramp test?
1 Like
Sorry, no. One day in between.
2 Likes
Do you have a link to his forum please? I can’t find it on his website
Hi everyone… interesting debate. I listened to the Steve Neal podcast but also the follow on one with Bob Seebohar which was equally thought provoking around diet. My feeling is that research into exercise physiology and diet is challenging, often involves small numbers of athletes, and commonly is frought with bias and confounding variables. I guess that’s why different coaches have such contrasting approaches but can equally boast impressive results.
I have no doubt that coach chad et al could go on the Faster Podcast and sound equally impressive - if not more so. They have a database of thousands of amateur athletes. In many respects the TrainerRoad plans have similarities to Steve Neals approach. In SSB for example you start with short sweet spot intervals and then gradually extend the duration - so when you first start on the shorter intervals your heart rate won’t drift up so much as they’re short, but then as you get towards the end of the plan your fitness has improved so that you can last longer without cardiac drift. In addition, as coach chad has pointed out your FTP towards the end of a plan will have likely risen - so 20 mins at 0.95 is probably not 95 percent. My experience of following SSB is that it therefore follows a similar trajectory to what Steve Neal proposes. I suspect however it builds better muscular endurance because you’re spending longer periods at higher power albeit for shorter interval initially.
All of that said, I have experienced similar issues with burn out following TR plans. I think a lot of the issue for us working amateurs is making poor decisions around training-life-work balance. It’s certainly my problem! We probably pick more volume than we should, fit workouts in at bad times, and don’t skip workouts when the signs of fatigue are there. I think the TR plans can push you close to burnout if you’re not careful, whereas there may be less danger of that with some of these other approaches and particularly if you have a good coach. We certainly can’t say they don’t warn us though on the TR podcast! Coach chad constantly talks about going for lower volume if you’re in doubt and emphasises skipping a work out if you’re not feeling it.
Anyway good debate. Happy training everyone.
4 Likes
Thanks. I might give it s go for a few months
1 Like
I needed to hear this! Very well put man. I’m in the exact same position and go through the same cycle. I think ego has a huge role and we all just need to let go sometimes!
1 Like
Are there optimal values for this ratio to shoot for? I know it would depend on the race type, but does he give optimal numbers or do you just compare your own numbers over time?
I haven’t done that 30 minute test, but could use my last minute from the ramp to estimate my MAP.
75% for most disciplines. 80% for gravel or long consistent efforts.
1 Like