From the originator himself.
Good find.
Thatās really the issue isnāt it? Most know that a 20min and/or a 60min test gives a better and more accurate FTP, however it sucks and people donāt want to do it regularly. That was the conclusion of TR, to find a test people will do regularly.
I donāt ever want to do a 60 min test! It sounds horrible and itās of no interest or relevance to my racing (XCO/XCM). Of my 30+ races I donāt think Iāve had a sustained effort over 10 mins, itās all punchy efforts mostly sub 2-3 mins.
I just want a test thatās easy enough to set my training to and the Ramp test does that. That being said, it did take a lot of Ramp tests for me to figure out how to do them correctly because 75% of a max effort on a ramp does not work for me! I landed on stopping the ramp test when my cadence has significantly dropped and not trying to eke out every second until death. Which seems to be about 20-30 seconds before ultimate failure. I have learned to know the feeling of this inflection point
17 Likes
There is the concept of using a longer test (be it KM baselines, 20min, or even full 60min) AND doing the MAP test.
The relationship between the two as it changes with training and between individuals can really inform your training.
But yeah, ppl often donāt want to do those longer tests. Itās a shame because knowing both can tell you so much more than one or the other. And maybe even keep you out of internet debates 
. Win win
As a bonus, I no longer base high intensity off of FTP. No more āis it 120% or 130%ā for a given interval set. I base it off of MAP.
Base work close to FTP off of FTP (longer protocol). Base VO2max etc work off of MAP.
As a side note, Ric offers group coaching, not just high end one-on-one.
2 Likes
Over time I think curiosity is enough. I did 20mins for a few years, was suspicious of the ramp but checked it against a 20 min and got similar values, Ive also done virtual 40k TTs which also align similarly to my TR FTP.
I donāt think you need to do it all the time, but itās worth exploring beyond ramp occasionally.
2 Likes
And you have to be careful because now that you have āfound your percentageā, itās not necessarily constant. It will change even within an individual depending on type of training you do.
Edit: but not that often so no need IMO to do every six weeks necessarily.
4 Likes
Iām also curious if I cut my arm off how long I can live before I bleed out, both of which seem equally enjoyable. Youāre actually probably right though, curiosity may get to me at some point as Iām only 4 years into the sport. Iāve done 3 x 30min SS workouts where Coach Chad says if youāre able to complete this workout itās time for a FTP bump. So far thatās tampered my curiosity.
2 Likes
Itās no fun, I wouldnāt recommend it.
2 Likes
Be good to hear opinion and basis for Sufferfests 4DP; both original āhour of hellā and ramp version. See if thatās any more precise.
Coming from Rowing at a time in which 1 hour max-efforts were a weekly to bi-weekly standard dose of training, I can attest to easily having 10W swings over that length all the time! Itās incredibly physically and mentally tough.
The problem as highlighted above isā¦ if you do adjust FTP down (no shame), it would be good to have the Vo2 intervals still adjusted against the Ramp/MAP value, because iād be far more worried about them being out of zone vs lower work.
I have a similar experience, not long after the Ramp Test was launched in its final state (vs the Ramp Test X) I did a ramp and 20-min Test a couple of days apart and got a result within 2w.
Unfortunately my training was derailed significantly for a few years but Iām hoping to get more consistent again soon, might try another comparison to see if things have changed. Motivation to get through a 20-min test is low though!
1 Like
So if you do the ramp use 72%
1 Like
??? Unbelievable.
1 Like
Yeah Iāve posted that and a couple other articles a bunch of times on the forum (in replies). The MAP based zones predate Coggan levels. Another good one is Watt Matters blog post equating MAP and Coggan zones/levels.
1 Like
Hereās the key question. What is the typical error in estimating FTP from MAP, and is it big enough to matter?
Stern claims that 97% of individuals fall in the 72-77% range. That means that taking 75% of MAP should work pretty well for almost everyone, as a 2-3% error doesnāt seem critical. 5%, OTOH, would seem like a deal killer.
HOWEVER!
Taking 95% of 20 minute should be better, because the longer the test, the less differences between individuals in anaerobic capacity should matter. Yet, taking 95% of 20 minute power only gets you to within plus-or-minus 8% in 95% of the population.
My guess is therefore that the ramp test is only good to within about plus-or-minus 10%, which explains so many people post about their struggles hitting their zone-based workout prescriptions.
Anybody see any flaws in the above reasoning?
2 Likes
Do you have data on that, or conjecture? People have different % anaerobic contribution on 20-min test, so FasCat coaching does the following:
ātake the average 20 minute power and subtract 5 ā 10% to arrive at an athleteās 60 minute āFunctional Threshold Powerā or FTP. As a generally rule of thumb we use 5% for slow twitch aerobic athletes and 10% for athletes that have a well developed anaerobic system. Weāll subtract 7.5% if we donāt know about the athleteās anaerobic capacity.ā
Source: A 20 Minute Power-Based Field Test ā FasCat Coaching
WKO consistently puts my 20-min aerobic vs anaerobic at 95% / 5% so Iāve been happy using 95% multiplier. Itās one reason (before I used WKO) that I did ~1 hour test in 2017.
Plus whatever error your power meter throws in.
Assuming you always use the same one, thatās included automatically.
4 Likes
I got the 8% from what TP says.
1 Like
I really do not know why because 90 min TiZ sst done in 3 intervals is not really sign of FTP bump but basic workout if your TTE is close to 50-60 min.
3 Likes
Juicy discussion boys. Made my ride this morning pass a bit more better.
Iāll add a quick nugget:
FWIW, Ric Stern himself uses both a 20-min test and his MAP protocol (for reasons that I outlined aboveā¦in fact, thatās who I stole the idea from). Also, āwatt mattersā blog is Alex Simmons, Ric Sternās coaching partner. He also uses both.
Puff, puff, pass.
1 Like