Yes, for some smart trainers (usually the “budget” ones) you may need to shift to surpass a “ceiling” or “floor” limitation of the trainer’s resistance curve. That is understandable and acceptable in order to hit the desired power targets.
Shifting should be applied in that situation with known gearing, when appropriate to hit the desired power targets. Importantly, this can be learned and applied in a very repeated manner to keep test results consistent and comparable over time. It should be planned and applied with deliberate intent from the rider.
However, that situation is very different than what the OP did and was proposed above (shifting to get over a hump or bad ERG adaptation by the rider). I still contend that shifting in the case described earlier is not the best approach to apply. Apart from the end of the test, there is little reason that a rider shouldn’t be able to adapt to the resistance steps (without the need to shift to fix a mistake).
Thanks again everyone for the tips on how ERG works and how to use it correctly. It felt 100x better tonight. Going to complete the week and redo ramp test next week and see how I do
Nice You’ll get used to the ERG auto adjusting resistance. As you do so, you’ll learn to be smoother in your reaction to the minute resistance changes which will also smooth out your cadence a bit. Both of the aforementioned will result in a smoother looking graph. No, the goal isn’t a really smooth graph. One, we don’t put out power that way. Two, a smooth graph is useless. However, a really spiky/rough graph is also representative of a lot of wasted energy due to fighting the erg and/or a not so smooth cadence.
Power is power, irrespective of flywheel speed. While attempts to maintain consistent test conditions among various tests is commendable, telling people that they’ve got to return to a certain drivetrain gear ratio mid-interval isn’t helpful, atmo. I wasn’t making a recommendation at all regarding test gearing other than to use the gearing to re-establish your desired cadence if they accidentally let it slip. While I agree that during a ramp test the consistent-increment resistance steps are able to be anticipated, I don’t think users should punish themselves for not anticipating them, fail tests earlier, thereby helping to skew the test results that you in fact would be attempting to make more consistent by maintaining a gear ratio.
The quality of the product is evidence, and I have every faith, that poor ramp test trials have been filtered from having a meaningful impact on TR’s algorithm for the generation of estimated FTPs resulting from the FTP Ramp Test. Experience with ERG mode workouts makes us naturally become better ERG mode riders, for sure, but when it comes to newbies performing a ramp test, it’s appropriate to encourage them to do as they will during their ensuing planned workouts: by hook or by crook, use whatever they have at their disposal to progress through and complete intervals. While a ramp test is a learning experience, VO2Max is not really a favorable condition in which to learn to be a better ERG mode rider. I think it’s not at all uncommon even for experienced riders to be surprised at how much more difficult it is to complete the remaining 60 second intervals in a ramp test shortly after they exceed LT.
It seems like the original poster has learned a good bit from the info here and the video provided, along with some additional experience putting it to the test. That’s a nice forum success.
There is a very likely impact from testing in a maximal flywheel speed as compared to minimal flywheel speed. We don’t have enough testing to prove one way or the other. But much of the anecdotal experiences and minimal testing we have seen indicate there is likely some impact on our bodies, regardless of what is indicated as the same power/resistance.
Admittedly, a single shift is unlikely to alter the flywheel speed enough to alter the results (if the above is true). But I think it is something to be avoided in the overall goal of maintaining consistency in testing.
If people start applying this multiple times in a test it will likely lead to impact on the test results. Good/bad/other is unknown, but it introduces another variable that really has no purpose in a properly executed test. But again, I admit to speculation on my part.
I just see it differently. We’ve already helped a couple users improve their understanding and use of ERG mode in discussion like this one this very week. I don’t think the Ramp test or other ERG applications should be done without regard to the intent or best practices.
It seems that many people making the jump to a smart-controlled trainer and using ERG for the first time can have a basic misunderstanding about what it is, how it works, and what is required of them to make the most of the training mode.
ERG is a great tool, but can be applied poorly if people focus on the wrong details or have unrealistic expectations of what it should do.
We agree on the fact that education is key here, and ERG is one that I have personal interest in, and have helped many people understand and apply better. It happens quite often that we see people complaining that ERG is failing them, when the reality is that they were using it improperly. The education of posters like this, and the others that learn from the related discussion all benefit and we get people to better apply this great tool as a result. Win-Win
With cheaper smart trainers (as mine), shifting is essential to both match the initial power demand and get to the max. I’m now pretty used to it (lowest gear until 140W, another one when getting close to FTP), and as long as you’re done shifting by the time the ramp reaches 100% FTP, I don’t think there’s any issues with it. The real stuff starts afterwards anyway. Shifting in the last couple of minutes before everything falls apart would indeed be a pretty bad idea.
Note that I also shift for intervals (like sweet spot or FTP), up a couple of seconds before the interval starts to make sure I’ll reach the power demand, and down at the end to get to recovery level. It’s like an Erg/resistance hybrid mode…
This was in the context of testing (the focal point of the thread), but also applies to all workouts. People need to learn the limits and requirements of their equipment, and then adjust their use as need to meet the power targets as prescribed.
After the training session last night and feeling the resistance ‘kick up’ 5-10 seconds before each interval change, I really think I have a solid grasp on ERG mode and how to use it now and most importantly - what to expect. I did calibrate and update every component before the ramp test and am in the habit of doing it before each ride (this is an outside riding habit that I have consistently maintained).
Now that I have a good feel for how the trainer acts and performs under ERG mode, I really think it’ll be smooth sailing ahead.
I was so used to using zwift and outside riding that transitioning to the way TrainerRoad works that it took me a little while to adjust. I have Baxter on the schedule for tomorrow which will be a nice long session to really seal the deal on how to use and adjust my riding technique for ERG mode.
With Baxter, you can surely use ERG mode. I have done it that way and it works alright.
It’s not firmly stated, but it is heavily implied that this workout is meant to be done in Resistance mode.
“Baxter is 90 minutes of non-stop aerobic conditioning at 55-80% FTP where the effort changes based on cadence making this effectively a fixed-gear trainer ride with low to moderate effort levels aimed at primarily utilizing fat as the fuel source.”
“Additionally, you can improve your pedal efficiency through high-rpm spinning and also focus on furthering your muscular control and joint integrity via low-rpm grinding.”
The cadence range and recommendations within the workout effectively aim to pick one gear on the bike (during steps 4 & 6), and then reach it the higher and lower power targets via cadence changes.
As such, you can set Resistance and maybe around 10-20% on the trainer, then find a gear that allows you to spin up to 110 rpm to hit the higher power, and down to 70 rpm to hit the lower power.
I find this way more fun and engaging when compared to doing it in ERG mode.
It approximates the fun I had the first time I did this workout years ago on my Kinetic Road Machine. It was so cool to stay into the workout, watch the steps, and try to match power with cadence changes.
So, I would recommend at least playing with Resistance for this workout to see if you like that vs ERG.
Yeah, start with something around that. You can nudge the setting up or down as you fine tune in the first 10-15 minutes. It takes a blend of the Resistance setting and your gearing.
The instructional text is good about guiding you during the early parts to find a gear that should work for most of the workout. It’s no shame to shift, but more fun when you get the right combo to make cadence-only changes to meet the targets.
In my recent one, I chose to split the workout 50/50 with an over-gear (lower cadence) emphasis in the first half, and under-gear (higher cadence) emphasis in the 2nd half. So anything can work really.
Can you change the resistance on the fly? I use TR on my desktop and it’s not within arms reach. I guess I can use my phone app for that workout in lieu of the desktop
@JUIC3D Rides like Baxter are great in Resistance mode. Have a great ride! If and when you go back to ERG, feel free to DM me in the forum if you have any questions or run into any big issues.
I’m not sure if you have a Mac or Windows computer, but the hotkeys to change Resistance percentage are only available on the Windows app. But here’s a little secret - you could download the desktop Beta version which has the hotkeys on both Mac Windows versions. Some more info here: https://www.trainerroad.com/forumt/totally-new-desktop-app/
Note that it’s the Beta, and there are some minor issues still getting hammered out. But it’s an option for you.
Why turn power smoothing off? At least as I understand it, It only affects the displayed power output, with no functional effect on actual power input/output. This just seems like it should be personal preference, unless you are suggesting we should start using the power graph to try to smooth out power fluctuations.
I would rather concentrate on maintaining a consistent cadence and let the ERG power take care of itself.
For clarity, my concern relates to the ERG Mode Power Smoothing within the Wahoo app. It alters the apparent output from the trainer to any device or app and makes it look super smooth. Wahoo is the only company to do this.
My personal dislike of the Wahoo smoothing is the fact that it shows a very unnatural and unrealistic power graph. It makes people believe that they are applying smooth power, when the opposite is often true. It could be that they are being smooth, but it can also be them being inconsistent.
Even in ERG mode, there is constant variation in power delivery. The small changes in the power and smoothness of our cadence all impact the real power as captured in the workout. ERG isn’t magic, and it doesn’t make perfect workouts without proper use by the rider.
I think seeing a more accurate representation of the power as generated by the rider is a more useful set of data. It shows if the are being smooth or not and gives appropriate information for people to learn and adjust their power delivery in the active workout, and in future ones.
Additionally, we see many complaints and questions when Wahoo users (who often don’t know about the setting, and get used to the glassy smooth power data) make a move to another trainer brand or get a real power meter. They are shocked about how rough the power is and assume the new meter or trainer is broken. The truth is that Wahoo was feeding them false information and skewing their expectations.
I agree, it’s personal preference and people can choose what suits them. But at the very least I think they should understand the options available and how one of them is quite unrealistic.
Agreed, focusing in cadence is exactly the right thing to do when using ERG. It’s the common recommendation I make (examples below) when I see people having issues with ERG because they are “chasing the power target” like they would in Resistance mode.
That focus on cadence is still possible and advisable no matter which setting the Wahoo users choose. So it doesn’t matter in that sense at all. That is also true for every other trainer brand since none of them offer the ERG mode smoothing. People do just fine with the rougher looking graphs, as long as they apply proper ERG techniques.
I think the smoothing hides the potential for riders to have more accurate data that they can use and review to improve their riding on the trainer. It could also translate to outside if they improve their power delivery based upon the real picture from the unsmoothed data.
I don’t necessarily think they need to pay attention to the graph during the workout, assuming that they focus on cadence as mentioned. But I do think it can be helpful in review of the workout after completion, to see how well they did with their cadence and the output as measured and reported more accurately without the Wahoo ERG smoothing.
Edit to add, I just happened to be listening to the podcast (on repeat in my commute) and catch one of the mentions about the Wahoo smoothing. https://youtu.be/I0TegxHfj-8?t=3630
You’ll get used to the ERG auto adjusting resistance. As you do so, you’ll learn to be smoother in your reaction to the minute resistance changes which will also smooth out your cadence a bit. Both of the aforementioned will result in a smoother looking graph. No, the goal isn’t a really smooth graph. One, we don’t put out power that way. Two, a smooth graph is useless. However, a really spiky/rough graph is also representative of a lot of wasted energy due to fighting the erg and/or a not so smooth cadence.
