I definitely fall into the category loosely discussed on here of having better capabilities in threshold/ss/temp than above (vo2 etc)
I got my FTP from mostly guessing right and i did on my last attempt ignore the ramp test result.
On my 1st attempt Huffaker demoralised me - in so far as i could not hold 120% of FTP.
I took the next few weeks slowly building up 60s @ 120% / 90s 120% / 2mins / 2.5 and finally this week managed to complete Kasier (3min) at 120% of Vo2.
During this time however threshold was all fine ā¦
It does show (to me at least) different riders have different capabilities and that should be expected really!
Form my experience so far with TR i think the workouts kind of ātell youā if youāre FTP is right ā¦ once you start a plan.
Another one whoās Ramp Test underestimates compared to the other two tests (which both give similar numbers).
Interesting thing is Iām training for Hill Climbs - short and sharp efforts. I know Iām not weak in this area as I beat most people up hills and my power numbers in workouts for short and sharp efforts are strong. Even workouts like Gilbert which are actually similar to the Ramp test.
Yet I just canāt seem to push on in the ramp test. Why? Possibilities:
I need longer to warm up my Vo2 max - this is definitely true. The ramp test warm-up is actually built into the test as you climb the pyramid
I have no target time to hit - also true but I know roughly what I should be aiming for - 20 mins right
Ramp test suck - obviously not true as they work for many (and I prefer this test to the others, it just gives me bad numbers)
So maybe just the first. Will be interesting to test with more of a warm-up (to which Iād need to repeat for every test).
Interestingly, thereās a ramp test out there on Zwift which involves upward steps every 2.5 minutes, and then takes your final 2.5 minute power and x .825 for your ftp.
With this method I get an FTP of 270. With Trainer Road itās 263. For me, the former is just right for threshold and sweet spot, the latter for vo2 max.
Could it be because on the Zwift one, you reach exhaustion at 121% ftp, and on TR, you reach exhaustion at 133%? So TRās ramp test is geared towards riders who perform better in that kind of zone?
After listening to last weekās podcasts Iām thinking I might take a similar approach to Tony Weeks. I think he basically said he can tell where he should be based on how the workouts go. I know from enough history if Iām completing a specific workout without too much trouble, Iāll probably gain about 10 watts after the recovery week. Considering that the past few weeks Iāve been feeling it out anyways since Iām not sure if I just had a bad test, or if it has been the lack of suprathreshold intervals which caused me to perform lower on it before starting SSBII. The first week was really quite easy, and Huffaker wasnāt too bad, so I bumped it up 5 watts and just did donner this morning which wasnāt too hard.
Still though, you canāt do that without having a pretty good idea where you are starting.
That makes sense. I guess what I was asking was this: suppose you fail the third interval, do you just reduce the workout intensity or do you perform the three next intervals at 115% regardless of what it says? Do you then perform all vo2max work at that intensity regardless of prescription? And if you donāt fail the 120%, do you just bump up workout intensity or do you perform all intervals in the next set at 120% or even more regardless of the prescription?
Looking at some of the work being done around CP + Wā modeling and regressions to solve for them in workouts is starting to convince me that is going to be the ānextā answer.
Testing sucks. Different riders respond to different tests differently. One number is somewhat deficient for defining workouts. I hope that TR is doing something with their massive dataset to push the state of the art forward in that area.
I was at a Zwift recorded, 20-minute-test FTP of 264 in June. After a huge, unstructured training block in June/July I joined TR and recorded an FTP of 271 in August on the ramp test. The 7 point bump seemed about right.
I then moved into āShort Power Buildā and had trouble completing both Vo2 work AND threshold work. But after sticking with it for a week or two and settling into the work at my new FTP, I began to nail the workouts.
I just took another ramp test today after 6 weeks of āshort power buildā and tested at FTP 280. If you had asked me to bet on what my FTP would be based on my last few workouts, I would have bet on 280. So it feels right.
I am guessing that I am going to struggle for a couple weeks with workouts at the new 280 level, but will settle in once I get acclimated to the higher effort.
I would also say that I am not necessarily good at one type of work vs. another. I feel equally bad at both of them
CP modeling is not the holy grail that it appears to be. There are a number of reasons why that Iād like to get into, but itās probably worth starting a different thread on that topic.
Good point hereā¦ There really is a simple solution if it doesnāt track well to your abilities. Adjust your FTP up or down as needed. The goal isnāt to let a number define you, but to use it for progressive stimulus/overload.
I started using the British Cycling warm up for the Ramp Test, it seemed to help me go for longer, but then I realised that it was taking the same time as longer duration testing but with those tests I got more usable heart rate data, so Iāve switched back to the longer tests.
I enjoy the new ramp test, is so much less painful than the unknowns of the old 2x20 butā¦
Did my first one after reading how score was estimated, was hoping for 250 but scored almost 280 - and I probably could have gone another minute. However I then tried to do carillon -4 and my heart rate jacked to 175, wasnāt happening, I was cooked. Took a day to recover.
Now doing sweetspot base and hunter was much too hard, had to reduce intensity to keep hr down, raised to for last 2 minutes of final 20 minute interval and heart rate went to 175 with pain.
Iām thinking ramp test has overestimated me by 10%. Iāll see if I can complete this week at current ftp but suspect Iāll be buried. Knew something was wrong when I had to start counting breaths for distraction 30 minutes into 120min workout.
Looking at the test data, I see 362w for your best 1 minute power.
0.75 x 362w = 272w by my math of the typical Ramp test calculation.
Your test looks pretty good other than the odd HR info near the beginning. I am guessing you werenāt getting data, messed with it, and then it started working properly. It seems normal as the test progresses.
Overall, I think the test āworkedā properly. With that said, TR admits that this test may not work for everyone. People on either end of the bell curve may not get as accurate of an FTP prediction compared to the other FTP test types.
Have you done other tests in the past?
Those may help indicate how the Ramp does (or does not) match those results.
Hi Thanks for looking and correcting my numbers. Yes have been having trouble with the hrm. Iāve moved the ble sensor out from under the trainer and things are better now. It is still cutting out if I sit up on the bike but that wasnāt the problem here.
I was very well rested prior to the test. I had a lot of time off bike this summer, long singlespeed mtb rides (4-5 hours) 3x/week and just a few fun singlespeed endurance mtb races so my stretch goal was to get to my old high of 260, Iām roughly as fast now as I was then. I suspected something was wrong when I started segment 17 - that it was going to overestimate my ftp. I expected to run out of juice at 340. I believe I could have kept driving but didnāt see the point. The other thingā¦ after this test I was wheezing and coughing, it was pretty intense for me even if I didnāt go until exhaustion.
I do know my LTHR is in the low-mid 160s, if my hr goes above there it will generally keep going up until I pop. My max hr is about 195 but I try to avoid that because it doesnāt feel healthy. Iām 50, my resting pulse is 52-55.
So when I am doing a sweetspot interval I expect to keep hr below 165.
I suspect if the ramp test started with short hard intervals it would deplete my glycogen a bit so test wasnāt so biased by my freshness and rest. If I took the test today I think itād be much lower. Iām feeling pretty cooked from last night even though I dropped intensity 10% for most of the last 2 20 minute intervals. I had a hard time getting my cadence up, legs were tired.
As for comparing with the old 2x20 methodā¦ wellā¦ that test ruins me so Iām not eager to do it any more. Iād rather go riding. Highest I ever got on that test was 258 and that was after 2 sections of high volume traditional base.
Last thing: last night when the intervals felt too hard my breath was still quite under control, like a breath every 4 seconds. But effort felt way too painful and intense. Could be thereās a bunch of muscle acclimatization I need? Certainly feels like Iāve got some improvements to make!
Thanks again for your response and I appreciate if you can correct any misunderstandings Iāve revealed in my above verbiage.
So recall that I am one of those riders in which the Ramp Test seems to underestimate my FTP as I am better at steady state efforts.
I got 314 on the last Ramp Test I did a couple of weeks ago, but then 2x20min efforts at 340 W immediately afterwards. So I manually put my FTP to 345 and figured I would have to tone down V02max efforts to align with my Ramp Test FTP score.
I did Huffaker on Monday. I decided to start at 110% of 345 and manually adjust as needed after each interval. So I ended up increasing the intensity by 2% for each interval (i.e. 110%, 112%, 114%, 116%. 118% and 120%; instead of 110, 115, 120, 120, 115, 110) and actually got through each one. This suggests that 345 FTP is pretty accurate for me, even at V02max efforts. Yay for VO2max improvement!
But now Iām really curious to see how my next Ramp Test goes. It may be that Iām just not very good at executing the Ramp Test for some reason.
So yeah, I guess the message is try not to let your Ramp Test FTP score limit you.
