Ramp test/MAP calculation - what are the rules?

bahzob

The cracking weather we had on Saturday meant we went in search of apples to make our cider. I had planned the day to do first century of the year but no time for that. So feeling quite fresh with only a short time to train I thought I'd do a ramp test.

Protocol was start 200W, increase 20W/min til drop. It went pretty well up to 400W, hit and held target watts nicely (see below). Next step up was into uncharted territory and when I started it I was close to limit and ended up going harder than schedule then calling it as I knew there was no way in God's earth I could do another minute let alone one at 440W.

My question is how should I calculate MAP from this.
- Is it the 434W average of the last minute?
- or is it the 420W that I should have been doing
- or something else?

Supplementary:
- If its the best minute (i.e. 434W) is it usual to push like mad in the last few seconds and keep going as long as you can to get that final average as high as possible? Or should you aim to keep flat steady power as close to target as possible?

danowat

When I got tested, it was the last "set" I finished......(which was 420w, if I remember correctly)

jibberjim

It's irrelevant - just ensure you use the same protocol when you do it next time.

bahzob

jibberjim wrote:

It's irrelevant - just ensure you use the same protocol when you do it next time.

I was partly thinking in terms of what number you use to calculate training zones, different results mean different zones.

danowat

bahzob wrote:

jibberjim wrote:

It's irrelevant - just ensure you use the same protocol when you do it next time.

I was partly thinking in terms of what number you use to calculate training zones, different results mean different zones.

Surely training zones should come from FTP......

Tom Dean

bahzob wrote:

then calling it as I knew there was no way in God's earth I could do another minute let alone one at 440W.

You gave up too early

jibberjim

bahzob wrote:

jibberjim wrote:

It's irrelevant - just ensure you use the same protocol when you do it next time.

I was partly thinking in terms of what number you use to calculate training zones, different results mean different zones.

I wouldn't suggest using a MAP test for that.

amaferanga

What about your L/R balance?

ric/rstsport

danowat wrote:

bahzob wrote:

jibberjim wrote:

It's irrelevant - just ensure you use the same protocol when you do it next time.

I was partly thinking in terms of what number you use to calculate training zones, different results mean different zones.

Surely training zones should come from FTP......

Not at all. Training zones can come from any metric you like, if you know what to do with that metric. Of course, though, some metrics wouldn't make great for great zones.

We've (RST Sport) been using zones based on MAP since 1998 (probably before that too) as have British Cycling, which makes testing better for some riders (i'm suggesting that some people are more likely to do a MAP test rather than e.g. an FTP test). Our zones pretty much match (e.g.) Coggan's zones within a few watts (which is what you'd expect).

Ric

ric/rstsport

bahzob wrote:

The cracking weather we had on Saturday meant we went in search of apples to make our cider. I had planned the day to do first century of the year but no time for that. So feeling quite fresh with only a short time to train I thought I'd do a ramp test.

Protocol was start 200W, increase 20W/min til drop. It went pretty well up to 400W, hit and held target watts nicely (see below). Next step up was into uncharted territory and when I started it I was close to limit and ended up going harder than schedule then calling it as I knew there was no way in God's earth I could do another minute let alone one at 440W.

My question is how should I calculate MAP from this.
- Is it the 434W average of the last minute?
- or is it the 420W that I should have been doing
- or something else?

Supplementary:
- If its the best minute (i.e. 434W) is it usual to push like mad in the last few seconds and keep going as long as you can to get that final average as high as possible? Or should you aim to keep flat steady power as close to target as possible?

The zones we use at RST Sport (see http://www.rstsport.com/?event=training&feature=zones) are protocol dependent
We use 20 W/min for elite males
25 W/min for non-elite males
and 15 W/min for all women
(these are the same incremental rates as BC). Additionally, we try to get our athletes to use a 'smooth' ramp rather than steps, but in light of different equipment and what people have for self-testing we would suggest (e.g.) 5 W/12-secs for the 25 W/min, 5 W/15-secs for elite males and 5 W/20-secs for females.

As you reach the 'finish' point we encourage our riders to continue riding smoothly - following the 'correct' power (rather than e.g. smacking out say 600 W for 15-secs as opposed to say 415 W).

You don't need to finish the last 'step'. you just finish wherever and then find the highest average power over 60-secs.

If you can suddenly smack it harder and keep riding at that higher level for more than a few seconds then it's likely you weren't really near your finish point...

Ric

bahzob

amaferanga wrote:

What about your L/R balance?

LOL. Well one thing is for sure, regardless this is at least 20W more than I used to produce before I improved the way I pedal.

Its just another demonstration that being better at something means you can sustain good efficient form much closer to the limit. Last 2 minutes past 400W I was focusing on pedaling well. Old days I would just have been mashing the pedals and fighting the bike.

regards the question it was 52 v 48 l/r. I know why I am favouring the left leg and one of the things I am looking at is seeing if focusing on maintaining 50 v 50 results in any differences.

bahzob

Ric/RSTSport wrote:

The zones we use at RST Sport (see http://www.rstsport.com/?event=training&feature=zones) are protocol dependent
We use 20 W/min for elite males
25 W/min for non-elite males
and 15 W/min for all women
(these are the same incremental rates as BC). Additionally, we try to get our athletes to use a 'smooth' ramp rather than steps, but in light of different equipment and what people have for self-testing we would suggest (e.g.) 5 W/12-secs for the 25 W/min, 5 W/15-secs for elite males and 5 W/20-secs for females.

As you reach the 'finish' point we encourage our riders to continue riding smoothly - following the 'correct' power (rather than e.g. smacking out say 600 W for 15-secs as opposed to say 415 W).

You don't need to finish the last 'step'. you just finish wherever and then find the highest average power over 60-secs.

If you can suddenly smack it harder and keep riding at that higher level for more than a few seconds then it's likely you weren't really near your finish point...

Ric

Thanks Ric, this will help for next time. I got some feedback that the test is giving a pretty good indication of zones yesterday when I rode a hard 20 minutes. I didn't pace on power just went out hard at the start then eased back then pushed end. Average watts turned out 346W pretty much exactly where the you would have predicted.

Alex_Simmons/RST

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com.au/2006/ ... ccess.html

Richj

Apologies for resurrecting such an old post but.....

If I was looking to do a MAP test would people advise using ERG mode?

Also if I was to increase by 25 watts a minute should I build a workout that increases power every minute by 25watts and take my last completed minute as my max, or look at increasing the watts by 5 watts every 12 seconds and taking my highest average minute power at the end (providing I keep to the test and don't sprint.

Thanks

ric/rstsport

just finished creating some workouts for Zwift... for some of our RST Sport training sessions, including nice smooth MAP tests.

Richj

Will these be available to everyone Ric?

ric/rstsport

i have three workouts that are free to anyone (you just need to like RST Sport on Facebook, and share the post on your timeline). https://www.facebook.com/RSTSport/photo ... =3&theater

However, that doesn't include a MAP test... We have some Training Plans that are just being finished off, along with a new website. The Training Plans will include a MAP test (non-elite male, female) along with some training sessions that have been 'Zwifterised' (i don't know if that's a real word, but hoping you know what i mean). Hoping the website will be operational by next week...

Alex_Simmons/RST

Richj wrote:

Apologies for resurrecting such an old post but.....

If I was looking to do a MAP test would people advise using ERG mode?

Also if I was to increase by 25 watts a minute should I build a workout that increases power every minute by 25watts and take my last completed minute as my max, or look at increasing the watts by 5 watts every 12 seconds and taking my highest average minute power at the end (providing I keep to the test and don't sprint.

Thanks

A smoother increase in load is better for this sort of test but it's not super critical, it just matters that the power demand increases at the right rate. Use any reasonable analytics software to readily identify your mean maximal 1-minute power from the test.

Steps ups for MAP tests were more for convenience due to the less sophisticated erg/trainer technology available in years gone by.

5W/12sec will be fine. In some software you can simply program a start and ending power and a duration and it will manage the increase as a linear ramp, e.g. set it so the slope is 1W every 2.4 seconds. This will be what Ric has set up with Zwift, and I have used a similar approach for years when testing people on my Computrainer with PerfPro software managing the erg load. Before that I manually adjusted the load, or the test was on a "dumb" trainer and the test subject had to adjust to and maintain a power level as directed.

Step ups in power demand are more typical for when doing a different kind of testing as a longer time (several minutes) is spent at each power level, e.g. for blood lactate threshold testing, or VO2max tests. This permits time for the body to "catch up" so to speak with the new power demand. What happens is many physiological responses take a little while to respond to the new power demand and some can rise up in the early part of the new step and then settle back down to a lower level (e.g. blood lactate level). So a bit more time is needed to allow for homeostasis, while ever that is still possible for a given power demand level, as of course eventually it will not be.

Richj

Thanks for the reply Alex, apologies I somehow missed it when you posted it.

I will have a play with the Zwift workouts and set start and end power and see if I can get it to ramp up smoothly.

Thanks again