3minute fullgas = 120% FTP?

Tom Dean

neeb wrote:

Although if you were doing a set of several 3min intervals you wouldn’t be able to do them all at your absolute maximum 3min power. So it helps to set a target based on a certain percentage of your maximum output at a similar duration.

i suggest 120%

sloppyschleckonds

Has the OP done a FTP test yet

napoleond

I set a target based off a percentage of what they’ve achieved in a specific test. I’ve never just worked off FTP, right in the early days when I started training with Power I had a week of testing different time periods.

imposter2.0

Svetty wrote:

Imposter wrote:

cruising on empty wrote:

Tom Dean wrote:

If you can’t do the intervals at 120%, you’ll have to do them at less than 120%. Am I missing something here?

Yes you are missing the point if you can do the intervals at 140%, does that mean it is better and you should?

You should always do the intervals at the maximum RPE you can sustain for the duration of the interval. Whether that comes out at 120%, 140% or 138.5% is kinda irrelevant really...

There is a reason why training with power is different from training with RPE - or HR.........

We're talking about 3min 'fullgas' intervals though - where RPE is pretty much the only thing that matters...

burnthesheep

Imposter wrote:

We're talking about 3min 'fullgas' intervals though - where RPE is pretty much the only thing that matters...

Maybe I'm a wuss, but I can't repeat a 3 min "fullgas" interval. If it is actually "fullgas" like a hill climb effort, you're done.

If you can't repeat the effort, it's not an interval.

So, wouldn't it be 3min of whatever you can do according to the workout? Two sets of 3x3min with 3min rest between........I can do that at maybe 310 or 320.

ONE full gas effort......I have done more up to 360. If I didn't have to ride a few more miles, maybe 380 was possible.

That's a long way from me being able to repeat that same effort six times in a workout.

Alex_Simmons/RST

The best guide for what you can do at any duration is what you can actually do.

As to what's the appropriate intensity relative to your capability at which one should train (for intervals), that's an entirely different matter. Training maximally can be useful at times but it can also be quite counterproductive. It's all about context and training goals.

In terms of individual power to FTP ratio variability, here is a chart by Andy Coggan showing the range of power variability across individuals at various durations, expressed relative to FTP. I forget exactly how many athletes this covers (approx 100-200) and from professional to lower club level capabilities (FTP range from ~150W to 400+W IIRC).



As you can see, as the duration gets shorter, the ratio of mean maximal power to FTP becomes more widely variable across individuals. That's to be expected due to both individually variable anaerobic capacities as well as neuromuscular power capabilities, relative mix of fast and slower twitch muscle fibres and so on.

I added for ease of viewing some red lines showing the 3-minute mark and the range of mean maximal power relative to FTP. Approx 120-140%.

BenjoMunro

cruising on empty wrote:

Alex99 wrote:

MiddleRinger wrote:

cruising on empty wrote:

Cool, so 95% of 20min power "could" be your ftp, or it could be wildly wrong too based on many variables?

Basically yes, but a 20 minute test is going to more accurate than a 3 minute one, simply because it's closer to the actual hour so there will be less variation. A 30 minute test would be even more accurate, then a full hour test even more so.

Essentially, the shorter the test, the larger the influence of anaerobic capacity which is variable across individuals. Some protocols for shortened FTP estimation include a short effort before e.g. a 20 or 30 minute test to reduce the influence of anaerobic capacity.

So if you have a vo2max workout that prescribes 3min @120% FTP. But you have a 3min power duration of say 150% ftp. Do you adjust intensity?

This is making power training sound like a grey unproven area, can you imagine how grey and unproven HR and RPE is in comparison!?

VO2 Max sessions on TrainerRoad prescribe 120%FTP, 3min efforts as repeatable power, not 3min max power. Three mins max power should not be able to repeated without long periods of rest. You have to ask yourself if you can knock out 6x3min at xxx% as there is little benefit in doing 1-2 intervals at 150%, and then failing the rest of the workout.

charlie_potatoes

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

ryan_w-2

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Lols....

Tom Dean

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Hello 2001 Lance

Alex_Simmons/RST

Tom Dean wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Hello 2001 Lance

Not even super dope Lance could hit that sort of W/kg

philbar72

8 or 20 min test is the way to do this, as I get skewed results.

diplodicus

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Is that you, Lance?

JakeJ

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

World Olympic sprinter, holding 700 watts for about half of the duration of this 3 minuet video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4O5voOCqAQ

Get off.

ryan_w-2

JakeJ wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

World Olympic sprinter, holding 700 watts for about half of the duration of this 3 minuet video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4O5voOCqAQ

Get off.

That’s a flawed test.

He held 700w for a minute.

I can hold 855w for a minute.

I am NOT world gold medalist, Robert Förstemann!

burnthesheep

JakeJ wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

World Olympic sprinter, holding 700 watts for about half of the duration of this 3 minuet video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4O5voOCqAQ

Get off.

I've always had an issue with that video, the total time or the wattage is off or something. Because if you watch, the woman they have do the toaster challenge later appears to put out a lot more power for longer. Not saying she couldn't because she's a lady, just because either way she's a lot smaller person.

Pretty sure the leadout train guys have some awesome 3min and 1min powers.

Team4Luke

Any test should be performed for the period of time to obtain results for the replicated event aiming to see an improvement at or for the period within that event requiring such output.
Performing any short test to guess at what the results would be for a longer test is a no go.
Very short testing also relies on your state of mind and body and how or not you can suffer, difference can be huge over short testing and misleading. This does not indicate a gain or a loss neccessarily, only regular testing over time will show a trend.
Testing indoors equally is not the same as testing outdoors, results are not the same neither are the test conditions.
A one hour test is a proven period that identifies potential and larger gains acquired, simply holding a few extra watts for example over an hour is more forthcoming than holding a few extra watts when your testing at a maxed out effort for a short period.
Gains over one hour will be very useful and useable across the board from minute one to minute 60 so hence why this is a regular testing period of time and training time.
Training and or testing for very short periods is clearly useful for say a sprinter or being able to jump on a wheel in a road race for example however gains made at short time periods probably not as useable up the board as the time periods get longer.
If you want to know your true ability and test for such fitness gains then test for an hour.

charlie_potatoes

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Irrespective of the above doubters these are the numbers that I posted.

neeb

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Irrespective of the above doubters these are the numbers that I posted.

You didn't say they were yours, though..

ryan_w-2

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Irrespective of the above doubters these are the numbers that I posted.

Lol, go away you little troll.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Irrespective of the above doubters these are the numbers that I posted.

and no doubt they are a nonsense.

Alex_Simmons/RST

neeb wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

482 watt FTP
704 watt 3 min
146%
64.5kg

Irrespective of the above doubters these are the numbers that I posted.

You didn't say they were yours, though..

They wouldn't be anyone's. No human at least.