FTP test .... is it important?

zest28

I am new to indoor training and I did a FTP a few weeks ago when I started. As all structured workouts were too easy for me, I decided to manually increase my FTP by 50 watts in order to get a descent workout. I can now complete all structured workouts were I feel drained after a structured workout session (but still able to finish them).

Is this a good way to set the FTP? I really do not feel motivated to do an other FTP test as it is not fun to do. So I am wondering if I can get away by setting the FTP level based on how easy / hard the structured workouts are.

whyamihere

Which test method did you use? If it was an 8 or 20 minute test, there is an element of getting the pacing right to get the right numbers. If a ramp test, you may have stopped earlier than was completely necessary (they hurt a lot at the end). The accuracy can be improved through practice.

timothyw

Have a look at Xert, it can give you a close estimate on your FTP just from normal riding (although obviously it's best for rides in which you are working at your hardest!)

Other question is how is your power output being measured, do you have a proper power meter? Trainers will estimate your power but this can be miles out (and inconsistent from one ride to the next, depending on the type of trainer).

zest28

I use the power meter of the Wahoo KICKR. What went wrong is that the fan took a few days longer to ship, so I did the FTP test without a fan.

However I am wondering if I can adjust the FTP based on the difficulty of the workouts as I do not feel motivated to do an other FTP test again.

fenix

Clearly your FTP is wrong if you can complete sets with a higher FTP by 50 watts.

Lack of fan would definitely play a part. And possibly practice. If it's your first then you'll be more likely to bail out earlier.

The danger is that not all workouts should be hard. It's very easy to burn yourself out

You need to repeat the test in a few weeks to see where you are.

bobmcstuff

Heat adaptation for indoor training is reasonably important, especially if you're in the house where it might be fairly warm and still without a fan. If it was your first go FTP testing, without a fan, and you weren't used to turbo training it is quite possible to test a lot lower.

After you have done a few tests it gets quite easy to set FTP - I can guess mine to <5 watts usually.

I'd probably recommend doing another at some point to get the feel for it. Now you've got the fan it should be a bit less unpleasant... maybe.

slowmart

If the OP is stating they’re “not motivated” to do an ftp test it’s a pointless exercise in subjectively benchmarking an FTP which is then the datum which all prescriptive workouts are based.

There’s a world of physical discomfort and pain to endure whilst your mental resilience will also need to increase at the same rate for your body to accrue the adaptations that are sought.

fenix

If you have Zwift they do a ramp test that's not quite as nasty as the flat out 20 minute session. I think I was done and dusted inside 20 mins including the warm up !

dannbodge

As above.
Do a ramp test, for 90% of people they will give an FTP result which is correct (or at least within 10%) and it only lasts 30mins max.

slowmart

I wonder how the OP will react if they ever hit their actual FTP?

zest28

My "indoor" FTP based on a 73km ride with 1400m of altitude climbing is pretty close to what I manually set based on the workout difficulty.

Also my average power over that entire ride was pretty much spot on with the power that Zone 2 indicates.

So it seems that FTP test is not needed as long as you know at what power you can complete the structured workouts before failing them.

slowmart

As you’re new to indoor training and you asked a question, why don’t you digest some of the informed responses?

It’s clear from your comments you haven’t a clue about the science, methodology or structure of indoor training.

zest28

After 2 months of training, I can definetly tell you not to rely on FTP but on how much a challenge the sessions are.

The 1st training program I was one was waaaaaaay too easy for me. I had to artificially boost my FTP alot to have any challenge. If I didn‘t boost my FTP artificially, I would have seen no gains at all.

Now this new training program is great for me. For this one I have to use my FTP (which i get from Zwift races). I do not artificially boost my FTP for this one as I have to go threw my pain barrier and suffering like hell already.

I am quite pleased with my results so far over these 2 months. Only need 9 Watts more to hit my FTP target for this year already I suspect my outdoor FTP is probably even higher than my target already.

Also I get my FTP scores from races as it seems I can deliver more power during races (I guess I am more motivated when trying to win).
.

bigmitch41

I wouldn't want to attempt an ftp test without my fan on, no way could I reach the same power numbers, I suggest doing the 12 week ftp builder workout program then re-doing the ftp test, not all workouts are meant to leave you exhausted.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

https://whatsonzwift.com/workouts/2018-prl100-prep/week-1-day-1-pre-training-plan/ will give you a rough idea if you have your FTP set in the right ballpark, providing you haven't recently cruxified your legs.

In the "Less than an hour to burn" section in Zwift, which also includes https://whatsonzwift.com/workouts/less-than-an-hour-to-burn/emilys-short-mix/ (which is a really quite intensive little session, with that final 9min block being rather testing if you have used a decent FTP estimate).

joe2019

zest28 said:

After 2 months of training, I can definetly tell you not to rely on FTP but on how much a challenge the sessions are.

The 1st training program I was one was waaaaaaay too easy for me. I had to artificially boost my FTP alot to have any challenge. If I didn‘t boost my FTP artificially, I would have seen no gains at all.

Now this new training program is great for me. For this one I have to use my FTP (which i get from Zwift races). I do not artificially boost my FTP for this one as I have to go threw my pain barrier and suffering like hell already.

I am quite pleased with my results so far over these 2 months. Only need 9 Watts more to hit my FTP target for this year already I suspect my outdoor FTP is probably even higher than my target already.

Also I get my FTP scores from races as it seems I can deliver more power during races (I guess I am more motivated when trying to win).
.

Bless, after a few years of training you'll be able to read this and realise that you haven't got a clue at this moment in time.

ugo.santalucia

FTP seems the buzzword at the moment, but churning out a reproducible value is not easy, especially on a stationary bike... I for one get way too hot and start feeling dizzy at power values where I am quite comfortable outdoors. I also get very bored very quickly and lose focus on a stationary.
Overall, the good ole way of choosing a relatively long hill (ideally 20 minutes or longer, but could be less) and see how fast you can go up, then working your FTP from there using a calculator might give you a more reproducible value. A calibrated power meter will give you a better estimate than a calculation based on time and mass.
For comparison, I tend to churn out very reproducible times going up hills.
Ultimately, the better FTP value is the one you can reproduce, rather than the one that you got out of the blue once and if the reproducible one is 20 Watts lower, then so be it.
Finally, if the ultimate goal is to produce power outdoors, then you might as well measure numbers produced outdoors rather than in a "lab".

diplodicus

ugo.santalucia said:

FTP seems the buzzword at the moment, but churning out a reproducible value is not easy, especially on a stationary bike... I for one get way too hot and start feeling dizzy at power values where I am quite comfortable outdoors. I also get very bored very quickly and lose focus on a stationary.
Overall, the good ole way of choosing a relatively long hill (ideally 20 minutes or longer, but could be less) and see how fast you can go up, then working your FTP from there using a calculator might give you a more reproducible value. A calibrated power meter will give you a better estimate than a calculation based on time and mass.
For comparison, I tend to churn out very reproducible times going up hills.
Ultimately, the better FTP value is the one you can reproduce, rather than the one that you got out of the blue once and if the reproducible one is 20 Watts lower, then so be it.
Finally, if the ultimate goal is to produce power outdoors, then you might as well measure numbers produced outdoors rather than in a "lab".

I think most people use ftp for training zones, which are mostly used indoor. If this is the case then "indoor" numbers make sense

slowbike

Being able to complete structured workouts comfortably doesn't mean you've set too low an FTP setting - it could be that the structured workout is there for endurance - and therefore is deliberately NOT stressing you - so to up your FTP just so it does counters what the session is there for.

Ultimately though, all workout sessions are based on your stated FTP - so you could do with recording an accurate FTP on the device you're using for working out - no point doing it on the road and then using it on the turbo - or the other way around.

But, it does depend what you're intending to get out of it - if you're not bothered about your FTP, then just plug in a number that works for you ...

slowmart

zest28 said:

After 2 months of training, I can definetly tell you not to rely on FTP but on how much a challenge the sessions are.

The 1st training program I was one was waaaaaaay too easy for me. I had to artificially boost my FTP alot to have any challenge. If I didn‘t boost my FTP artificially, I would have seen no gains at all.

Now this new training program is great for me. For this one I have to use my FTP (which i get from Zwift races). I do not artificially boost my FTP for this one as I have to go threw my pain barrier and suffering like hell already.

I am quite pleased with my results so far over these 2 months. Only need 9 Watts more to hit my FTP target for this year already I suspect my outdoor FTP is probably even higher than my target already.

Also I get my FTP scores from races as it seems I can deliver more power during races (I guess I am more motivated when trying to win).
.

Wow 2 months of training and your summary is to not rely on FTP?

I bet Froome is sh1tting himself.

ugo.santalucia

diplodicus said:

I think most people use ftp for training zones, which are mostly used indoor. If this is the case then "indoor" numbers make sense

I always forget that I am the only one cycling October to March too...

I have a friend who bought the watt bike about one year ago... since then he's been cycling outdoors a handful of times... literally... previously he was doing 8K miles per year

zest28

slowmart said:

zest28 said:

After 2 months of training, I can definetly tell you not to rely on FTP but on how much a challenge the sessions are.

The 1st training program I was one was waaaaaaay too easy for me. I had to artificially boost my FTP alot to have any challenge. If I didn‘t boost my FTP artificially, I would have seen no gains at all.

Now this new training program is great for me. For this one I have to use my FTP (which i get from Zwift races). I do not artificially boost my FTP for this one as I have to go threw my pain barrier and suffering like hell already.

I am quite pleased with my results so far over these 2 months. Only need 9 Watts more to hit my FTP target for this year already I suspect my outdoor FTP is probably even higher than my target already.

Also I get my FTP scores from races as it seems I can deliver more power during races (I guess I am more motivated when trying to win).
.

Wow 2 months of training and your summary is to not rely on FTP?

I bet Froome is sh1tting himself.

1. I have been cycling for 20 years.
2. I have been doing HIIT outdoors based on my own power rather than FTP so I am not new to this. (only new to turbo training though. But I like it so far)

To give you an example how silly workouts based on FTP is, I remember I was doing a maximum effort interval session based on my FTP. But those power numbers are way too low because my top end is huge. These type of intervals I have been doing outdoors with much much bigger numbers as I can drop big Watt bombs easy. No surprise I was super fresh still after this indoor session.

Sweet spot training is pretty good based on my indoor FTP though which is what I am focussing on now indoors. I will save the top end work with my own interval sessions outdoor later.

3. Considering that Froome is a GC, his top end is pretty weak. So his top end workouts would look totally different than Cavendish for example who has got a huge top end. If you think Froome and Cavendish need the exact same maximum effort interval session (which is what the FTP number describes), then I don't know what to say.

zest28

Anyway, let's close this discussion. Just thought I share my experience based on 2 months of indoor training.

zest28

ugo.santalucia said:

diplodicus said:

I think most people use ftp for training zones, which are mostly used indoor. If this is the case then "indoor" numbers make sense

I always forget that I am the only one cycling October to March too...

I have a friend who bought the watt bike about one year ago... since then he's been cycling outdoors a handful of times... literally... previously he was doing 8K miles per year

Haha, I have the same problem as your friend. I hardly ride outside anymore.

I am a bit concerned that my very long ride ability will drop off, so I will be forced to go outside and do some seriously long rides again most likely.

pblakeney

dannbodge

zest28 said:

slowmart said:

zest28 said:

After 2 months of training, I can definetly tell you not to rely on FTP but on how much a challenge the sessions are.

The 1st training program I was one was waaaaaaay too easy for me. I had to artificially boost my FTP alot to have any challenge. If I didn‘t boost my FTP artificially, I would have seen no gains at all.

Now this new training program is great for me. For this one I have to use my FTP (which i get from Zwift races). I do not artificially boost my FTP for this one as I have to go threw my pain barrier and suffering like hell already.

I am quite pleased with my results so far over these 2 months. Only need 9 Watts more to hit my FTP target for this year already I suspect my outdoor FTP is probably even higher than my target already.

Also I get my FTP scores from races as it seems I can deliver more power during races (I guess I am more motivated when trying to win).
.

Wow 2 months of training and your summary is to not rely on FTP?

I bet Froome is sh1tting himself.

1. I have been cycling for 20 years.
2. I have been doing HIIT outdoors based on my own power rather than FTP so I am not new to this. (only new to turbo training though. But I like it so far)

To give you an example how silly workouts based on FTP is, I remember I was doing a maximum effort interval session based on my FTP. But those power numbers are way too low because my top end is huge. These type of intervals I have been doing outdoors with much much bigger numbers as I can drop big Watt bombs easy. No surprise I was super fresh still after this indoor session.

Sweet spot training is pretty good based on my indoor FTP though which is what I am focussing on now indoors. I will save the top end work with my own interval sessions outdoor later.

3. Considering that Froome is a GC, his top end is pretty weak. So his top end workouts would look totally different than Cavendish for example who has got a huge top end. If you think Froome and Cavendish need the exact same maximum effort interval session (which is what the FTP number describes), then I don't know what to say.

That to me says you're using the wrong program/training metrics.

A lot of platforms base all your intervals on FTP only which is wrong (as you've pointed out). The Sufferfest makes you test the main 4 zones (5s, 1m, 5m and FTP) in one test and then sets your sessions using these numbers.

Person A could have a huge sprint power and a modest FTP
Person B could have a tiny sprint power but a Huge 5min power and the same FTP as Person A

The same workouts wouldn't work for both of them:

https://thesufferfest.com/blogs/training-resources/is-your-training-app-accurate?fbclid=IwAR1DJ9LyLLPrn3yvM7yg_ogLnDMdC1cwTVpEJdGvWRY2CzF7ZaqfmC9rDz4

ugo.santalucia

dannbodge said:

A lot of platforms base all your intervals on FTP only which is wrong (as you've pointed out). The Sufferfest makes you test the main 4 zones (5s, 1m, 5m and FTP) in one test and then sets your sessions using these numbers.

Person A could have a huge sprint power and a modest FTP
Person B could have a tiny sprint power but a Huge 5min power and the same FTP as Person A

The same workouts wouldn't work for both of them:

https://thesufferfest.com/blogs/training-resources/is-your-training-app-accurate?fbclid=IwAR1DJ9LyLLPrn3yvM7yg_ogLnDMdC1cwTVpEJdGvWRY2CzF7ZaqfmC9rDz4

It still baffles me why anyone with no interest in road racing (or possibly hill climbing competitively) would be interested in developing more sub-1 minute power... but then I look at how many "races" are happening on Zwift and it all makes sense...

bobmcstuff

ugo.santalucia said:

dannbodge said:

A lot of platforms base all your intervals on FTP only which is wrong (as you've pointed out). The Sufferfest makes you test the main 4 zones (5s, 1m, 5m and FTP) in one test and then sets your sessions using these numbers.

Person A could have a huge sprint power and a modest FTP
Person B could have a tiny sprint power but a Huge 5min power and the same FTP as Person A

The same workouts wouldn't work for both of them:

https://thesufferfest.com/blogs/training-resources/is-your-training-app-accurate?fbclid=IwAR1DJ9LyLLPrn3yvM7yg_ogLnDMdC1cwTVpEJdGvWRY2CzF7ZaqfmC9rDz4

It still baffles me why anyone with no interest in road racing (or possibly hill climbing competitively) would be interested in developing more sub-1 minute power... but then I look at how many "races" are happening on Zwift and it all makes sense...

We have sprints and stuff on the club run occasionally, it's fun to drop your mates sometimes. Cycling is supposed to be fun and being able to go really fast like that is fun (to me).

Although I'll admit I don't really do sub 1 minute. VO2-type intervals for 2-5 mins is more "useful" on the road.

bobmcstuff

zest28 said:

ugo.santalucia said:

diplodicus said:

I think most people use ftp for training zones, which are mostly used indoor. If this is the case then "indoor" numbers make sense

I always forget that I am the only one cycling October to March too...

I have a friend who bought the watt bike about one year ago... since then he's been cycling outdoors a handful of times... literally... previously he was doing 8K miles per year

Haha, I have the same problem as your friend. I hardly ride outside anymore.

I am a bit concerned that my very long ride ability will drop off, so I will be forced to go outside and do some seriously long rides again most likely.

I trained for a 13hr ride last year using mostly indoor workouts and shorter rides. Plus some 3-4hr at the weekends.

In my experience, frequency trumps duration. I.e., riding 1hr 5 times a week is better than riding 5hr once a week.

In any case, so long as you know you are going to be comfortable in the saddle over those durations, it's all about pacing, eating, and psychology.

ugo.santalucia

bobmcstuff said:

In any case, so long as you know you are going to be comfortable in the saddle over those durations, it's all about pacing, eating, and psychology.

It's all about tarmac... a 15 hour ride on the best roads of Wales was less painful than a 9 hour ride on the worst roads in Shropshire and Herefordshire

StillGoing

dannbodge said:

zest28 said:

slowmart said:

zest28 said:

After 2 months of training, I can definetly tell you not to rely on FTP but on how much a challenge the sessions are.

The 1st training program I was one was waaaaaaay too easy for me. I had to artificially boost my FTP alot to have any challenge. If I didn‘t boost my FTP artificially, I would have seen no gains at all.

Now this new training program is great for me. For this one I have to use my FTP (which i get from Zwift races). I do not artificially boost my FTP for this one as I have to go threw my pain barrier and suffering like hell already.

I am quite pleased with my results so far over these 2 months. Only need 9 Watts more to hit my FTP target for this year already I suspect my outdoor FTP is probably even higher than my target already.

Also I get my FTP scores from races as it seems I can deliver more power during races (I guess I am more motivated when trying to win).
.

Wow 2 months of training and your summary is to not rely on FTP?

I bet Froome is sh1tting himself.

1. I have been cycling for 20 years.
2. I have been doing HIIT outdoors based on my own power rather than FTP so I am not new to this. (only new to turbo training though. But I like it so far)

To give you an example how silly workouts based on FTP is, I remember I was doing a maximum effort interval session based on my FTP. But those power numbers are way too low because my top end is huge. These type of intervals I have been doing outdoors with much much bigger numbers as I can drop big Watt bombs easy. No surprise I was super fresh still after this indoor session.

Sweet spot training is pretty good based on my indoor FTP though which is what I am focussing on now indoors. I will save the top end work with my own interval sessions outdoor later.

3. Considering that Froome is a GC, his top end is pretty weak. So his top end workouts would look totally different than Cavendish for example who has got a huge top end. If you think Froome and Cavendish need the exact same maximum effort interval session (which is what the FTP number describes), then I don't know what to say.

That to me says you're using the wrong program/training metrics.

A lot of platforms base all your intervals on FTP only which is wrong (as you've pointed out). The Sufferfest makes you test the main 4 zones (5s, 1m, 5m and FTP) in one test and then sets your sessions using these numbers.

Person A could have a huge sprint power and a modest FTP
Person B could have a tiny sprint power but a Huge 5min power and the same FTP as Person A

The same workouts wouldn't work for both of them:

https://thesufferfest.com/blogs/training-resources/is-your-training-app-accurate?fbclid=IwAR1DJ9LyLLPrn3yvM7yg_ogLnDMdC1cwTVpEJdGvWRY2CzF7ZaqfmC9rDz4

Says to me he hasn't properly tested for his FTP be it 2 x8 min, 1 x 20, Ramp test or 4DP.