atwl77

I've only done Zwift's ramp test and found it too simplistic, and gave me an overly high FTP. I don't know if other ramp tests (e.g. in Trainerroad) are similar... but this new one appears to be more comprehensive than Zwift and includes an additional endurance test afterwards to fine tune the data. What do you think?

ZHVelo

Why don't people just ride for an actual hour?

Sure, ramp tests can be fun, can have analytical importance (or not, I do not know), but if you want to know what Wattage you can hold over 1 hour, how about you do exactly that?

Is there anything speaking against this? The only thing I found is that it is too taxing. Which I don't buy at all.

atwl77

Riding for an hour introduces pacing issues. You must be a very experienced rider in order to properly pace yourself to ride at threshold for the whole hour. It's all too easy for an inexperienced rider to ride to:
- ride too hard and blow up before the 1 hour test is over
- ride too hard, realize and compensate
- ride too easy, realize and compensate
- ride too easy, not realize, and still have energy left after 1 hour is over

While shorter tests like 20-minute and 8-minute FTP tests don't completely remove the pacing issues, but they are greatly reduced since it's easier to hold a consistent pace over shorter durations.

And on the other hand, ramp tests eliminate pacing issues completely since the whole point of a ramp test is to ride hard until you blow up.

ZHVelo

Makes sense.

Can't you check this though by looking at you average watts over 20 minute periods within your 1 hour trial? At 10 minute periods within the trial? If at the end you get slower or faster you'd know if you were going too hard/too easy.

atwl77

Typically that's not how you tell if you're going too hard or easy.
Typically you either have a target wattage in mind, or go by feel and look at what sort of wattage you're doing, then holding it.

But the issue is... say you're doing around 300W. After 30 minutes you're starting to feel the pain and burn, but think hey I can still go on. By 45 minutes you start to realize, oh crap that's too hard, I can't hold on much longer. By 50 minutes, boom. Dead legs. One FTP test screwed. Even if you decided to take it down a notch at the 45m mark, that's still an inconsistent pace and therefore the resulting FTP score is probably inaccurate.

Or there's always the opposite situation. You're doing 300W. After 30 minutes, you think, hmm maybe this feels too easy. Up this to 330W. By 45 minutes, hurting, but still feeling good. Okay let's do 350W. Then once you finish at 60 minutes, you think back... maybe I could have done 360W. Regardless, it was inconsistent pacing, therefore inaccurate FTP result.

etc...

But I suppose, in the first example, you might be able to salvage the situation by selecting the most consistent 20-minute section of that effort, and go back to the ol' 95% x 20m power to get a more accurate FTP result.

Marylander

Shoot, I just want a number to use in my "training" (which is really about getting some exercise and making it more interesting by having some variety plus some goals and such). I'm not interested at all in getting skilled enough physically and mentally to do a good hour test.