FlashBazbo

It's Winter. Always a difficult time to get an FTP test that compares with valid tests taken the rest of the year. And tomorrow is time for my end-of-Early Base phase FTP test. My last FTP test was in late October. Here are my options for tomorrow's test:

1. An outdoor FTP test on my usual course -- but with temps in the high 30's to low 40's and wind of 15 mph, with gusts above that. Lots of clothes and lots of wind. The second half of the FTP test will be into the teeth of that 15 mph wind. (All my FTP tests are taken on this course, but the temps are usually in the 60's and 70's, with wind of around 5 mph.)

2. Use a Kickr Snap indoor trainer. The results of indoor FTP tests are notoriously low -- but who knows by how much?

3. Skip the FTP test and wait six weeks (to the end of Late Base) to take a baseline FTP for use during the Build phase.

So, the question . . . which of these 3 options makes the most sense? And given the option you recommend, how would you adjust the results (if at all), to come up with a "valid" FTP upon which to base the power zones for Late Base training?

caloso

I would do the outdoor test. First, even when it's cold I find I'm able to make better wattage pushing into the wind, which will be helpful during the second half of the test. Second, you're testing your ability to make power under the conditions in which you're riding. So, if you're going to ride outside, you should test outside. Third, the precise number isn't that important. It's to set training parameters. If you get numbers and your workouts are too easy or too hard, there's nothing wrong with adjusting the wattage targets.

rubiksoval

I don't ever do ftp tests. Like, I've never done one. Ever. There's simply no need.

So my question would be, why do you think you need to do one? If you were to go do a workout, could you hit the numbers? If not, would you not just adjust the numbers downward for the next one?

I think there's an over-fascination with these "tests". Just go try a workout. See how you get on. Adjust appropriately. Especially if you're just starting structured training.

FlashBazbo

You should read a good book on why and how people use power meters to train.

I could write pages about why I wouldn't waste my time and effort training without the information provided by an FTP test. But the shortest short answer is a quote from Emil Faber: "Knowledge is good."


Training without objective data (from an FTP test) is training in ignorance. It's a shot in the dark. My time and effort is worth too much to just ride at random, hoping (or imagining) I'm doing some good.

RChung

There are lots of things you can do with a power meter and general FTP training is one of the least demanding. Depending on what your goals are, getting a precise estimate of your FTP may not be that critical.

FlashBazbo

What about the original question? Do you have an opinion? Assume that I've been training using power for years and that, yes, I really do need and want an accurate FTP test. (I can't imagine NOT wanting good data. That seems like a waste of time.)

gregf83 

FTP tests are useful when starting out but once you've been training for a few years they are not as important.

Most people who've trained or ridden consistently and competitively for a few years have a pretty good idea of what their FTP is based on what they've been doing so it's not accurate to say one is training in 'ignorance' if one doesn't do a formal FTP test.

As rubiksoval pointed out target wattages are easily adjustable based on RPE. During a build phase your FTP is going to be changing (hopefully upwards) continuously. You don't have to wait for a formal FTP test to adjust your target power levels if you find the workouts are too easy.

Riders get caught up in doing an interval session to some precise number when the reality is there is a fairly broad band of power where you will be getting a benefit for a particular session.

To your original question, I would do the test outside. Wind in your face shouldn't affect your power output unless you're having trouble breathing and I don't think it ever gets cold enough in Tennessee to affect your lungs.

rubiksoval

I got my first powermeter in 2006. So I've used it for a good little while. I think I've read just about every book and article and thread I could find on the matter (probably not, but I've tried!)

But you completely missed my point on the real-life utilization of a powermeter in your knee-jerk reaction, there.

I'm still curious to know about you going out and just trying a workout and moving on from those numbers. Is this a scary proposition or something?

Knowledge is accrued over time; over months, over years. I'm not sure why you think your knowledge from any one specific 20 minute segment is that much more important... or even particularly relevant to your ultimate goals.

rubiksoval

Again, I think you've got a very overzealous view of the "test".

I have years and years of data. That's given me a huge insight into my numbers that no single ftp test could ever give. If you've been using power for that many years as well, then I can't imagine what more data you'd need to get you to a very close ballpark which can then be adjusted as needed.

I make it a point to waste as little time on the bike as possible so every single ride and workout I do utilizes numbers to some specific degree, so I do agree about the good data. I just disagree that good data comes from one singular ride or effort.

rubiksoval

We did get into the upper 20s last night!

RChung

Gregf83 is right: if you've been training using a power meter for years then you probably already have a pretty good idea what your FTP is. However, if you're in the special situation of one who has been training with power for many years but for some reason absolutely needs an accurate FTP estimate then you should do the test that gives you the most accurate estimate. It doesn't seem that complicated to me. Have you tried reading and understanding a book on training with power? If you find these kinds of things complex perhaps it would help.

Heathpack 

If you normally ride and train outside, do your test outside IMO, despite the less-than-ideal circumstances. Just know & understand how those factors might affect your results and to what extent. Then set your number & adjust accordingly if need be over the next few weeks, depending on how your workouts go.

If I were to ride a test in cold and wind, my numbers would probably be higher than in more "ideal" conditions. This is just something I know about myself. You might be completely the opposite.

I have been working with a coach for 2 years now and have ridden exactly one test, it was at the beginning of our relationship. Beyond that, we both know what we think my FTP is. We don't always agree but we each have our opinion.

In an email exchange with my coach just a few days ago, I commented to him that over the time I've been working with him, I've become somewhat like an Eskimo. You know how Eskimos have 40 words for snow? I kind of see power like that now. I no longer see a watt as a watt. Not on the output side, there a watt really is a watt. But on the power-generation side of the equation, a watt is no longer a watt to me. Some watts are harder to produce and have a greater physiologic cost. Some watts are easier to produce. If I'm doing something in which the watts come easily, my FTP is one (higher) number. If I'm doing something where the watts are harder to generate, my FTP for that task is another (lower) number.

I know this sounds like sacrilege but it's actually how it works. An easy example is if I'm given a climbing workout on the TT bike. If I'm struggling to make a power target in aero, I know all I have to do is sit up and I can make the number. Right, but don't do that when you're trying to train your ability to produce uphill power while in an aero position.

So my point is that your FTP for any kind of mixed work is really a range of watts. It's important to develop a sense of which factors influence your abilities- temperature, wind, % grade, mental state, altitude, rested vs fatigued state, etc- and to what extent. This is really what determines what you can do on any given day rather than the results of an FTP test.

I'm also always a little surprised to read on BF how often people change their FTP. We just don't move my numbers around that much. Even my riding a 20k TT at 112% back in Dec did not trigger an increase for me. I actually kind of like having an FTP range in my head when I'm doing workouts. I think it makes me reach to hit higher numbers but not be too concerned on any given day if I can't.

gregf83 

If cross country skiers can race at -20 cyclists shouldn't have any problem at +20

RChung

I don't think that's sacrilege. I think it's sorta consistent with the word "functional" in its name.

The OP's original question was "FTP tests: Worth doing under less-than-recommended conditions?" I think the answer is *usually* no, though there may be some goals that make it worth it, and the OP knows his goals better than we.

OTOH, I've actually never been able to finish reading a book on training with a power meter so there's that.

Heathpack 

Well the 'sacrilege' comment was really about my sense that sometimes I think people start to think of power as this completely objective data point. It is on the measurement side but not on the generation side.

Then I think once people hear the word 'objective' used to semi-correctly describe power, this results in the sense there is one High Holy Number to be discovered by riding The Perfect Test. I'm not saying OP thinks this way, just that based on my reading on BF, I believe some people start to think this way.

The reason I would ride the test is that I think it's worthwhile to develop an understanding of how various factors impact the power you can put out. I'm perhaps looking at this a little differently than OP, but my approach might have value to him. For me, I use my power meter in training but also in racing. I will race on days with different conditions, so I want to have a sense of how this will affect my pacing. For me, there really is no Perfect Test. Some will be better than others and part of working with power is learning to parse this out.

At any rate, it will be a good workout and a good opportunity to do something harder than usual. If you find cold and wind to be challenging, my attitude is that you should seek opportunities to ride in those conditions, provided its not dangerous to do so.

When I say I don't ride a lot of FTP tests, in some ways that's not true. I actually ride them routinely, when you consider a lot of the workouts I do contain elements that are very test-like. I think the difference is that I don't take the time to rest and go through a formal protocol because it's just not necessary once you've been doing it awhile and have generated substantial data. Which is what multiple people are saying all throughout this thread, just a little more succinctly than I am.

RChung

Right, there's a split between the demand and supply sides of power, and that has consequences for measurement. There are lots of different things you can do with a power meter and they differ in the degree of accuracy and precision they require. As a rough rule of thumb, the things you do on the supply side have fewer requirements for accuracy and precision than the things you do on the demand side, which is why many people can train (especially FTP) pretty effectively with a HRM, a wristwatch and a course of known distance, or even a one-sided power meter. FTP is sorta more an organizing principle than a bright shiny line.

I give regular formal tests to students but in my own work I don't take tests to figure out whether I'm making progress. Hmmm. Maybe I should.

Heathpack 

Exactly. All of these things we use to describe effort- power, heart rate, RPE and resp rate/quality- have their own degree of wiggle to them & are affected by different things.

I'm sure people approach things variably, but for me I race a TT monitoring those four factors constantly. Sometimes you have to throw one or two out the window, they will be off to an unpredictable degree. A great example is when I raced at Loyalton last year and discovered a different physiologic effect on me doing a 100% effort at 5000 ft. I train at 1200 ft and have ridden a decent amt at altitudes ranging up to 11,000 ft. I thoughtI had a good idea of the effect of altitude on my power output but what I failed to realize is that the effect as I understood it was for endurance events. Turns out I experience a much greater effect at a 100% effort than at a 75% effort.

So I floundered a bit and tried to fall back on HR but that was off too in ways I hadn't previously experienced. I should have just fallen back on RPE, that was a great lesson there.

Which is part of my point, you really have to just go out and do some of these things in order to understand the effects. Ideal conditions are great but since you don't always have them, there's something to be said for exposing yourself to less-than-ideal conditions too. By way of learning over time.

Totally different thing than the objective output data you might get using a power meter for aero testing say.

FlashBazbo

All our approaches are determined by our experiences and training. And, there was a time, probably seven or eight years ago, when I wasn't so picky about regular tests or the value of accurate power numbers. I used them as, apparently, all of the respondents to this thread use them. I wouldn't say my power meter was a toy, at that point, but I clearly wasn't getting very much out of it that I couldn't get from an HRM.


But about 7 years ago, I decided to get picky. And I found that regular, accurate power tests (5 sec., 1 min., 5 min., FTP) kept me motivated and gave me a good sense of how my training was going. It allowed me to identify and modify my training to strengthen my weak points -- and make the most of my strong points. I saw huge improvement compared to the more casual way I trained before. So yes, I became a believer in the process.


Then, about 5 years ago, I was having a really strong year. I was stronger and faster than ever. I was meticulous about my monthly power tests (every six weeks now) and all the numbers were headed in a very positive direction. The numbers were so good that I decided I could handle adding another hard week to each training cycle. By PE and by my subjective impressions of how things were going with the new plan things were extremely positive. I expected to see amazingly good numbers in my next power testing. But I didn't. At the end of the first testing under the new training cycles, my results were down a tad. Not much, but not good. But I kept going -- convinced myself that it was a testing anomaly. These things happen. I FELT stronger! At the end of the second training cycle, my power numbers were down by 10%. I didn't perceive that I was getting weaker, but clearly I was. I was overtraining / under-recovering and it was making me slower. Without regular, accurate power testing, I would probably have kept going and kept getting slower until the point of serious overtraining. It was only because I was meticulous about regular, accurate power testing that I discovered the problem -- and fixed it -- before the Fall season. That made me perhaps a little fanatical about regular, accurate power testing. My experiences determine my approach.


That's what motivated my question. I just wondered if anyone who is equally meticulous about regular, accurate numbers had an idea of how to adjust the numbers from a less-than-ideal test -- or whether it could be done in a meaningful way. You guys' experiences and approaches are just different than mine.

gregf83 

Out of curiousity how much does you FTP change during the year and from year to year? At this stage in my life I'm happy if it doesn't go down although at some point that will end...

Heathpack 

@FlashBazbo, I think it's not really correct to say that I don't value accurate power. I have three SRM power meters because I couldn't stand the bad data I was getting from the two Stages meters that I had previously. I can't stand measurement inaccuracies. But I still understand that there's wiggle in the power numbers, that's all I'm saying.

I also agree on using the power meter as a motivational tool & as something that helps you see training results and manage fatigue. But for me, training results are assessed by race results and fatigue is managed by my coach who uses the power data as just one aspect of his assessment.

People will tell you that you should not race with a power meter but I don't think this is universally true. I know what power numbers I can make in theory during a race, yet sometimes they seem too difficult. The power data can actually motivate me to make numbers that seem to hard on a given day and the surprising thing is that sometimes that same "too difficult" number starts to feel easier the long I do it. Whereas without the power data, I might have settled for 5 watts less.

Anyway, I hear what youre saying, you're using power differently than I am and that's fine. I do think you're taking the actual numbers a little too literally and I'd encourage you to think outside that box a little. But I will also freely admit that I've not even been cycling for 4 years, I've only been training with power for 2.5 yrs, I've only been racing 1.5 yrs. So I am still learning & evolving my understanding too. Take what I say with that grain of salt.

As to the effect of cold and wind on your test, it's really hard to say. It sounds like you consider those negatives, so I'd guess for you they'd have a negative effect. I do a lot of workouts in 30-40F temps and I prefer those kinds of temps for hard workouts, I will vasoconstrict my peripheral blood vessels to conserve heat and more of my cardiac output will go towards my working muscles. I see this as a win. But if you hate the cold or don't know how to dress for a 100% effort in that exact temp, it could be a negative impact for you.

Ditto for the wind. Previous to my racing TTs, the wind likely would have been a negative. It requires such a relentless effort that most cyclists don't routinely do. But that's exactly what you train to do in a TT, so wind fazes me less now, I have less psychological effect of it. And on top of that, you learn to put out more power into a headwind (because that's the fastest way to ride it), so you become more practiced at that too. How will the wind affect you? Hard to say- it will depend on how you feel about wind mentally and how often you ride a steady effort into the wind.

If you're not sure, just ride it and see.

RChung

If that's your situation then in answer to your original question, I wouldn't test in anything other than in a meticulous way that provides exactly the same conditions as your usual tests. Any result you get in less-than-similar conditions will raise more questions in your mind than the one you started with.

FlashBazbo

It depends. Last year, I had shoulder reconstruction surgery, then knee surgery -- essentially five months off the bike. After 7 months back on the bike, I'm still not quite back to where I was 2 1/2 years ago. And I'm not quite 90% of my peak Build Phase power from before my last "A" race (2015).


Historically, my "off season" consists of an extended Base Phase training. I don't intentionally take any weeks off the bike. During that Winter period, I expect my FTP to drop to about 90% to 95% of my historic peak FTP. I generally expect my FTP to gain up to 95% of peak FTP during Late Base Phase and make up the rest during Build Phase. During Build, my bigger gains are in my weak spots -- 5 second and 1 minute power.


I drop a few watts (around 5) after my Spring "A" race, then try to build it back for a sub-4:30 century in the Fall.


I'm not as young as I once was, so I do my best not to lose too much fitness in the Winter -- while at the same time, making sure I get some recovery benefit from the off season. That lets me ride with the fast guys in early Spring races.


This year, I'm giving it my best shot. I'm hoping to get back to peak 2015 power levels. If I don't, I will probably reevaluate what and how much I do on the bike.

rubiksoval

What are your spring races? HoS and Cedar Hill? Aaron Shafer? 3 Rivers? All excellent races. Just two more months to go! You race masters?

FlashBazbo

In recent years, my spring races have all been gravel races. The Land Run 100, Dirty Kanza 200, etc. The longer distances and lack of lengthy steep climbs fit my strengths/weaknesses better. Plus, they chop up the age groups into a lot more and smaller classes. More chances to be competitive.


But this year, my knee surgeon hasn't cleared me to race the serious gravel races yet. I will be looking for a paved race or two. (I already plan to do Tulsa Tough in June.) Any suggestions for a couple road races WITHOUT big climbs? I'm not a bad climber for 168 lbs, but that's kind of like saying your heifer doesn't fly bad for a cow.

FlashBazbo

FOLLOW-UP: The temps were warmer than expected, so I decided to do the test on my usual route. The whole warmup and test were into a 15+ mph wind, so my total distance travelled was somewhat less than usual. Otherwise, the wind helped me get a good test. I have confidence in the number. And I've changed my workout power zones accordingly.