Once and for All - Stand / Don't Stand for FTP Test?

[JZP]

My seated 20-minute FTP test on Zwift is 3.0 W/kg, while a local climb (completed in just over 59 min.) tells me I average 3.16 W/kg. I get out of the saddle for different sections of the climb, so it's no surprise the number is a bit higher.

Since one's FTP is simply a baseline for setting training programs, I think a proper FTP test should be performed seated, as standing produces a higher number, and it's difficult to determine when to stand/sit for specific training modules - correct?

Also, when attempting to seem less pathetic among my riding buddies, should I give them my higher number?

[BBres]

I am sure that going out of the saddle for some parts is OK for the FTP test.

You'll get better number outside on your favourite climb, because your body works a little different way in real world than when the bike is attached solid and unnaturally to your trainer.

In the winter time, for indoor trainings, my coach artificially lowers my FTP by 5% to maintain the same feeling of targer power during intervals.

Also testing uphill is easier than on a flat road.

So I'd say your FTP is the higher number

Also note that according to the newest knowledge and the testing protocol the real test should be preceded by all-out 5 minute effort. Then you recover for 10 mnintes and start the 20-minute test.

[spdntrxi]

sit

[BBres]

BS

[JZP]

BS

* EDIT * - Oh, I see what you mean

[BBres]

That was a reply to the post above


Wysłane z iPhone za pomocą Tapatalk

[MagicShite]

"maybe", if you did a blow out 5 minute effort before hand.

Also stop doing 20 minute tests?

Just do the full thing.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/the- ... protocols/

[DanW]

I am all for making the FTP test as similar to the efforts/ training you will be doing.

I ride a rigid SS MTB so a seated FTP test indoors is pretty irrelevant IMO. Maybe an extreme example but you get the gist of my perspective

I would also say that I am a fan of scaling FTP by real world efforts in general and not just a 20 min structured test. If you can constantly ride 6 min hills throughout a ride, day in day out, at 30W more than your upper Z5 level then clearly there is something wrong with how your arrived at your FTP IMO. Maybe that is getting OT

Anyway, my perspective is you are trying to work out a reference point to guage other efforts by. Nothing more, nothing less. That would be the purpose of the FTP test in my eyes regardless of other technicalities so make it apply to what you actually do.

[CasualRider]

Do not overthink it, just use the highest number and see how you feel during the workouts.

I've been training with my coach for over two years and I've only done one FTP test at the beginning. FTP was adjusted a few times since then but I've never done another one as it's unnecessary.

And I would say to do a proper one hour FTP test for me I need to be on form and relatively fresh to be able to really reach my FTP.

[CasualRider]

Do not overthink it, just use the highest 1h number and see how you feel during the workouts.

I've been training with my coach for over two years and I've only done one FTP test at the beginning. FTP was adjusted a few times since then but I've never done another one as it's unnecessary.

And I would say to do a proper one hour FTP test for me I need to be on form and relatively fresh to be able to really reach my FTP.

[Andrew69]

"maybe", if you did a blow out 5 minute effort before hand.

Also stop doing 20 minute tests?

Just do the full thing.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/the- ... protocols/

Yeah, very few people do the full monty simply because it is hard, and the number is often lower than what a 20 minute test produces, so how are they supposed to brag?

And as far as the 5 mintue blow out before a 20 min test......NO ONE.

So many people are more interested in the FTP number rather than actually training to get fitter/faster.

[MagicShite]

"maybe", if you did a blow out 5 minute effort before hand.

Also stop doing 20 minute tests?

Just do the full thing.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/the- ... protocols/

Yeah, very few people do the full monty simply because it is hard, and the number is often lower than what a 20 minute test produces, so how are they supposed to brag?

And as far as the 5 mintue blow out before a 20 min test......NO ONE.

So many people are more interested in the FTP number rather than actually training to get fitter/faster.

Err, the full thing is actually WAY easier than the 5 min + 20 min test/solo 20mint test

[Nohands83]

You will probably find the difference is due to being outdoor vs indoor, most people (but not all) are more powerful outdoors - particularly on a climb.

That said I wouldn't get too hung up on FTP in general, as that article outlines it's just a ballpark, there's too many variables for it to be super accurate for everyone. FWIW all my best numbers have come from when I've had a number pinned on my back.

There are also other ways (far less scientific) of checking you're in the right ballpark with your training, for example, if you do 4 (or 5) x 5 min climbs with your eyes balls out and are spent at the end of all the reps, then you are probably working the right system.

Think even Coogan (Mr Training Peaks) has distanced himself from the idea of FTP in more recent years. Also, I seem to remember a story that it ended up being 20 minutes as that was the length of the road he could ride uninterrupted from his house... that may well be an internet rumor but I wouldn't be surprised if not.

[req110]

Not a topic.
Do the FTP test by whatever makes you produce higher numbers. Seated or off saddle, I don't care. And you should not care at all.

If you still care, you can run multiple FTP tests:
1) seated
2) offsaddle
3) uphill
4) flat
5) all ditto on all your bikes

[AJS914]

FTP is supposed to be a proxy for MLSS (key words being steady state). It seems like seated would be a better representation of that but getting out of the saddle a few times on a 20 minute climb isn't going to make a huge difference either way.