Most of the usual suspects for training, e.g. Sufferfest/Wahoo, TrainerRoad, Training Peaks, Golden Cheetah, have been using other metrics to classify athlete performance more exactly for quite a while now - years in some cases. Can't think of any major training platform that still uses just FTP off the top of my head, so it's an interesting question but one that is probably not as relevant these days.
I think if you train regularly with power as I do, then you get a good feeling as to what your training zones are without actually doing an FTP test which may or may not be accurate anyway. I adjust my interval sessions over time based on whether I'm finding them easy or too hard.
Sure I use FTP but really I use the cp curve and keep in mind 3 things. First is the horizontal on that curve: this is in theory ride to exhaustion at constant effort like Connor’s 405 for 26 min (I would sell my soul for that) but at 1, 5, 20, 60 min. Testing that is horrible; every now and then I remind my coach of the idea and immediately regret it. Second is some notion of sub cp efforts. These are verticals on the cp curve; going for any given time at say 75% of the cp value at that time should be sort of free. Third is some sort of frequency axis complementary to the time axis on the cp curve that catches the notion of resistance to fatigue. I haven’t figured out quite how to graph this but the idea makes sense. I need to build a mathematical model that comports with actual physiology but my day job gets in the way…
Great videos! You all keep putting them out. Your ftp experiment looked so painful,😂. Was considering how in spring, when we get outside, Is there any better training than a solid, fast, long duration pace line?
Hey rg, Ah thank you!! Really happy with where the ol' fitness is actually coming out of winter thanks to plenty of indoor sessions and a little less volume. Thanks for watching, Conor
I used to focus on FTP exclusively to measure myself, but I was getting smoked on casual group rides on shorter hill efforts (2 - 10 minutes). I started thinking about the power curve more holistically and trying to improve my 2-minute power, 5-minute power, and how quickly I can recover from those efforts. It's made me much better out in the real world.
Thanks for the comment! This is a really interesting way of looking at it, as so much of bike riding is not a consistent effort, mixing up those power curves is great!
OK. I got 1:13 into the video and Conor "explains" what FTP is. Except he's incorrect. FTP is NOT the max power you can hold for an hour. Coggans was clear about this. It was designed as a way to estimate LT2 and it was thought of as a power output that could be maintained for an extended time - maybe 40min, maybe longer. The "max for an hour" concept is misleading and does not focus on the underlying physiology. FTPs value arises from it's value as an estimate of LT2 so that various training zones can be approximated. Since most people do not have any other way to assess LT2 it is not a terrible number to use for this. Pros test lactate directly so of course they don't need ftp the way the rest of us do
Hey, Thanks for the comment! Conor here. My own interpretation of this is that FTP is the power you can hold for 60mins - that's the description of it as a concept in it's original basic form. It's designed to 'track' closely with LT2, which is a value that is more fluid in terms of duration. 30 /40 / 60mins + depending on person. FTP was the power based way of estimating this without the need for lactate testing needed for more accurate lab lactate testing - that would put an exact number on LT2. Let me know what you think, happy to be proved wrong and chat this out further! Thanks again, Conor
I am with Oli. As an amateur, FTP is the perfect benchmark for structured training. Personally, I see FTP as the ideal threshold between going all out in VO2 max sessions or just lingering in the grey zone. In my polarized training approach, it's mostly either zone 2 based on heart rate or high-intensity sessions based on power, and FTP serves as the perfect referee. For professionals, of course, things are much more refined as they need to chase those marginal gains. But for amateurs, simply being consistent and structured already makes a huge difference.
Yes for sure, I still personally find FTP a really simple easy way to get a good idea of where I'm at and how hard I should be training. Just a reminder to test for it accurately I think, I do think its easy to over estimate based - and making sure that ftp number is right will help the rest of your riding. Thanks for watching! Conor
FTP and critical power tests are both useful tools to judge progress. People arguing about the ratio one should multiply the 20 minute power by forget that the accuracy of these estimates reflects the variance your actual capacity would have day by day anyways. These tests are just a training metric and you'll get your actual fitness by doing enough efforts of varying llength in races or hard rides to fill out your power curve and see the progress you're making.
As a keen cyclist (X2 40 mile round trip commute, hill ride Saturday, long ride Sunday and Zwift is for Zone 2 and hard efforts) with average fitness for my age (53). I’ve found focusing on FTP was destructive for what I wanted, which was to get fitter and a bit quicker over long distances. No way could I hold Zwift’s FTP it calculated. I started at 235 then 250 and finally 285. I focused so much on improving the FTP score, which included missing commute rides, with a lot of zone 2), I became slower outside and started to feel fatigue on rides. In my opinion (and that’s all it is) for keen cyclists, who want to ride well “outdoors” FTP means nothing, other than bragging rites on Zwift. Ride outside as often as you possibly can and you’ll get better/faster/fitter than trying to have a higher FTP. In my opinion.
I had the complete opposite experience. Improving the 20min ftp test will likely give you better fitness for long commute rides. To achieve 20mins of 105% ftp you will have to train zone2 and lots of threshold for prolonged periods up to 40min+. That will definitely make you sustain longer riders in the long run, and ftp is a good indicator of improvement. On the other hand focusing soly on ramp/hill tests will only increase your anaerobic capacity which won't do much in a sustained effort. In addition, after hard trainings (threshold, vo2 max, anaerobic) which are quite common to improve your ftp your muscles are so fatigued that zone2 may feel like a chore. So, if you train aggressively to improuve your ftp, you may be too fatigued to ride casually every now and then. That's usually the downside of training efficiently, but after tapering, you should have significantly improved your overall fitness.
Thanks Conor and crew and experts . I have started using WTF for a while now , its working ! If I feel good , I push , if not , I don't . I am older , and riding is FUN . I used to be a serious runner , but I can't anymore , so I ride whenever the weather allows . I learned to enjoy the things I am able to , and I realize how lucky I am ! Be well , eh !
Hahaha! I love it! WTF sounds like the breakthrough guideline we all should be using! I assume there's absolutely no need to measure/calculate it in any way...Correct?
Great video. I think the content is getting better on GCN, with more personal stories, sciences to back it up, and some epic adventures. Kudos and I hope to we will see even more content like that!
I'm at minute 1:45 and I absolutely cringed when Connor said he put in the FTP that he would then hold for an entire hour. Good lord - that's sacrifice for a cause if I ever saw one.
Your rising heart rate is something called “cardiac drift”. It’s a function of body (core) heat, generated by muscular effort and mitigated by temperature, humidity airflow and even clothing. When pulse stabilizes, you’ll see brief moments when your pulse dips by 2-3 beats per minute then rises back up. That’s your cardio system trying to renegotiate a lower energy state, which is a characteristic of the human body’s tendency to conserve energy (this tendency is why it’s typically so hard to lose weight).
I thought cardiac drift was when you exceeded your fitness level in terms of duration. For example, I think you'd expect to see steady power and HR for a half hour and then heartrate start to climb (into the red) while maintaining power and pretty soon, your power would start dropping.
I’ve learned something valuable…fastest way to increase your FTP is to stop multiplying, and instead divide your average 20 min power by 95%. 👍🏼👍🏼 Love it! Joking aside, interesting video. Cheers, GCN.
Well done Connor. Beautifully laid out, and well rounded, discussion on FTP. One of the best discussions I have listened to about FTP. To me, it comes down to knowing what you want to achieve. Then, understand those parameters that effectively measures your progress towards that goal. Perfect! Well done 👍
I totally agree that for amateur athletes looking towards fitness goals or completing events that FTP is very much a good enough metric to build a plan around. Compared to a pro's training, most of our training "discipline" levels are dubious enough to make rough guide posts more than adequate. 🤣
This is very thought provoking Conor. I use FTP just to set my training zones. But your work here does suggest that the metric monitoring companies like the one I use need to adopt a way of monitoring critical power - more on that please - that allows coaches to introduce greater specificity to workout suggestions. The Tudor and EF Education coaches points were fascinating - I’d really like to hear more about training from guys like these two.
Thanks HKRoad, James, Colby and Olu provided some great insight - we'd love to get them back on for more chat! I'd really like to cover critical power further, so watch this space ;) Thanks for watching and tuning in!! Conor
Well done. After the previous FTP topic post you promised to do the hour effort and you actually did. Kudos. Never going to fun for you! Fun to watch though!!! To max an hour effort isn’t it abut keeping HR under control (under / around AT) and the power attained is the consequence. Can we convince you to do an hour effort using HR as the effort restrictor (until last 10 mins or so) and lets see what power is attained. Would be interesting to see what % of a 20m effort is right for you.
Hey all, Thanks for watching! Apologies for the maths typo.... that was a mistake. It's 20min power X 0.95 to get an estimate of FTP via that method of testing. Thanks and sorry! Conor
Firstly, amazing effort chap! 400w+ @20mins! That’s my 2mins power 😂!! Secondly, FTP is just a single data point - I love the fact that you’re looking at this holistically. It’s a bit like BHP v Torque - people buy cars based on BHP but drive torque all day long. But you need both. So in the same way, I like that one chap mentioned perceived exertion/feel, power then HR - in that order. Doesn’t matter what my FTP is, if my body tells me I can’t sustain that power in that zone on that day and in those conditions. Some days my Z3 feels more like Z4 on other days and vice versa! Those zones are based on a single parameter. I guess feel can be deceptive too, but if you’re an experienced rider, you know the difference between the mind quitting and the body telling you what it’s capable of on any given day. What do you think GCN ex-pros? Is feel deceptive or your body communicating with you?
Serious effort Connor to aid in a great video on FTP. The one thing I would add from personal experience anytime the challenge is really tough is that the mental discipline ad mental toughness it takes to push to your absolute limits is as big a part or maybe even more important than the physical effort.
Thank you for your answer on the GCN Tech episode the other day! Really fascinating video today. But Connor, come on, clean the bike before it goes on the trainer 🙈 But in all seriousness, very interesting video. James Spragg made a very good point; being a different sort of rider is key. I’ve always found I can hold my FTP well (4/kg), but when it comes to 3-5 minute power, the legs can sometimes desert me - and it wouldn’t be too much of a surge from my FTP.
Great vid. For me, it's just a baseline figure to see if things are getting better or worse. It's useful, but no single number tells anyone everything... Thanks!
We are Not the world fittest cyclists .. We dont train like them, we don't eat like them.. We don't train 25+ hours a week and sleep 10 hours a day.. If you train like a PRO for 5 hours a week you will be weak a shit .. I want more content about how to optimise training to get as fast as possible with a 3-6 hours a week for training.. My guess is 90% of the people watching GCN train 3-5 hours a week to do maybe 2x 150-200km century rides a year..
I find them super interesting, just to see how good other people can be. As for training with such limited time? I wouldn’t train, I’d just ride my bike “outdoors” and go as fast as you can now and again.
Yep, good prediction Si! Proved that the FTP number was wrong, as semi-expected from a shortish ramp test (which I did suspect after watching the FTP test week video). Weird thing is it was all looking good at 10 minutes in, maybe heart rate a little high but seemed to be under control!
2 years ago I used polarized training very strictly and saw no particular improvement over my numbers from 3 years ago. Last year I did whole rides without a HRM and power meter. Despite the lower volume I wasn't any worse than the year before, I just noticed I had a harder time repeating threshold type intervals. What this taught me is that FTP isn't a good indicator of performance, looking at overall TSS for instance can tell you more sometimes. These days I use MAP for VO2Max exercise because it's not based on some arbitrary percentage of a given effort and it's easy to do it regularly, and my average power for 5h as my zone 2/LT1 figure. Power curve is then used to pace a particular duration of effort the more data points the better so it's good to hunt a trava segment every now and then, but I'm not a slave of my numbers because I know a lot more can influence the result of a race, nutrition especially.
Great film Conor/GCN. I'll say it again and again! You can teach your body to do a good FTP test and get a great result to brag to your mates about but going hard for 20mins is not the same as pushing an endurance effort for 1 hour regardless of what algorithm is working in the background. I do a 60mile ride as hard as I can and look at my average power for the duration of the ride. That result is more realistic to me. It shows me where I'm at. I usually do that 4 times a year. My zwift FTP is great for my age and fitness but it's unrealistic.
Really interesting video - thanks for talking with the various coaches. It’s interesting to see where training is going right now. I still like FTP for a measure to set my zones - I agree with Oli that for us non-pros, it’s a good way to baseline. When I’m focused more on Individual Pursuit or Team Pursuit, I care more about 3-min or 5-min power, but for general riding I like FTP.
thanks for the comment Diana. It is surprising how many riders are into those 1/3/5 min powers as often that is the duration that they need to ride consistently at during a race - vs FTP. cheers!
For me I use AIFTP from Trainer Road (TR). I do not believe it is a representation of my hour effort though. I just use it as a consistent, repeatable, and relative data point. I also can produce more power on the road than on the trainer especially when I consider RPE and HR. The nice thing about TR (I ams sure Zwift does this too) is it evaluates your performance across multiple zones. Is it perfect - NO. But again if you look at it as data you can consistently repeat and view it as a relative set of data points I don't think there is any harm and it will improve your fitness and performance by increasing these metrics through training. We get too carried away with finding out the exact answer to things in life and sometimes you need to realize things are not always black and white. Great video and proves what i always thought about FTP and training.
Yeah, just because your body can do it doesn't mean that your mind can too. Grit is a skill. Powerlifters do the same. They'll calculate their 1RM using their 5RM. Then come competition day, they can't perform the lift.
I have previously done long threshold efforts (80 mins) once a week and during that time my 60 min FTP and my 20 min FTP was identical. But the 80 min sucked too much so I started doing intervals and lost the ability to sustain my threshold for 60 mins. I am not sure if I want to go back to these long threshold efforts though. Its quite a toll.
Yeah well FTP is not the power you can hold for an hour either. It is a quasi metabolic steady state. 20 minutes, 60 minutes, they are all estimates that will vary in accuracy depending on how aerobic and anaerobic you are.
Firstly, amazing effort chap! 400w+ @20mins! That’s my 2mins power 😂!! Secondly, FTP is just a single data point - I love the fact that you’re looking at this holistically. It’s a bit like BHP v Torque - people buy cars based on BHP but drive torque all day long. But you need both. So in the same way, I love the fact that one chap mentioned feel, power then HR in that order. Doesn’t matter what my FTP is, if my body tells me I can’t sustain that power in that zone on that day and in those conditions. Some days my Z3 feels more like Z4 on other days and vice versa! I guess feel can be deceptive too, but if you’re an experienced rider, you lnownthe difference between the mind quitting and the body telling you what it’s capable of on any given day. What do you think GCN ex-pros? Is feel deceptive or your body communicating with you?
There's another way of estimating FTP you didn't mention: Take the average of what's called by some your "efficiency factor" (EF), Average Power/HR while riding in what you feel by RPE or by your previous estimated FTP zonology, is your Z2 for 10-20 minutes and multiply this by 190. Use this as a guideline for determining your power zonology...it's good enough for that purpose. Really, the EF in itself is all you need to monitor for determining your fitness progress or regress, but the multiplication by 190 is so you can use your power meter for your zone determination while riding. This method is very simple, fits into your normal training, and the EF can be your primary guide for your training progress...the higher the better..track it every ride, keep a plot of it, and look for long term trends every 3-6 months. e.g. Pogacar's Z2 riding is around 320 W with HR 150...EF = 2.13, multiplied by 190 and you get his estimated FTP of 405 W which is very close to estimates for it (415 W) found on the web made by other means.
A couple of big fans keeping body temperature down would probably help extend the effort. 403W for that duration is quite impressive. That had to hurt.
If you want to do more quality training content, please consider bringing on Kolie Moore at some point. There are, imho, few voices who are so competent yet so pragmatic and down-to-earth.
So, you can do cycling version of Sugar Kane workout. 1. Do 20 min test to get FTP number 2. Try to hold 95% of that number for a 1 hour or as long as you can 3. Hold 100% of that number for as long as you get in previous one. Add the rest days in between sessions
What's the difference between step 2 and 3? Say you average 300W for 20 minutes, then ride 285W (95% of 300W) for 30 minutes before you collapse. What would step 3 be?
I agree with PE. Some days I just can’t do a threshold workout where I’m at threshold for 30 minutes without any recovery in-between. For those workouts on Zwift (in my training program) I’ve had to lower the % difficulty because otherwise my legs are burning so bad I won’t be able to finish the session. PE works great for those of us that are not professional athletes and are time crunched.
Thanks for suffering (again) to make this video, I use Ftp as a keen amateur for indoor training and for that I find it a really helpful metric. Generally when I'm out riding I base my efforts on perceived exertion, I find that serves me better in the real world. Then power and heart rate data are relegated to interesting data to compare post ride.
Really interesting! I think the main takeaway is that although the FTP may not be fully accurate to what you can withstand for an hour solid, as long as you are always completing the same test under the same conditions then it’s a great guide of cycling fitness. My results seem to be a pretty accurate reflection of my 1hour threshold, ramp test, 20 minute test and a tested 1 hour effort all came back within 10 watts.
As someone who is new to the world of cycling, I use FTP as a way to set my training zones and also as a way to motivate myself to get better on the bike. I've gone from being dropped by my cycling buddies, to dropping my buddies now. I put that down to structured training and races that Zwift provides.
It would be interesting (for the viewers!) if the test was repeated not using ERG mode. My guess is that in free ride you might be able to hold on for longer. Possibly being able to get a small amount of recovery would enable you to push on for longer, rather than hitting the "ERG wall of death"! Great video, very informative. More like this please😅
The Grade gave me an FTP of 264W just before christmas, I thought it was way too high for a long time (my best 20min effort was 260W, which was up the grade and then z1 and 1h best was 240W). In training sessions I struggeld with 250W for 10min. But in a race i managed to hold 262W for 56min and still feeling ok, which was surprising, but also showed me that the grade FTP was kinda accurate.
1:50 is misleading and completely wrong- to divide by 95% of something you would need to first calculate the value of those 95%, which is the entire point here. It's actually 20min avg power in Watts multiplied by 0.95
Wait so are you telling me that professionals use more specific testing and training zones than a standardised general power figure? That's mind blowing
Liked the session! I use FTP since it gives me a benchmark number, knowing very well that i may not be able to sustain this number for as long as an hour.
I get on my bike & ride. For the first 20min to an hour, i am reminding myself to take it easy, relax, there is no rush. Then i let myself start enjoying hammering, recovering while a riding, repeat as many times as the day allows you. Give thanks, sleep, repeat as needed. Ride more. Know your/you're love.
You shouldn't have combined heat training with an FTP test. Performance and motivation are way better in the fresh air. But you're also old. 😅 I remember a Connor who could maintain 440 watts for almost 45 minutes, with a wig and a helmet on his head. But you were still a pro then AND: younger, weren't you? That makes me feel a lot better. Even GCN presenters are only human.Great video!!! And you still are an animal!!!
Great video. I do think more needs to be said about weight and its relationship to power. An FTP of 408 for someone of Connor's weight (I assume over 80kg) is different to someone with 350w ftp who is 10kg less. Would have been nice to think about the value of Watts per kg more. I notice they still discuss this a lot on the world tour. E.g. They'll talk about how Jonas or Pog are doing 7watts per kg.
One has to have some kind of standard to use in order to set training zones, and FTP as a concept is a relatively convenient and easy way to do for most riders. Likely the best way to set training zones is via blood lactate testing, and I think a lot of pros use that. But for amateur cyclists, most are not going to be able to test blood lactate on a regular basis, so, enter an FTP estimate. I find a 20 minute FTP test result a pretty good indicator of where I am at as an estimate, and I set my training zones via that. I also understand it is only an estimate, and I pay attention to both HR and PE as it relates to power on every ride. All three are important, and understanding one's own bodies responses to training impetus and adjusting efforts accordingly is important, as it is to pay attention to outside factors (environmental conditions, especially heat).
Thank you, I feel much better now! I have never tried, but I always thought that I wouldn't be able to keep my FTP for an hour, so I thought I had a problem with durability. I know now that maybe it isn't true...Doesn't change a thing in my (low) performance, but as I said I feel better :)
Personally I think this is such a valuable Video 👏 I for one have had times where I have placed far too much of my perceived ability as a cyclist on my FTP. I have also allowed myself to feel as if others judge how good I am depending on the average watts shown on a Strava Activity. Thankfully I'm in a way better place with it all now, but your worth and ability as a cyclist is far far greater than the arbitrary numbers we attach to ourselves.
Because of TrainingPeaks, my coach simply redefined FTP and zones. His definition of threshold exists but measured differently. But he defines my zones more personally
I didn’t read every single comment in this thread, but in case I missed it, it feels as though everyone should be reminded: When Connor first became a presenter on GCN, he held 440 W for over 40 minutes, attempting to replicate the power that Bradley Wiggins did to set the our record.
Watching Conor ride to me a fascination of sorts. I am over 6 feet tall not particularly flexible and therefore CdA is forefront to my thinking when considering my FTP relative to speed I can sustain on the bike. For those interested, here is the Power versus speed equation and of course, many if not most know that power is proportional to the cube of velocity: 𝑃 =1/2 ⋅ 𝜌 ⋅ 𝐶𝑑𝐴 ⋅ v^3 Many of us have raced against small riders who punch a very small hole in the wind. Very fast small riders. They ride real little bikes with their torsos flat to the top tube. They also don't weigh much and climb well aka W/kg. As an engineer, when I look at a rider on a bike, I find myself crunching the rider's equation in my head. Yes, power matters, but I think in terms of Power relative to CdA and also speaking of equations, most know the Power equation: P = Torque X RPM whereby Torque = Pedal Force X Crank length. When watching Conor ride aside from all the air he catches on the bike, I am also struck by how low his RPM (cadence) is to generate the considerable power he does. I can't help but think he maybe able to sustain a higher FTP through a higher cadence. I know for me, it would be physically impossible to sustain the power he does at the cadence he rides. To me FTP needs to be taken in context and why the PhD Analyst in the video looks at other numbers. But what he didn't speak to is the elephant in the room which is CdA. The goal of power or sustained power is speed of course and in the context of speed, CdA is proportional to power as the above equation reflects. Each metric has equivalent weighting. Many of us know a small rider who has a sub or close to 300w FTP who can keep up with monsters with their close to 400w FTP. This is because CdA is as important as Power. Lastly, outside of functional threshold power, one can also consider why CdA matters so much for sprinting. Arguably, Mark Cavendish is the greatest sprinter of all time who likely put out the least amount of power among elite sprinters. He was called Manx Missile for a reason.
HR drift is a thing even on normal rides, but watching his HR keep climbing so quickly I knew his real FTP was a chunk lower. Understanding the complex mix of power output, HR, energy sources, stress levels, rest all play their part for the pure test of performance. Skill can overcome a lot of excessive fitness in real world complex environments, I would argue many normal riders would benefit more from learning bike skills and handling. Like the one coach said, having a high FTP means nothing if you can't ride well or crash out.
The original FTP test was designed to be 60 minutes long, as it represents the maximum power a cyclist can sustain for one hour. The 20-minute test is a more practical alternative, where the average power is multiplied by 0.95 to estimate FTP. However, this can still overestimate true one-hour power, especially for amateur riders who struggle with longer sustained efforts.
It's 95% of 20min, you subtract 5% as a way to predict that 5% would be the decrease to sustain 1hr. I believe here's the caveat, I don't know any rider who can sustain their FTP correctly measured (95% of 20min) for the hour. There's also a huge discussion that the hour isn't in fact an hour, more like 45 min. I think critical power works way better.
Really good video, I use FTP as a guide, I also track my 1& 5min power too. I like FTP and I can calculate my w/kg from this and ride mountains or other long climbs focused on that which I find a better way to pace myself and get the most out of myself.
People always forget that you're supposed to do a 5 minute max effort before a 20 minute FTP test so that your anaerobic contribution to the 20 minute test won't inflate the result.
Thanks Connor, very insightful! I think it makes sense, FTP is a good ballpark measure to set training zones for amateurs, but it is not as accurate as Lactate testing in a lab. And best 60min power doesnt say anything about your sprint. So it makes sense the pros don't use it much.
What Colby Pearce says is actually very interesting. This triangle of power output, heart rate stats and perceived exertion with perceived exertion being the most important, after the other two feed information to it. Does it mean that for instance when an athlete puts out a high power number but has ''bad'' heart rate stats but also has low perceived exertion it indicates he/she is capable of much more if good sleep, less stress -> better heart rate are sought for this athlete?
I have and will use FTP as a tool to scale my training efforts. I think the most important note is to relate to FTP just as a training metric - always present, but not a goal or an absolute holy grail to be discovered. I did a 1hr effort at 95% FTP last week - didn't die, but definitely had to fight myself through most of it.
I'm a less talented rider, with an ftp of only 280W and I'll never try to test that for one hour 😮. Riding at FTP is painful and I can only inflict this to myself if it is for a stage win on a Grand Tour. I use FTP only as a calibration number for the work-outs and to discuss with fellow racers at the pub. Congrats for your performance anyway!
just do the hour test, then it is 100 % accurate and you are training your body to withstand a longer sustained effort. Very important for time triallists and break aways
@Andy_ATB I do. I have also suffered a few serious injuries, riding in bad weather, so over the winter my Tacx trainer is a safer option and probably a better base training tool than riding in the winter, for next season.
I thought the FTP 20 minute protocol had some denting efforts in warm-up to reduce likely output to place it near to T60 efforts. 400W had once been my 4 minute interval power, but not any more....
403w at 26:30 is insane. I did 239w for 3 mins x 4 rounds and I was dead after. TrainerRoad says my FTP is 240w which I can NOT hold for an hour. Or even 20 mins. If I could hold 200w for an hour, I'd be talking to my wife about LA 2028 lol. chapeau, Conor.
Good effort Conor 👍 The one thing that you didn't talk about is your fitness the day of your test. I don't think you tapered well enough to maximize your performance for that test. You could have probably lasted an extra 5-15 mins
Not going to even attempt to compare my power to Connor's, but it is interesting how similar his heart rate is to mine for what I perceive as a "this sucks, but I can hold it for an hour" effort, and then turns out it was really only something I could hold for half an hour.
Great video. I always enjoy seeing Conor suffer 🤣 Perhaps Conor's mistake was only doing ~12min flat out efforts and using Zwift to estimate his FTP. The reality that in a longer effort he could only hold that number for 26mins (as Simon predicted) is telling.
FTP is a software model with 5 parameters, which is the lovechild of the 3 parameter Critical Power model (in the video the 2 parameter version was mentioned) and Riegel's Fatigue Factor. You need much more than 1 test (20 min) and if you do use an oversimplification (x% of 20 min power) you get a rough estimate. The ramp test is stupid. The latest version of FTP, which includes iLevels and different phenotypes is pretty accurate, however your Time To Exhaustion at FTP (TTE) can be anywhere between 30 and 60 min, or even 20-70min... or in extreme cases 80+ minutes. So yes - dumbing down FTP to one parameter should be frowned upon. Use the full model, if you want accuracy
hats off great effort! however must admit Im disappointed that you stopped. the point is max hour power, right? ok, next video....actual hour power! FWIW I have no idea my FTP but after a hard hour on Zwift (attacks, rests etc) I tend to have just about 250w. curious what your steady hour power might be based on a training FTP number.
Might be a bit of a weird question. Rate of perceived exertion when it comes to especially intervals: Shall I rate the most felt intensity during the most brutal interval or estimate an average RPE of the whole workout? Example. Let's say I cycle 2 hours in zone 2 and rate it RPE 3. Inserting a few Sprint intervals to the first 30 minutes, the following 90min ride in zone 2 will feel more like RPE 4 to 5 due to fatigue. The Sprints would be rated RPE 10, towards the end of the workout it feels more like RPE 5, although the watts on the majority of the workout sit comfortably in zone 2, RPE 3. How to rate RPE correctly?
Training to increase FTP has to be "pushed up" from below by exercising at a slightly lower intensity rather than trying to "pull it up" by training at a higher intensity than FTP.
Have you ever used FTP for training? Or do you use something entirely different? Tell us about it! 👇⚡
Most of the usual suspects for training, e.g. Sufferfest/Wahoo, TrainerRoad, Training Peaks, Golden Cheetah, have been using other metrics to classify athlete performance more exactly for quite a while now - years in some cases.
Can't think of any major training platform that still uses just FTP off the top of my head, so it's an interesting question but one that is probably not as relevant these days.
Also, awesome effort Connor, great video 👍😁
I think if you train regularly with power as I do, then you get a good feeling as to what your training zones are without actually doing an FTP test which may or may not be accurate anyway.
I adjust my interval sessions over time based on whether I'm finding them easy or too hard.
Sure I use FTP but really I use the cp curve and keep in mind 3 things. First is the horizontal on that curve: this is in theory ride to exhaustion at constant effort like Connor’s 405 for 26 min (I would sell my soul for that) but at 1, 5, 20, 60 min. Testing that is horrible; every now and then I remind my coach of the idea and immediately regret it. Second is some notion of sub cp efforts. These are verticals on the cp curve; going for any given time at say 75% of the cp value at that time should be sort of free. Third is some sort of frequency axis complementary to the time axis on the cp curve that catches the notion of resistance to fatigue. I haven’t figured out quite how to graph this but the idea makes sense. I need to build a mathematical model that comports with actual physiology but my day job gets in the way…
Great videos! You all keep putting them out. Your ftp experiment looked so painful,😂. Was considering how in spring, when we get outside, Is there any better training than a solid, fast, long duration pace line?
I think I can speak for everyone watching that 406 watts for 26 minutes is definitely NOT a failure!!
I just looked at my power curve. I can do it for 35 seconds 🤣
@@mikemazzantini6397 Connor is 6'8
@@mikemazzantini6397 I hit that once on a 10 meter-long short hill.
Agree. That kind of power would win all my races without a sprint. haha
Hey rg, Ah thank you!! Really happy with where the ol' fitness is actually coming out of winter thanks to plenty of indoor sessions and a little less volume. Thanks for watching, Conor
I used to focus on FTP exclusively to measure myself, but I was getting smoked on casual group rides on shorter hill efforts (2 - 10 minutes). I started thinking about the power curve more holistically and trying to improve my 2-minute power, 5-minute power, and how quickly I can recover from those efforts. It's made me much better out in the real world.
Thanks for the comment! This is a really interesting way of looking at it, as so much of bike riding is not a consistent effort, mixing up those power curves is great!
Let's face it, no one cares who's the first to finish the group ride. However every climb is pretty much an unspoken competition. 😂
So good to see gcn back to some high quality content... Apart from that graph clanger on dividing by 0.95 to get a lower value (that's multiply!).
You found our deliberate mistake 😉
P.S don’t invest money through Conor, maths isn’t his strong point!
@@gcn😂😂😂
or you could divide it by 1.05 if you really hate multiplying ;)
OK. I got 1:13 into the video and Conor "explains" what FTP is. Except he's incorrect. FTP is NOT the max power you can hold for an hour. Coggans was clear about this. It was designed as a way to estimate LT2 and it was thought of as a power output that could be maintained for an extended time - maybe 40min, maybe longer. The "max for an hour" concept is misleading and does not focus on the underlying physiology. FTPs value arises from it's value as an estimate of LT2 so that various training zones can be approximated. Since most people do not have any other way to assess LT2 it is not a terrible number to use for this. Pros test lactate directly so of course they don't need ftp the way the rest of us do
Exactly. 1 minute in and the classic misunderstanding has already been presented.
Yes! Thank you! This needs to be upvoted. Somewhere along the line this has been totally forgotten.
Hey, Thanks for the comment! Conor here. My own interpretation of this is that FTP is the power you can hold for 60mins - that's the description of it as a concept in it's original basic form. It's designed to 'track' closely with LT2, which is a value that is more fluid in terms of duration. 30 /40 / 60mins + depending on person. FTP was the power based way of estimating this without the need for lactate testing needed for more accurate lab lactate testing - that would put an exact number on LT2. Let me know what you think, happy to be proved wrong and chat this out further! Thanks again, Conor
I did love the part of the Oli Beckinsale interview where your sunglasses magically appeared on your face 😎
🪄🕶️
Si the guru was bang on with his estimate.
Good effort though I have always wondered about how useful ftp is. I just kind of use it for setting zones.
I am with Oli. As an amateur, FTP is the perfect benchmark for structured training. Personally, I see FTP as the ideal threshold between going all out in VO2 max sessions or just lingering in the grey zone. In my polarized training approach, it's mostly either zone 2 based on heart rate or high-intensity sessions based on power, and FTP serves as the perfect referee. For professionals, of course, things are much more refined as they need to chase those marginal gains. But for amateurs, simply being consistent and structured already makes a huge difference.
Well said
Yes for sure, I still personally find FTP a really simple easy way to get a good idea of where I'm at and how hard I should be training. Just a reminder to test for it accurately I think, I do think its easy to over estimate based - and making sure that ftp number is right will help the rest of your riding. Thanks for watching! Conor
FTP and critical power tests are both useful tools to judge progress.
People arguing about the ratio one should multiply the 20 minute power by forget that the accuracy of these estimates reflects the variance your actual capacity would have day by day anyways.
These tests are just a training metric and you'll get your actual fitness by doing enough efforts of varying llength in races or hard rides to fill out your power curve and see the progress you're making.
As a keen cyclist (X2 40 mile round trip commute, hill ride Saturday, long ride Sunday and Zwift is for Zone 2 and hard efforts) with average fitness for my age (53). I’ve found focusing on FTP was destructive for what I wanted, which was to get fitter and a bit quicker over long distances. No way could I hold Zwift’s FTP it calculated. I started at 235 then 250 and finally 285. I focused so much on improving the FTP score, which included missing commute rides, with a lot of zone 2), I became slower outside and started to feel fatigue on rides. In my opinion (and that’s all it is) for keen cyclists, who want to ride well “outdoors” FTP means nothing, other than bragging rites on Zwift. Ride outside as often as you possibly can and you’ll get better/faster/fitter than trying to have a higher FTP. In my opinion.
I had the complete opposite experience. Improving the 20min ftp test will likely give you better fitness for long commute rides. To achieve 20mins of 105% ftp you will have to train zone2 and lots of threshold for prolonged periods up to 40min+. That will definitely make you sustain longer riders in the long run, and ftp is a good indicator of improvement. On the other hand focusing soly on ramp/hill tests will only increase your anaerobic capacity which won't do much in a sustained effort. In addition, after hard trainings (threshold, vo2 max, anaerobic) which are quite common to improve your ftp your muscles are so fatigued that zone2 may feel like a chore.
So, if you train aggressively to improuve your ftp, you may be too fatigued to ride casually every now and then. That's usually the downside of training efficiently, but after tapering, you should have significantly improved your overall fitness.
Not a racer then
Thanks Conor and crew and experts . I have started using WTF for a while now , its working ! If I feel good , I push , if not , I don't . I am older , and riding is FUN . I used to be a serious runner , but I can't anymore , so I ride whenever the weather allows . I learned to enjoy the things I am able to , and I realize how lucky I am ! Be well , eh !
Hahaha! I love it! WTF sounds like the breakthrough guideline we all should be using! I assume there's absolutely no need to measure/calculate it in any way...Correct?
@@Avianthro No I think its measured in smiles ? Or in Massachusetts , Smoots !
Ah yes, the often muttered WTF technique. Amazing how often it is applied to daily life too…
@ oh man. It’s the brains reset button
What is WTF?
Great video. I think the content is getting better on GCN, with more personal stories, sciences to back it up, and some epic adventures. Kudos and I hope to we will see even more content like that!
You beat Si's prediction by half a minute. Good on you, Connor.
Conor I love how you ALWAYS REALLY PUT YOUR HEART INTO EVERY CHALLENGE !! THANK YOU I THINK OF YOUWHEN IM STRUGGLING AND IT GIVES ME STRENGTH!!
Thanks for the comment. We love how Conor does it too, sometimes he bites off more than he can chew, but it makes great viewing!
I'm at minute 1:45 and I absolutely cringed when Connor said he put in the FTP that he would then hold for an entire hour. Good lord - that's sacrifice for a cause if I ever saw one.
Your rising heart rate is something called “cardiac drift”. It’s a function of body (core) heat, generated by muscular effort and mitigated by temperature, humidity airflow and even clothing. When pulse stabilizes, you’ll see brief moments when your pulse dips by 2-3 beats per minute then rises back up. That’s your cardio system trying to renegotiate a lower energy state, which is a characteristic of the human body’s tendency to conserve energy (this tendency is why it’s typically so hard to lose weight).
I thought cardiac drift was when you exceeded your fitness level in terms of duration. For example, I think you'd expect to see steady power and HR for a half hour and then heartrate start to climb (into the red) while maintaining power and pretty soon, your power would start dropping.
I’ve learned something valuable…fastest way to increase your FTP is to stop multiplying, and instead divide your average 20 min power by 95%. 👍🏼👍🏼 Love it! Joking aside, interesting video. Cheers, GCN.
Well done Connor. Beautifully laid out, and well rounded, discussion on FTP. One of the best discussions I have listened to about FTP. To me, it comes down to knowing what you want to achieve. Then, understand those parameters that effectively measures your progress towards that goal. Perfect! Well done 👍
Don’t worry about it myself. Good idea for your training zones but I personally listen to my body while training
Hey Christopher, thanks for the message. If it worked for the great Eddy Merckx, it’s good enough for the rest of us!
@@gcn What that's not true at all. Eddy was an extremely rare natural talent
1:48 I don't want to be "that" guy, but it's 20 min avg. power multiplied by 95%.
Exactly, i rolled my eyes and came straight down here 😂
This guy maths…
But…if you divide your FTP will be more impressive.
Obviously, what they meant was dividing your ftp by 1/95%
I totally agree that for amateur athletes looking towards fitness goals or completing events that FTP is very much a good enough metric to build a plan around. Compared to a pro's training, most of our training "discipline" levels are dubious enough to make rough guide posts more than adequate. 🤣
Great to see more cycling geekery on GCN! Great job Connor & Co
thanks Mat! Let us know what you would like to see next!
This is very thought provoking Conor. I use FTP just to set my training zones. But your work here does suggest that the metric monitoring companies like the one I use need to adopt a way of monitoring critical power - more on that please - that allows coaches to introduce greater specificity to workout suggestions. The Tudor and EF Education coaches points were fascinating - I’d really like to hear more about training from guys like these two.
Thanks HKRoad, James, Colby and Olu provided some great insight - we'd love to get them back on for more chat! I'd really like to cover critical power further, so watch this space ;) Thanks for watching and tuning in!! Conor
Well done. After the previous FTP topic post you promised to do the hour effort and you actually did. Kudos. Never going to fun for you! Fun to watch though!!! To max an hour effort isn’t it abut keeping HR under control (under / around AT) and the power attained is the consequence. Can we convince you to do an hour effort using HR as the effort restrictor (until last 10 mins or so) and lets see what power is attained. Would be interesting to see what % of a 20m effort is right for you.
Hey all, Thanks for watching! Apologies for the maths typo.... that was a mistake. It's 20min power X 0.95 to get an estimate of FTP via that method of testing. Thanks and sorry! Conor
Firstly, amazing effort chap! 400w+ @20mins! That’s my 2mins power 😂!!
Secondly, FTP is just a single data point - I love the fact that you’re looking at this holistically. It’s a bit like BHP v Torque - people buy cars based on BHP but drive torque all day long. But you need both.
So in the same way, I like that one chap mentioned perceived exertion/feel, power then HR - in that order. Doesn’t matter what my FTP is, if my body tells me I can’t sustain that power in that zone on that day and in those conditions. Some days my Z3 feels more like Z4 on other days and vice versa! Those zones are based on a single parameter.
I guess feel can be deceptive too, but if you’re an experienced rider, you know the difference between the mind quitting and the body telling you what it’s capable of on any given day.
What do you think GCN ex-pros? Is feel deceptive or your body communicating with you?
Serious effort Connor to aid in a great video on FTP. The one thing I would add from personal experience anytime the challenge is really tough is that the mental discipline ad mental toughness it takes to push to your absolute limits is as big a part or maybe even more important than the physical effort.
Mate good effort and interesting to hear the coaches opinion on it!
Thank you for your answer on the GCN Tech episode the other day!
Really fascinating video today. But Connor, come on, clean the bike before it goes on the trainer 🙈
But in all seriousness, very interesting video. James Spragg made a very good point; being a different sort of rider is key. I’ve always found I can hold my FTP well (4/kg), but when it comes to 3-5 minute power, the legs can sometimes desert me - and it wouldn’t be too much of a surge from my FTP.
I watched this from beginning to end. Informative and thought provoking.
Great vid. For me, it's just a baseline figure to see if things are getting better or worse. It's useful, but no single number tells anyone everything... Thanks!
Connor bonks again folks. Love you, man.
Why break the habit of a lifetime!
We are Not the world fittest cyclists .. We dont train like them, we don't eat like them.. We don't train 25+ hours a week and sleep 10 hours a day.. If you train like a PRO for 5 hours a week you will be weak a shit .. I want more content about how to optimise training to get as fast as possible with a 3-6 hours a week for training.. My guess is 90% of the people watching GCN train 3-5 hours a week to do maybe 2x 150-200km century rides a year..
Im not a pro but i still find these videos interesting, so im glad they make these
Training like a pro comes from volume. If you want to be somewhat good you should at least train 8hrs a week.
Try Dylan Johnson, i think he has plans for people strapped for time
Enough videos on how to train with low volume on UA-cam. Love these pro level content ❤
I find them super interesting, just to see how good other people can be. As for training with such limited time? I wouldn’t train, I’d just ride my bike “outdoors” and go as fast as you can now and again.
Yep, good prediction Si! Proved that the FTP number was wrong, as semi-expected from a shortish ramp test (which I did suspect after watching the FTP test week video). Weird thing is it was all looking good at 10 minutes in, maybe heart rate a little high but seemed to be under control!
2 years ago I used polarized training very strictly and saw no particular improvement over my numbers from 3 years ago. Last year I did whole rides without a HRM and power meter. Despite the lower volume I wasn't any worse than the year before, I just noticed I had a harder time repeating threshold type intervals. What this taught me is that FTP isn't a good indicator of performance, looking at overall TSS for instance can tell you more sometimes. These days I use MAP for VO2Max exercise because it's not based on some arbitrary percentage of a given effort and it's easy to do it regularly, and my average power for 5h as my zone 2/LT1 figure. Power curve is then used to pace a particular duration of effort the more data points the better so it's good to hunt a trava segment every now and then, but I'm not a slave of my numbers because I know a lot more can influence the result of a race, nutrition especially.
Great film Conor/GCN. I'll say it again and again! You can teach your body to do a good FTP test and get a great result to brag to your mates about but going hard for 20mins is not the same as pushing an endurance effort for 1 hour regardless of what algorithm is working in the background. I do a 60mile ride as hard as I can and look at my average power for the duration of the ride. That result is more realistic to me. It shows me where I'm at. I usually do that 4 times a year. My zwift FTP is great for my age and fitness but it's unrealistic.
Really interesting video - thanks for talking with the various coaches. It’s interesting to see where training is going right now. I still like FTP for a measure to set my zones - I agree with Oli that for us non-pros, it’s a good way to baseline. When I’m focused more on Individual Pursuit or Team Pursuit, I care more about 3-min or 5-min power, but for general riding I like FTP.
thanks for the comment Diana. It is surprising how many riders are into those 1/3/5 min powers as often that is the duration that they need to ride consistently at during a race - vs FTP. cheers!
For me I use AIFTP from Trainer Road (TR). I do not believe it is a representation of my hour effort though. I just use it as a consistent, repeatable, and relative data point. I also can produce more power on the road than on the trainer especially when I consider RPE and HR. The nice thing about TR (I ams sure Zwift does this too) is it evaluates your performance across multiple zones. Is it perfect - NO. But again if you look at it as data you can consistently repeat and view it as a relative set of data points I don't think there is any harm and it will improve your fitness and performance by increasing these metrics through training. We get too carried away with finding out the exact answer to things in life and sometimes you need to realize things are not always black and white. Great video and proves what i always thought about FTP and training.
I always thought that basing FTP as 95% of 20 min power was always very optimistic. Wouldn't surprise me if FTP was more like 80-90% of 20 min power.
Indeed!
Yeah, just because your body can do it doesn't mean that your mind can too. Grit is a skill.
Powerlifters do the same. They'll calculate their 1RM using their 5RM. Then come competition day, they can't perform the lift.
I have previously done long threshold efforts (80 mins) once a week and during that time my 60 min FTP and my 20 min FTP was identical. But the 80 min sucked too much so I started doing intervals and lost the ability to sustain my threshold for 60 mins. I am not sure if I want to go back to these long threshold efforts though. Its quite a toll.
Agreed. My best 20 min power is 345w. 95% would be 327w, no way I can do that for an hour
Yeah well FTP is not the power you can hold for an hour either. It is a quasi metabolic steady state. 20 minutes, 60 minutes, they are all estimates that will vary in accuracy depending on how aerobic and anaerobic you are.
Firstly, amazing effort chap! 400w+ @20mins! That’s my 2mins power 😂!!
Secondly, FTP is just a single data point - I love the fact that you’re looking at this holistically. It’s a bit like BHP v Torque - people buy cars based on BHP but drive torque all day long. But you need both.
So in the same way, I love the fact that one chap mentioned feel, power then HR in that order. Doesn’t matter what my FTP is, if my body tells me I can’t sustain that power in that zone on that day and in those conditions. Some days my Z3 feels more like Z4 on other days and vice versa!
I guess feel can be deceptive too, but if you’re an experienced rider, you lnownthe difference between the mind quitting and the body telling you what it’s capable of on any given day.
What do you think GCN ex-pros? Is feel deceptive or your body communicating with you?
Thanks Connor :-) that was really encouraging for us normals who might have been upset holding half that power ;-)
FTP = Feel The Pain 😮
not wrong!
😂That's the only definition
One beer for this gentleman)
In us old guys it refers to: frequency to pee
Really interesting video. That type of power output is pretty impressive.
Some effort, seriously well done!
There's another way of estimating FTP you didn't mention: Take the average of what's called by some your "efficiency factor" (EF), Average Power/HR while riding in what you feel by RPE or by your previous estimated FTP zonology, is your Z2 for 10-20 minutes and multiply this by 190. Use this as a guideline for determining your power zonology...it's good enough for that purpose. Really, the EF in itself is all you need to monitor for determining your fitness progress or regress, but the multiplication by 190 is so you can use your power meter for your zone determination while riding. This method is very simple, fits into your normal training, and the EF can be your primary guide for your training progress...the higher the better..track it every ride, keep a plot of it, and look for long term trends every 3-6 months.
e.g. Pogacar's Z2 riding is around 320 W with HR 150...EF = 2.13, multiplied by 190 and you get his estimated FTP of 405 W which is very close to estimates for it (415 W) found on the web made by other means.
A couple of big fans keeping body temperature down would probably help extend the effort. 403W for that duration is quite impressive. That had to hurt.
You should have seen the state of him wandering around the GCN office afterwards, it was like a zombie 🧟
If you want to do more quality training content, please consider bringing on Kolie Moore at some point. There are, imho, few voices who are so competent yet so pragmatic and down-to-earth.
So, you can do cycling version of Sugar Kane workout.
1. Do 20 min test to get FTP number
2. Try to hold 95% of that number for a 1 hour or as long as you can
3. Hold 100% of that number for as long as you get in previous one.
Add the rest days in between sessions
What's the difference between step 2 and 3?
Say you average 300W for 20 minutes, then ride 285W (95% of 300W) for 30 minutes before you collapse. What would step 3 be?
I agree with PE. Some days I just can’t do a threshold workout where I’m at threshold for 30 minutes without any recovery in-between. For those workouts on Zwift (in my training program) I’ve had to lower the % difficulty because otherwise my legs are burning so bad I won’t be able to finish the session. PE works great for those of us that are not professional athletes and are time crunched.
Thanks for suffering (again) to make this video, I use Ftp as a keen amateur for indoor training and for that I find it a really helpful metric. Generally when I'm out riding I base my efforts on perceived exertion, I find that serves me better in the real world. Then power and heart rate data are relegated to interesting data to compare post ride.
Really interesting!
I think the main takeaway is that although the FTP may not be fully accurate to what you can withstand for an hour solid, as long as you are always completing the same test under the same conditions then it’s a great guide of cycling fitness.
My results seem to be a pretty accurate reflection of my 1hour threshold, ramp test, 20 minute test and a tested 1 hour effort all came back within 10 watts.
As always, great informative video, Connor. (I know they’re in-vogue, but you look so much better clean shaven.)
I really like that blue Canyon frame hung up on the wall. Really cool colour way!
As someone who is new to the world of cycling, I use FTP as a way to set my training zones and also as a way to motivate myself to get better on the bike. I've gone from being dropped by my cycling buddies, to dropping my buddies now. I put that down to structured training and races that Zwift provides.
Connor you were killin, it!
It would be interesting (for the viewers!) if the test was repeated not using ERG mode. My guess is that in free ride you might be able to hold on for longer. Possibly being able to get a small amount of recovery would enable you to push on for longer, rather than hitting the "ERG wall of death"! Great video, very informative. More like this please😅
The Grade gave me an FTP of 264W just before christmas, I thought it was way too high for a long time (my best 20min effort was 260W, which was up the grade and then z1 and 1h best was 240W). In training sessions I struggeld with 250W for 10min.
But in a race i managed to hold 262W for 56min and still feeling ok, which was surprising, but also showed me that the grade FTP was kinda accurate.
If you can hold 262 for 56 and feel "ok" , your FTP is even higher than you think.
400W is my 30 seconds maximum holy shit pro athletes are stacked
Right?!!!
1:50 is misleading and completely wrong- to divide by 95% of something you would need to first calculate the value of those 95%, which is the entire point here. It's actually 20min avg power in Watts multiplied by 0.95
So many cringe mistakes in this video.
Wait so are you telling me that professionals use more specific testing and training zones than a standardised general power figure? That's mind blowing
Liked the session!
I use FTP since it gives me a benchmark number, knowing very well that i may not be able to sustain this number for as long as an hour.
I get on my bike & ride. For the first 20min to an hour, i am reminding myself to take it easy, relax, there is no rush. Then i let myself start enjoying hammering, recovering while a riding, repeat as many times as the day allows you. Give thanks, sleep, repeat as needed. Ride more. Know your/you're love.
You shouldn't have combined heat training with an FTP test.
Performance and motivation are way better in the fresh air.
But you're also old. 😅
I remember a Connor who could maintain 440 watts for almost 45 minutes, with a wig and a helmet on his head.
But you were still a pro then AND: younger, weren't you?
That makes me feel a lot better. Even GCN presenters are only human.Great video!!!
And you still are an animal!!!
For us middle age plus riders who started later in life, 405W is a HUGE number for an FTP. I couldn't do that for 5 minutes. lol
I don’t think any bit of data is outdated until there is something that disproves it definitively. I think that there should be nuance in everything.
It’s very good for measuring the 20 minute races. 😂
Maths @GCN!!!!!!
FTP = 20 min average MULTIPLIED BY 95%
What a good effort man! Too much power 💪🏼! Was it on ERG mode?
Great video. I do think more needs to be said about weight and its relationship to power. An FTP of 408 for someone of Connor's weight (I assume over 80kg) is different to someone with 350w ftp who is 10kg less. Would have been nice to think about the value of Watts per kg more. I notice they still discuss this a lot on the world tour. E.g. They'll talk about how Jonas or Pog are doing 7watts per kg.
One has to have some kind of standard to use in order to set training zones, and FTP as a concept is a relatively convenient and easy way to do for most riders. Likely the best way to set training zones is via blood lactate testing, and I think a lot of pros use that. But for amateur cyclists, most are not going to be able to test blood lactate on a regular basis, so, enter an FTP estimate. I find a 20 minute FTP test result a pretty good indicator of where I am at as an estimate, and I set my training zones via that. I also understand it is only an estimate, and I pay attention to both HR and PE as it relates to power on every ride. All three are important, and understanding one's own bodies responses to training impetus and adjusting efforts accordingly is important, as it is to pay attention to outside factors (environmental conditions, especially heat).
Thank you, I feel much better now! I have never tried, but I always thought that I wouldn't be able to keep my FTP for an hour, so I thought I had a problem with durability. I know now that maybe it isn't true...Doesn't change a thing in my (low) performance, but as I said I feel better :)
Damn, I was rooting for Conor to beat Si's prediction. But, the old blue was spot on!
Personally I think this is such a valuable Video 👏 I for one have had times where I have placed far too much of my perceived ability as a cyclist on my FTP. I have also allowed myself to feel as if others judge how good I am depending on the average watts shown on a Strava Activity. Thankfully I'm in a way better place with it all now, but your worth and ability as a cyclist is far far greater than the arbitrary numbers we attach to ourselves.
Because of TrainingPeaks, my coach simply redefined FTP and zones. His definition of threshold exists but measured differently. But he defines my zones more personally
I think Si psyched you out 😅
Ah not File Transfer Protocol... Thanks for clearing that up, I was confused.
I didn’t read every single comment in this thread, but in case I missed it, it feels as though everyone should be reminded:
When Connor first became a presenter on GCN, he held 440 W for over 40 minutes, attempting to replicate the power that Bradley Wiggins did to set the our record.
it's just an indicator to tailor for an individual workout based on the fitness of the person
Watching Conor ride to me a fascination of sorts. I am over 6 feet tall not particularly flexible and therefore CdA is forefront to my thinking when considering my FTP relative to speed I can sustain on the bike.
For those interested, here is the Power versus speed equation and of course, many if not most know that power is proportional to the cube of velocity:
𝑃 =1/2 ⋅ 𝜌 ⋅ 𝐶𝑑𝐴 ⋅ v^3
Many of us have raced against small riders who punch a very small hole in the wind. Very fast small riders. They ride real little bikes with their torsos flat to the top tube. They also don't weigh much and climb well aka W/kg. As an engineer, when I look at a rider on a bike, I find myself crunching the rider's equation in my head. Yes, power matters, but I think in terms of Power relative to CdA and also speaking of equations, most know the Power equation:
P = Torque X RPM whereby Torque = Pedal Force X Crank length.
When watching Conor ride aside from all the air he catches on the bike, I am also struck by how low his RPM (cadence) is to generate the considerable power he does. I can't help but think he maybe able to sustain a higher FTP through a higher cadence. I know for me, it would be physically impossible to sustain the power he does at the cadence he rides.
To me FTP needs to be taken in context and why the PhD Analyst in the video looks at other numbers.
But what he didn't speak to is the elephant in the room which is CdA. The goal of power or sustained power is speed of course and in the context of speed, CdA is proportional to power as the above equation reflects. Each metric has equivalent weighting.
Many of us know a small rider who has a sub or close to 300w FTP who can keep up with monsters with their close to 400w FTP. This is because CdA is as important as Power.
Lastly, outside of functional threshold power, one can also consider why CdA matters so much for sprinting. Arguably, Mark Cavendish is the greatest sprinter of all time who likely put out the least amount of power among elite sprinters. He was called Manx Missile for a reason.
HR drift is a thing even on normal rides, but watching his HR keep climbing so quickly I knew his real FTP was a chunk lower. Understanding the complex mix of power output, HR, energy sources, stress levels, rest all play their part for the pure test of performance. Skill can overcome a lot of excessive fitness in real world complex environments, I would argue many normal riders would benefit more from learning bike skills and handling. Like the one coach said, having a high FTP means nothing if you can't ride well or crash out.
Sorry but isn't the FTP calculation was 20 min all out average power multiplied by 95% instead of divided?
Yes
more like multiplied by 0,95
Yes
The original FTP test was designed to be 60 minutes long, as it represents the maximum power a cyclist can sustain for one hour. The 20-minute test is a more practical alternative, where the average power is multiplied by 0.95 to estimate FTP. However, this can still overestimate true one-hour power, especially for amateur riders who struggle with longer sustained efforts.
It's 95% of 20min, you subtract 5% as a way to predict that 5% would be the decrease to sustain 1hr. I believe here's the caveat, I don't know any rider who can sustain their FTP correctly measured (95% of 20min) for the hour. There's also a huge discussion that the hour isn't in fact an hour, more like 45 min. I think critical power works way better.
Really good video, I use FTP as a guide, I also track my 1& 5min power too. I like FTP and I can calculate my w/kg from this and ride mountains or other long climbs focused on that which I find a better way to pace myself and get the most out of myself.
People always forget that you're supposed to do a 5 minute max effort before a 20 minute FTP test so that your anaerobic contribution to the 20 minute test won't inflate the result.
Thanks Connor, very insightful! I think it makes sense, FTP is a good ballpark measure to set training zones for amateurs, but it is not as accurate as Lactate testing in a lab. And best 60min power doesnt say anything about your sprint. So it makes sense the pros don't use it much.
This one sentence is key: in to complete, not to compete.
So FTP is perfectly fine for me.
I had a hill that I would use to test if I was race fit. It was steep and long enough. A true test of strength and cardiovascular fitness.
What Colby Pearce says is actually very interesting. This triangle of power output, heart rate stats and perceived exertion with perceived exertion being the most important, after the other two feed information to it. Does it mean that for instance when an athlete puts out a high power number but has ''bad'' heart rate stats but also has low perceived exertion it indicates he/she is capable of much more if good sleep, less stress -> better heart rate are sought for this athlete?
I have and will use FTP as a tool to scale my training efforts. I think the most important note is to relate to FTP just as a training metric - always present, but not a goal or an absolute holy grail to be discovered. I did a 1hr effort at 95% FTP last week - didn't die, but definitely had to fight myself through most of it.
I'll try the Grade sometime when I pluck up the courage.
Give it a go and let us know how it went!
Sterling effort!
I'm a less talented rider, with an ftp of only 280W and I'll never try to test that for one hour 😮. Riding at FTP is painful and I can only inflict this to myself if it is for a stage win on a Grand Tour. I use FTP only as a calibration number for the work-outs and to discuss with fellow racers at the pub.
Congrats for your performance anyway!
For most amateur cyclists you should multiply the 20 min effort by 0,85-0,90.
just do the hour test, then it is 100 % accurate and you are training your body to withstand a longer sustained effort. Very important for time triallists and break aways
Or better still, just get out and ride; FTP means very little unless you race at a high level........
@Andy_ATB I do. I have also suffered a few serious injuries, riding in bad weather, so over the winter my Tacx trainer is a safer option and probably a better base training tool than riding in the winter, for next season.
I thought the FTP 20 minute protocol had some denting efforts in warm-up to reduce likely output to place it near to T60 efforts. 400W had once been my 4 minute interval power, but not any more....
The like is just for Conor's struggle
403w at 26:30 is insane. I did 239w for 3 mins x 4 rounds and I was dead after. TrainerRoad says my FTP is 240w which I can NOT hold for an hour. Or even 20 mins. If I could hold 200w for an hour, I'd be talking to my wife about LA 2028 lol. chapeau, Conor.
Varies. At times I’ve been able to hold my FTP for 70 minutes but mostly it’s around 45
Good effort Conor 👍
The one thing that you didn't talk about is your fitness the day of your test. I don't think you tapered well enough to maximize your performance for that test. You could have probably lasted an extra 5-15 mins
I think Colby is spot on!
Not going to even attempt to compare my power to Connor's, but it is interesting how similar his heart rate is to mine for what I perceive as a "this sucks, but I can hold it for an hour" effort, and then turns out it was really only something I could hold for half an hour.
Great video. I always enjoy seeing Conor suffer 🤣
Perhaps Conor's mistake was only doing ~12min flat out efforts and using Zwift to estimate his FTP. The reality that in a longer effort he could only hold that number for 26mins (as Simon predicted) is telling.
FTP is a software model with 5 parameters, which is the lovechild of the 3 parameter Critical Power model (in the video the 2 parameter version was mentioned) and Riegel's Fatigue Factor. You need much more than 1 test (20 min) and if you do use an oversimplification (x% of 20 min power) you get a rough estimate. The ramp test is stupid.
The latest version of FTP, which includes iLevels and different phenotypes is pretty accurate, however your Time To Exhaustion at FTP (TTE) can be anywhere between 30 and 60 min, or even 20-70min... or in extreme cases 80+ minutes.
So yes - dumbing down FTP to one parameter should be frowned upon. Use the full model, if you want accuracy
hats off great effort! however must admit Im disappointed that you stopped. the point is max hour power, right? ok, next video....actual hour power! FWIW I have no idea my FTP but after a hard hour on Zwift (attacks, rests etc) I tend to have just about 250w. curious what your steady hour power might be based on a training FTP number.
Might be a bit of a weird question.
Rate of perceived exertion when it comes to especially intervals:
Shall I rate the most felt intensity during the most brutal interval or estimate an average RPE of the whole workout?
Example.
Let's say I cycle 2 hours in zone 2 and rate it RPE 3. Inserting a few Sprint intervals to the first 30 minutes, the following 90min ride in zone 2 will feel more like RPE 4 to 5 due to fatigue.
The Sprints would be rated RPE 10, towards the end of the workout it feels more like RPE 5, although the watts on the majority of the workout sit comfortably in zone 2, RPE 3.
How to rate RPE correctly?
Training to increase FTP has to be "pushed up" from below by exercising at a slightly lower intensity rather than trying to "pull it up" by training at a higher intensity than FTP.