# Measuring FTP on a climb



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

I recently purchased a Power Meter and I would like to find my FTP.

Finding a flat section of road where I can go all out for 30 minutes (per Friel) w/out interruptions is going to be pretty hard around here.

Luckily, I do have have plenty of mountain roads in the area that I can ride uninterrupted for miles and miles.

One such road is a 9.2 mile climb with a 5% avg grade (gain is 2,432ft):

https://www.strava.com/segments/1288359

Is it ideal to use a segment such as the above to measure my FTP?
Are there drawbacks to measuring FTP on a climb? If so, what are they?

For reference, I can do the above climb in 55mins (10mph) with my HR in Z4 for the entire duration (177 bpm avg). Z5 starts at 181bpm for me.


Thanks in advance!


----------



## crowaan (Aug 13, 2013)

Only downside is that you will likely get a higher number doing it on a climb than doing it on a flat road. The climb will allow you to keep pretty consistently high power on the pedals while a "flat" road will have slight downhills that will cause moments of lower power. I would go with the climb since it would probably be a more accurate representation of your FTP.

Also 20 minute power minus 5% (Allen and Coggan) is a fine calculation.


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

Thanks for the feedback Crowaan. I actually ordered the Allen and Coggan book so I'll be reading that shortly.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

If you're already doing it, AP for 55 min all out is a better measure of FTP than .95 * 20 min AP.

The latter makes an assumption about your power profile.


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

Thanks Eric. 

The climb I listed above puts me very close to the 60min mark (60min TT effort if you will) so I was hoping to use that as my gauge and get the best FTP measure I can.

The avg grade is such that I can turn the pedals at a nice rhythm (82rpm avg on my last attempt) and since it's a climb it removes any chance of coasting I may have.

P.S.

What does AP stand for? Average Power? Apple Pie?


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

crowaan said:


> Only downside is that you will likely get a higher number doing it on a climb than doing it on a flat road.


How is that a downside? if your body can put out that power, it can put out that power.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

ericm979 said:


> If you're already doing it, AP for 55 min all out is a better measure of FTP than .95 * 20 min AP.
> 
> The latter makes an assumption about your power profile.


I would agree IF you can keep focused on producing maximum sustainable power that long. Most people have a hard enough time staying fully engaged in a 20 minute power test. 

The mountain should be great as long as it's not so steep you end up having to drop your cadence below what it would normally be on the road. I wouldn't think a 5% grade would do that for many folks, but might for quite a few too depending on the crank and cassette being used. (An 11/21 with standard crank with a 5% grad as an example)


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

Srode said:


> I would agree IF you can keep focused on producing maximum sustainable power that long. Most people have a hard enough time staying fully engaged in a 20 minute power test.
> 
> The mountain should be great as long as it's not so steep you end up having to drop your cadence below what it would normally be on the road. I wouldn't think a 5% grade would do that for many folks, but might for quite a few too depending on the crank and cassette being used. (An 11/21 with standard crank with a 5% grad as an example)


My avg cadence over the last 6 months is 78 rpm. On the climb I listed above I was able to maintain an avg of 82 rpm (a week ago). My bike has a compact crank with an with an 11-26 cassette.

I was mostly on the 34x23 combo for most of the climb. A few sections I was able to do 34x21 and in others I had to drop to 34x26.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

deviousalex said:


> How is that a downside? if your body can put out that power, it can put out that power.


Not a downside per se but, climbing you can exert a more constant force which can be hard to reproduce on the flats and nearly impossible on downgrades for prolonged periods of time. So, the downfall is when you train on the flats and try and hit target power you just have to keep in mind target might be a touch less. 

There has got to be a technical term for all this which I don't have. Just years of experience. And what I've experienced is that I can work hard (RPE) to reach target, not get there with the power, think I'm cooked and stop the interval sesh prematurely. In reality I was pushing good power and should have continued. It's not a lot of watts but, it's enough to make you think you are doing something wrong...hard to explain.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Srode said:


> I would agree IF you can keep focused on producing maximum sustainable power that long. Most people have a hard enough time staying fully engaged in a 20 minute power test.


yea, a 1 hour TT is kind of unpleasant. That's why most people do the 20 min * .95 test.
But it sounded like the OP was doing the full hour (or 55 minutes, close enough).

AP = average power.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I have a different FTP on climbs than I do on the flats (or more specifically, on the TT bike on the flats). 

Both are valuable and I use both for training, ie, if I am doing FTP on hills I use the hill number and if I am doing flat TT work I use the flats number.


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

Thanks for the feedback!

Good info on the climbing vs. flat FTP. That's not something I had considered.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

I know from experience that 95% of 20 minute power overestimates my FTP significantly. Even 90% might be optimistic.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Fireform said:


> I know from experience that 95% of 20 minute power overestimates my FTP significantly. Even 90% might be optimistic.


We probably don't have the same power profile, but I've done FTP tests and came out to an FTP of 290 then had races where I've had an NP of 270 and those lasted 2.5 hours.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

deviousalex said:


> We probably don't have the same power profile, but I've done FTP tests and came out to an FTP of 290 then had races where I've had an NP of 270 and those lasted 2.5 hours.


I'm sure we do have different profiles. The 95% formula is a one size fits all thing, and it's not always right.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

ericm979 said:


> yea, a 1 hour TT is kind of unpleasant. That's why most people do the 20 min * .95 test.
> But it sounded like the OP was doing the full hour (or 55 minutes, close enough).
> 
> AP = average power.


https://connect.garmin.com/modern/#activity/832645066

It hurt more than a little.


----------



## Poncharelli (May 7, 2006)

FTP testing gives an estimate. Then you extrapolate zones for your workouts, which again are estimates. 

This past weekend I was scheduled for 10X10 minute tempo intervals, at the end of a long training week after several heavy weeks. Even though my tempo zone is from 200-240W, I still had to adjust a bit. I think my best 10 min was 228W on a long hill, but the rest were not as good, just above 200W. Fatigue and higher elevation (about 3000 feet higher than I'm used to) played a factor. 

My point is that we seem to strive for so much exactness, but wind up really playing things by feel. With the training zones being so wide, there is definitely some room to adjust.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

One advantage to using a climb for your FTP test is that you can check your PM using one of the on line calculators (if you have accurate weight for you and the bike).

The model used is most accurate on a steady steep climb with no wind, least accurate on flat ground.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

I have managed essentially the same effect here in the flatlands by doing my power test into a headwind. Plowing into a steady headwind for 20 minutes is not very different from climbing.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Poncharelli said:


> This past weekend I was scheduled for 10X10 minute tempo intervals, at the end of a long training week after several heavy weeks. Even though my tempo zone is from 200-240W, I still had to adjust a bit. I think my best 10 min was 228W on a long hill, but the rest were not as good, just above 200W. .


Couldn't it just be that 100 minutes of tempo is a lot for any single ride?


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Fireform said:


> I have managed essentially the same effect here in the flatlands by doing my power test into a headwind. Plowing into a steady headwind for 20 minutes is not very different from climbing.


If your position on the bike is the same I agree. If you are climbing relatively steep stuff on the tops way back in the saddle v. low front end and on the nose on the flats into the wind then I have found it super difficult to hold high power. Interestingly, when it's a tailwind and my cadence is higher I am able to hold really good power on the flats. Maybe I'm full of it but, it's what I've noticed over the years. Something about being able to stay on top of the gears I guess. Wind=gusts=micro time periods of less power due to gearing IME. I can't really explain the tailwind thing other than I am usually running a higher cadence=quicker to shift=easier to keep power higher...Just guessing to be honest.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

deviousalex said:


> Couldn't it just be that 100 minutes of tempo is a lot for any single ride?


I don't think so and I'm nobody special.

edit: just wanted to say it would be tough and didn't want to sound like a tool. Honestly I prefer to do a lot longer tempo work and go way higher for 10 minutes. For example 3X30's. Or just try and hold 90 minutes all in one big block...


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I would agree that wind gusts can prevent a perfectly steady output just as most climbs don't have a steady gradient.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

True. Just reaching for why it's easier to hold higher power longer on climbs. Maybe it's more how muscle groups engage...again, i don't really know.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

woodys737 said:


> True. Just reaching for why it's easier to hold higher power longer on climbs. Maybe it's more how muscle groups engage...again, i don't really know.


I have always noticed that. I can't seem to sustain the watts into a headwind that I can sustain on a climb.


----------



## Poncharelli (May 7, 2006)

woodys737 said:


> If your position on the bike is the same I agree. If you are climbing relatively steep stuff on the tops way back in the saddle v. low front end and on the nose on the flats into the wind then I have found it super difficult to hold high power. Interestingly, when it's a tailwind and my cadence is higher I am able to hold really good power on the flats. Maybe I'm full of it but, it's what I've noticed over the years. Something about being able to stay on top of the gears I guess. Wind=gusts=micro time periods of less power due to gearing IME. I can't really explain the tailwind thing other than I am usually running a higher cadence=quicker to shift=easier to keep power higher...Just guessing to be honest.


My experience has been real similar. Tail winds are better for holding power, for me as well. But it seems in general that we all get used to what we ride the most. This year, because of the workouts coach is having me do (like those 10X10s), they seem more conducive for flat roads. Makes sense I told him all I care about is Crit Nationals (you coming up again?) to lead into Cross season. 

Weekend before rode with couple strong buds I usually climb well with and really had trouble holding on. Just not used to hills. I think the flat workouts have also made me a little bigger; about 5 pounds heavier than last year.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Poncharelli said:


> My experience has been real similar. Tail winds are better for holding power, for me as well. But it seems in general that we all get used to what we ride the most. This year, because of the workouts coach is having me do (like those 10X10s), they seem more conducive for flat roads. Makes sense I told him all I care about is Crit Nationals (you coming up again?) to lead into Cross season.
> 
> Weekend before rode with couple strong buds I usually climb well with and really had trouble holding on. Just not used to hills. I think the flat workouts have also made me a little bigger; about 5 pounds heavier than last year.


I am racing again this year. Just the crit though. I have been racing in Socal a lot more to help prep. Also, it kills me not to do the road race but, I think if I want to do ok in the crit I need to come in super fresh as I'm just not good enough to ride at that intensity the second day...

Interesting about the weight. I'm the same and riding much stronger right now. i don't think it's the weight though. I've cut back on the volume this summer and focusing more on rest. As in sleep. Waking at 4am to beat the heat, work and fam is just too much. The extra rest is really making a difference IMO.


----------



## Poncharelli (May 7, 2006)

woodys737 said:


> I am racing again this year. Just the crit though. I have been racing in Socal a lot more to help prep. Also, it kills me not to do the road race but, I think if I want to do ok in the crit I need to come in super fresh as I'm just not good enough to ride at that intensity the second day...
> 
> Interesting about the weight. I'm the same and riding much stronger right now. i don't think it's the weight though. I've cut back on the volume this summer and focusing more on rest. As in sleep. Waking at 4am to beat the heat, work and fam is just too much. The extra rest is really making a difference IMO.


That's awesome! You did a lot better than me last year; my goal is just to hold on this time. I tell ya, those SoCal dudes kill those crits, so that will be some great training. 

With the big families here in Utah, racing pretty much dies when the kids get out of school. Races in the spring will have 300-400 racers, and now we'll have 50-100 total. So weekend crits are far and few in between. And there's no more weekday crits in Ogden. 

I have a schedule conflict with the RR which is good, because that race was way less fun than the crit.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Poncharelli said:


> That's awesome! You did a lot better than me last year; my goal is just to hold on this time. I tell ya, those SoCal dudes kill those crits, so that will be some great training.
> 
> With the big families here in Utah, racing pretty much dies when the kids get out of school. Races in the spring will have 300-400 racers, and now we'll have 50-100 total. So weekend crits are far and few in between. And there's no more weekday crits in Ogden.
> 
> I have a schedule conflict with the RR which is good, because that race was way less fun than the crit.


Yes I think the difference is actually rather small between the top number of guys. 1-2% maybe? But that makes the difference in the end. What has helped me (and why I wanted to race so many socal events) is to work on positioning and to get to know who's who. Now that I know I can be in there (friggin got on the podium a couple times) my confidence is much better which has a really strange affect. I think I'm much less anxious now and therefore save more energy. 

Find me before the start. You've got me dialed and my kit is mostly silver with green accents...

edit: sorry for the thread creep. One FTP piece of advise for the OP or anyone obsessing about it: FTP is just a piece of the puzzle in crit and even flatter road races. Knowing strength, limiters, who's who, keeping position can all result in a finish better than a guy with a much superior FTP. I'm proof of that.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

woodys737 said:


> If your position on the bike is the same I agree. If you are climbing relatively steep stuff on the tops way back in the saddle v. low front end and on the nose on the flats into the wind then I have found it super difficult to hold high power. Interestingly, when it's a tailwind and my cadence is higher I am able to hold really good power on the flats. Maybe I'm full of it but, it's what I've noticed over the years. Something about being able to stay on top of the gears I guess. Wind=gusts=micro time periods of less power due to gearing IME. I can't really explain the tailwind thing other than I am usually running a higher cadence=quicker to shift=easier to keep power higher...Just guessing to be honest.


It's a mystery to me too. I can also hold similar power in a headwind and on a climb. But why not a tailwind...or no wind at all? 


I need to improve here. The TT in a local race series is an out and back: 1-2% climb followed by a 1-2% descent. I am convinced that it is a matter of hard work and I'm striving to improve my consistent power output up hills, down hills, and in all sorts of wind.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Into the wind I am in the drops and trying to hold my upper body down so I am less of a sail. On climbs I'm not worried about aero so I can sit up. I think that's part of the difference.... a simular but lesser effect than going from road bike to TT bike.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Today I did three 10 minute repeats on the TT bike at 320 watts. I just couldn't keep steady power any higher. It was hard. 

Just a few months ago I pushed 372 watts up a 10 minute climb.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

Local Hero said:


> Today I did three 10 minute repeats on the TT bike at 320 watts. I just couldn't keep steady power any higher. It was hard.
> 
> Just a few months ago I pushed 372 watts up a 10 minute climb.


I'm very similar. I was told I need to ride the TT bike a whole lot more to narrow that gap. Instead of a 10%+ difference, it should be closer to 3-4% or less.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

"Area for improvement"


----------



## dirk1978 (Aug 31, 2015)

I'm trying to work out my FTP from a climb I did fairly recently.

I've worked out that my weight is 80kg, the bike was 11kg, it was this segment https://www.strava.com/segments/9476589 and I did it in 22:55.

Using Bike Calculator I work it out to be 260w.

So if I take 20 mins at 260w * 0.95 = 247w. Assuming I can push a bit harder than that as it was a mass participation ride and I had lots of traffic + already done 60 miles etc. can I confidently say that at that time my FTP was 250w?

If so, I've got a lot faster since then + I could quite easily lose 10kg of weight. If I got my FTP to 300w and lost 10kg, that'd be 4.2w/kg - how does that compare to others?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

dirk1978 said:


> I'm trying to work out my FTP from a climb I did fairly recently.
> 
> I've worked out that my weight is 80kg, the bike was 11kg, it was this segment https://www.strava.com/segments/9476589 and I did it in 22:55.
> 
> ...


I am not sure that I completely trust the numbers from strava and the bike calculator, and then an estimate on what could have happened on top of that. It is difficult to control all the variables. 

The only way you will really know your FTP is to use a powermeter. You can do power tests or just ride and race around all year, then use a program to estimate your FTP based on your best efforts. 

Strava premium gives some good info. I don't have a powertap on my race wheels but use power in training and during TTs. At 160-165lbs, this is what I cranked out in 2015: 











Several podiums but I still have not won a real race this year.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

dirk1978 said:


> If so, I've got a lot faster since then + I could quite easily lose 10kg of weight. If I got my FTP to 300w and lost 10kg, that'd be 4.2w/kg - how does that compare to others?


Virtual d*ck length competition begin!

ewang.jpg Photo by dr_pete177 | Photobucket


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

dirk1978 said:


> So if I take 20 mins at 260w * 0.95 = 247w. Assuming I can push a bit harder than that as it was a mass participation ride and I had lots of traffic + already done 60 miles etc. can I confidently say that at that time my FTP was 250w?
> 
> If so, I've got a lot faster since then + I could quite easily lose 10kg of weight. If I got my FTP to 300w and lost 10kg, that'd be 4.2w/kg - how does that compare to others?



No, you can confidently say nothing about your ftp. Besides the huge problem with 20 mins * .95, there's the even more massive problem of only plugging in a few of many necessary numbers. You're missing far too many variables to give you an accurate power number for the climb itself. 

Just get a powermeter if you want to do power. Besides, knowing your ftp without actually training with a powermeter is 100% pointless. What are you going to do with that number anyway?


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

dirk1978 said:


> If I got my FTP to 300w and lost 10kg, that'd be 4.2w/kg - how does that compare to others?


Those are huge, huge ifs. 

And it doesn't. You'd still get dropped by a good climber, get smoked by a good sprinter, and get ridden off the back in a gutter by a good rider, period. 

FTP doesn't mean anything on its own. You could push 5 w/kg and still get dropped in decent races if you don't know what on Earth you're doing.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

Local Hero said:


> Strava premium gives some good info. I don't have a powertap on my race wheels but use power in training and during TTs. At 160-165lbs, this is what I cranked out in 2015:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Case in point. 

He has better numbers than me but I'm cat 1 with multiple wins and 20 podiums this year. I haven't even cracked 1200w in my last few races but since I was always in the break, I still podiumed. 'Cause bike racing is bike racing.

Edited: Actually, my 1 and 5 min power are quite a bit higher, but the rest of those numbers are really good!


----------



## dirk1978 (Aug 31, 2015)

pedalbiker said:


> Those are huge, huge ifs.
> 
> And it doesn't. You'd still get dropped by a good climber, get smoked by a good sprinter, and get ridden off the back in a gutter by a good rider, period.
> 
> FTP doesn't mean anything on its own. You could push 5 w/kg and still get dropped in decent races if you don't know what on Earth you're doing.


Really? 1 is a medium if, because getting to 300w FTP is surely achievable for most people with enough training? The other is just losing 10kg, which I could easily do from just not eating all the crap I currently do.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

dirk1978 said:


> Really? 1 is a medium if, because getting to 300w FTP is surely achievable for most people with enough training? The other is just losing 10kg, which I could easily do from just not eating all the crap I currently do.



Really. 

In all seriousness and genuinely not trying to be a smartass: Don't talk about it. Go do it. Then come back and say "I told you so". I'll be the first to congratulate you. 

But it always sounds easy to lose another kg here or there and boost your ftp another few percentage points. Reality is a different story.


----------



## dirk1978 (Aug 31, 2015)

pedalbiker said:


> Really.
> 
> In all seriousness and genuinely not trying to be a smartass: Don't talk about it. Go do it. Then come back and say "I told you so". I'll be the first to congratulate you.
> 
> But it always sounds easy to lose another kg here or there and boost your ftp another few percentage points. Reality is a different story.


Same as most things, the whole enjoyment is the journey of self improvement. It doesn't really matter where I end up before my body inevitably won't give any more improvements, it's all about the challenge. I'll never get to any kind of level which would make any difference to anything, but again, that's secondary.
Thanks for the advice. I'll see how I go.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

First, lifting your FTP from 250 to 300 watts is no minor task. Depending on how effectively you train that could take years. 

Second, imo 95% of your max 20 minute power is very optimistic. My own real world FTP is 90% of my 20 minute power, if that. 

Third, power is necessary but not sufficient to win. Guys with big numbers get beat all the time by guys with better racecraft.


----------



## Got Time (Jan 23, 2009)

300W FTP? I can only dream of that...
I guess I'm not "most people" :-(


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Fireform said:


> First, lifting your FTP from 250 to 300 watts is no minor task. Depending on how effectively you train that could take years.
> 
> Second, imo 95% of your max 20 minute power is very optimistic. My own real world FTP is 90% of my 20 minute power, if that.
> 
> Third, power is necessary but not sufficient to win. Guys with big numbers get beat all the time by guys with better racecraft.


I agree with all three points. On the last one, there are many reasons why a guy with above average numbers has average results. I personally have a lot of excuses. This season I raced for a teammate a lot. And my three best results this year were second place finishes to national champions (my state is teaming with national champs and former pros). I have to remember these things to stop from crying myself to sleep at night.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

dirk1978 said:


> So if I take 20 mins at 260w * 0.95 = 247w. Assuming I can push a bit harder than that as it was a mass participation ride and I had lots of traffic + already done 60 miles etc. can I confidently say that at that time my FTP was 250w?


You're taking calculated data from a climb where you didn't go all out and had already ridden 60 miles, then assuming that your FTP matches the 95% of 20min power, then adding a fudge factor since you didn't do the proper test protocol. There's a lot of assumptions and guesses in there. I could confidently say your ftp was probably between 300 and 225.



dirk1978 said:


> If so, I've got a lot faster since then + I could quite easily lose 10kg of weight. If I got my FTP to 300w and lost 10kg, that'd be 4.2w/kg - how does that compare to others?


Other who? It depends on who you are measuring yourself against. 4.2w/kg would be decent in masters climbing races in NorCal but won't get you many wins (we have a lot of national and world masters champs here). If you're doing regular races rather than climbing races, w/kg is not as important. On level ground it's w/aero drag, and of course your power profile has a lot to do with how well you do in races. A rider who can do 4.2w/kg and can sprint will do much better than the same w/kg with no sprint.


----------



## 41ants (Jul 24, 2007)

For true ftp, wouldn't the poster need more road to do an actual 60min test? It seems the formulas for 20 min efforts are just estimates. Granted, in FL, our local RR series has some TT's are relatively short so I do see some value in the 20 min test. However, for our state championship the TT is a 40K and I assume for nationals it is probably about the same distance. In a 40K TT I am not going to assume that I can sit at 375 without cracking.

Unfortunately for me the only one hour climb I did this year was at oramm on my mountain bike without power. So, I still have to go out find a segment of road or suffer for 60min on the trainer.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

41ants said:


> For true ftp, wouldn't the poster need more road to do an actual 60min test? It seems the formulas for 20 min efforts are just estimates. Granted, in FL, our local RR series has some TT's are relatively short so I do see some value in the 20 min test. However, for our state championship the TT is a 40K and I assume for nationals it is probably about the same distance. In a 40K TT I am not going to assume that I can sit at 375 without cracking.
> 
> Unfortunately for me the only one hour climb I did this year was at oramm on my mountain bike without power. So, I still have to go out find a segment of road or suffer for 60min on the trainer.


By definition yes but as you wrote and other coaches have stated a power metric is really all about how it relates to you. For example, I'm doing shorter races and criteriums right now. My 30 minute power seems to be a better predictor of general fitness than 60 minutes for sure. It's just way easier to repeat and see trends. I can't even think where I could get 60 minutes of road to do a good repeatable test that I didn't have to drive to get to.

If I were doing long climbs/races or ironman type rides then 60 minute power would be much more important to track I would think...jmo


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

And I actually think that high 5 min power is critical for criterium racing. You have to bury yourself for 5 minutes for the break to stick. If you are going to bridge, it will have to be 5 minutes or less. And to stay up front on the final two laps is a 5 minute effort.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Local Hero said:


> And I actually think that high 5 min power is critical for criterium racing. You have to bury yourself for 5 minutes for the break to stick. If you are going to bridge, it will have to be 5 minutes or less. And to stay up front on the final two laps is a 5 minute effort.


Absolutely. I do pay attention to the shorter metrics more than anything right now. How many times I can go waaaay deep and still hold the 1-3-5 minute power numbers has been a hard lesson to learn. Better fitness=more matches with close to the same power I think. Still trying to figure myself out!:mad2: Blown many a race thinking I could recover only to not have sh!t for the last lap...


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

For what it's worth.

My best 20min power is 266watts.

266x.95%=252watts

My 60min FTP (53min to be exact) 250watts.

Based on the above the 20min*.95 is pretty accurate for me.


----------



## 41ants (Jul 24, 2007)

woodys737 said:


> By definition yes but as you wrote and other coaches have stated a power metric is really all about how it relates to you. For example, I'm doing shorter races and criteriums right now. My 30 minute power seems to be a better predictor of general fitness than 60 minutes for sure. It's just way easier to repeat and see trends. I can't even think where I could get 60 minutes of road to do a good repeatable test that I didn't have to drive to get to.
> 
> If I were doing long climbs/races or ironman type rides then 60 minute power would be much more important to track I would think...jmo


Agree. Most of my events this past year have been relatively short, which is reflected in my power graph. I did quite a bit of 20 - 25 min TT, but nothing significantly at the 60min mark and you can see the big drop. My focus now is trying to increase my 1 and 2 min power to help out with crits and some xc events.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

you can always check the box for estimated FTP


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

Local Hero said:


> you can always check the box for estimated FTP


Yes - checking the box gives me 251.

I guess I've improved by 1 watt in one month...woot! :smilewinkgrin:


----------

