Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Does the rider with the best 20 min power to weight ratio win the race?

7K views 34 replies 16 participants last post by  twobigwheels 
#1 ·
When first getting involved with mtb racing an expert/elite told me that the racer with the best 20 min power/weight ratio (ftp/weight) wins the race.

I guess that makes sense to me, event though mtb racing is not a steady 'push' like a time trial, and there are skills involved, etc. that could make a difference - that you want a 'big engine'.

I guess my question is, has anyone with access to multiple power profiles seen where this is not true - OR that 1m or 5m power makes more of a difference? (putting things aside like a seasoned roadie's first mtb season where it would be an obvious case of lack of skills)
https://www.google.com/search?q=pow...Fforums%2Fviewtopic.php%3Fp%3D1457435;567;714

IF it is true, shouldn't we spend majority of our training trying to raise our ftp?
 
#2 ·
Generally speaking, raising your FTP also helps with shorter efforts, to a point. You will have more repeatability with shorter efforts.

Essentially, the fitter you are, the faster you'll recover from the shorter efforts. You might not be the first guy up the first 1-2min hill, but you'll be able to hit the next 10 of them at the same pace, and drive hard on the flats, instead of fading away.
 
#4 ·
I am going with "yes"... with a few assumptions.

>>> Every racer in the race has the same descending skills
>>> Every racer is on the same weight bike with the same tires

An XC race is a time trial I suppose. If we were talking road racing or a crit, as Lee Corso would say... not so fast...
 
#6 ·
I would say no within .5 W/kg. Another words, a rider with 3.5 w/kg can match a rider with 4.0 W/kg due to other factors: skills, repeatability, punch power, course efficiency, mental toughness, superior endurance, course knowledgability, etc., etc., etc.

But 1.0 w/kg difference becomes a bit insurmountable (4.5 vs. 3.5 for example).

I'm one of those guys who does pretty decent despite pretty low P/W (3.4-3.7, depending on time of year) for a Cat 1. I believe that my repeatability, punch, course efficiency (no brakes!!), and endurance is usually better than most others with similar P/W.
 
#7 ·
On the twisty, woodland singletracks I generally race on, I'd say bike handling skills and course knowledge are a major deciding factor. I'm a good climber on steady hills but get dropped rapidly on the flat/descents.
I'm training my ability to ride fast down rooty, loamy tracks at the moment and hope it makes a significant improvement in my placings. Am also running a Dirty Dan 2.0 up front even in the dry to give me more grip on soft corners.
If it was totally about power then I'd just do time trials instead!
 
#8 ·
There were a couple races where I beat a Cat 2 roadie just starting out in mountain biking. I had seen pictures that he podiumed in road racing last year in fairly big races. I am just a lowly mid-pack CAT 2 mountain biker and when in the non-technical sectioned flats he just flew by. On the downhills I would pass him up and the rooty uphills had him stumped as well.

So yes, given all things equal. The person who has the best 20 minute power is going to win. However, a good chunk of it is technical ability and flow.

I have a belief that most beginner mountain bikers go as slow as they do mostly because they ride their brakes the whole time and not because of their w/kg.
 
#9 ·
Yes and no. I ride road with guys with higher ftp's than me on occasion, but they are not necessarily always faster than me on mtb race day. This is only true if we have similar ftps, yet my bike handling skills is superior to theirs.

Some guys lose a ton of time because they can't descend well..

Having said this, I would trade a some of my bike handling skills for a little more ftp...haha.

**Oops...looks like tooclose just said this..
 
#10 ·
I think what you are try to ask is if CP20 is the best predictor of race performance. Obviously technical, mental, tactical, and equipment choice(although to a rather limited extent) is going to play a significant component in race results.

Ultimately for the fitness side of racing the person with greatest aerobic engine is going to be fastest. It doesn't take 20 minutes to find out who has biggest aerobic engine, 6 minutes is enough.

EDIT:

BTW from my experience with elite racer the fastest racers have the highest FTP. The guy with an FTP of 5.3 beats the guy with an FTP 5.2, who solidly beats the guy with an FTP 5.0. At an elite level everybody has similar technical skills, generally it comes down the who can sustain the highest power output.
 
#12 ·
When first getting involved with mtb racing an expert/elite told me that the racer with the best 20 min power/weight ratio (ftp/weight) wins the race.
...
IF it is true, shouldn't we spend majority of our training trying to raise our ftp?
FTP (Functional Threshold Power) is defined as your best power output for 1 hour. It isn't your best 20 minute power output.

Your best 20 minute power output (multiplied by 0.95) is one method of estimating what your best 1 hour power output could be. It's often used because a 20 minute hard effort is easier to do and recover from than a full 1 hour time trial if you're testing regularly.

The big danger with overly focusing on the Training Peaks power profile chart and its emphasis on shorter durations (5 seconds, 1 minute, 5 minutes, 20 minutes) is that you can get sucked into "chasing numbers". If you train for a particular test then you tend to get better at that test, sometimes at the expense of other aspects of your training. Repeatability (being able to do the same effort multiple times), recovery, endurance and mental toughness are all factors that come into play also.

I'm sure you've seen this chart on the subject by Andrew Coggan that was posted on Cyclingforums.com already.:)

"FTP can be used to predict someone's power to w/in (on average) +/- 5% from 2 minutes onward:" Andrew Coggan


Andrew Coggan Power Chart

https://www.cyclingforums.com/t/494491/converting-anaerobic-power-to-aerobic-endurance

.
 
#15 ·
I think that should be true, but in cat1 masters and below there's a lot of exceptions. I do well in my age group cat1 mtb, but I get dropped in cat1/2 cyclocross, by the same guys I often beat by minutes in mtb! It may be that the trails I train on are by coincidence very similar to the trails we race in the spring series, - I'm thinking that has quite a bit to do with it (wait for Kosmos training book to come out:) ).

I was talking to a guy (Mike G) I regularly race with, he dominated the spring series 3 years ago (cat1 35-49), most wins were by about 5 minutes (100 to 120 minute races), he experiences the same thing in cyclocross, the same guys he crushes in mtb often slowly pull away in cx. This guy is really good in the tight twisties, I've passed him on the climbs the past 2 years, but he's quite good in the woods, I think he has a lot of moto experience, - I also rode a whole lot of hours on trails on small dirt bikes with crappy suspension as a kid, I think that has helped me a lot.

I think the 'stronger' road guys, or guys who don't mtb as much, maybe lack some upper body conditioning that you get from more mtb?, as well as the ability to maintain smooth power through the woods. Could it also be trail concentration fatigue that builds up? Chasing these guys in cyclocross, even in woods, it doesn't completely make sense, but there are quite a few 'of us' who seem to lack power but do well at mtb.

The moral is; identify our weaknesses, that's probably where most of our improvements will come from. For me it seems clear, since I'm fast in the woods but not on the road, there's room to improve my 'road power', which would be easier if I were younger than 49, but there's still improvements I need to figure out how to make. I'll start with getting a modern road bike, there's plenty of guys I know who can work me over on the road once a week for starters.
 
#16 ·
The moral is; identify our weaknesses, that's probably where most of our improvements will come from.
That's exactly what I take away from it. Studies and discussions help refine my understanding of what, exactly, 'weakness' is - sort of like moving from 'man, that sucked...' to, 'man, those quick bursts of power end up draining my reserves pretty quick'. So helpful on that front.
 
#17 ·
There is a guy I raced with last season in Cat 1. While I routinely beat him, it wasn't by much most of the time. I produce more power/longer, but he has more skill. So basically I have gap him, or make up time in the climbs and hold him off in the tech.

Another guy who I believe produces more power (no numbers, just comparing) I routinely beat also because he burns out early trying to hold too fast of a pace. I haven't raced CX with him yet, but his lap times were much faster then mine.

Nice thing about XC racing, there is no one predictor of who will win. Things are never equal. Someone has more skill, someone has better pacing, someone has more power. One bike is great for one course, but not great on another course. Things are never equal.
 
#18 ·
Nice thing about XC racing, there is no one predictor of who will win. Things are never equal. Someone has more skill, someone has better pacing, someone has more power. One bike is great for one course, but not great on another course. Things are never equal.
BTW from my experience with elite racer the fastest racers have the highest FTP. The guy with an FTP of 5.3 beats the guy with an FTP 5.2, who solidly beats the guy with an FTP 5.0. At an elite level everybody has similar technical skills, generally it comes down the who can sustain the highest power output.
Thanks! That is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for, with all other things being equal (technical skills, bike, etc).
I should have clearly stated in my opening question that "with all things being equal". As LMN stated and other coaches who PM'd me,,,FTP is the #1 difference maker.

FTP is the maximum wattage an athlete can sustain for 60 minutes and according to Dr. Andrew Coggan, "the single greatest determinant of cycling performance"
 
#20 ·
Right, I'm in agreement here. I think what is useful about identifying 'single-greatest' predictors and such is that it helps prioritize in training. I only have about 15 hours per week to give to cycling, and that's not enough to cover all the bases. If I know that FTP drives success relatively more than other factors, I'll put most of that 15 hours toward raising it.
 
#22 ·
15 hours is quite a lot. I typically ride 15-20 hours a week, which gives me roughly 250 miles a week, depending on how much MTB and hill climbing I do. My bike commute is about 90 miles of that. I am not following a plan, just "seam of the pants", and mostly for pleasure. Usually 9but not limited to) a couple hours of intense XC style riding with burst of climbing and technical descending, couple hours of pleasure MTB riding with mostly fast descending (in a group setting). 2 x 30 minutes of intense commuting 5 days a week (I have a thing about leaving at the last minute), and usually two long road rides per week (Tuesday is typically a 100 mile day).

I should be scheduling more swim, run, and weight training. But with my combined training and chores, I can only spare so much more time and energy. If it wasn't for my wreck Wednesday, I wouldn't be on the internet now :D
 
#29 ·
That's a good article, and explains to me why my 10x10s sprints and short hill repeats (roughly 10x10s) that I focused on through summer didn't have much of a benefit when cyclocross season came. And why my training trails have been good for quite a few racers; roughly 6 minutes of recovery (flat or descent) between the 40 to 60 second climbs.
 
#31 ·
Maybe this article will help with transition from creating "peak power" to "repeatability".

"Peak power and repeatability require different types of training, and the order in which you train them is also critical. Peak power should be developed first, as it will allow you to transition to repeatability later in the week, month, or season. Once you have those peak numbers, repeatability will be a little easier to deal with, and you'll have higher power numbers to begin with." Hunter Allen

Hunter Allen Power Blog: Power Up: Increasing Repeatability and Peak Power
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top