Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 33 of 33

Thread: testing?

  1. #26
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,979
    Quote Originally Posted by scottz123 View Post
    I think it is accurate, but as you noticed you also have to be 'ready' for it. If you were 'sick', you were not ready.

    In the training bible Friel schedules it at the end of a recovery week.
    Yes, that is where the first one was correctly located. I went ahead with it thinking my massive headache was just a tension headache at the time of the test, but by the time evening rolled around more symptoms emerged that were not there - or at least not actually known by me - at the time of the test (namely fever).

    The repeat of the test 6 days later was not at the end of a R&R week, but rather on day 6 of a week in the middle of a 12 week base period. Feeling better meant I completed the test with higher numbers, but as you mention - it was not at the end of a R&R week so the timing of it all (illness and a scheduled FTP test) just was not optimal this time around.

    Quote Originally Posted by scottz123 View Post
    I agree with "getting better" at testing - proper warm up, mindset, not starting to hard, finding right gear, etc.
    I can see that one could get quite good, or at least much better at this test simply based on experience. Based on weather and equipment, I was relegated to the basement for an indoor version (for both attempts).

    I would be curious to hear other's experiences if their FTP test numbers are similar for an indoor version of the test compared to an outdoor version given a similar temperature environment (say 70 degrees). In other words - is chasing a carrot more fun, inspiring, easier, etc... out in nature as opposed to chasing it indoors enough to have different results.

  2. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jcm01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    I would be curious to hear other's experiences if their FTP test numbers are similar for an indoor version of the test compared to an outdoor version given a similar temperature environment (say 70 degrees). In other words - is chasing a carrot more fun, inspiring, easier, etc... out in nature as opposed to chasing it indoors enough to have different results.
    I cannot comment from personal experience however I've read Friel where he says this pretty much exactly. Says that in theory, the test can be conducted indoors or outdoors, however in his experience, people sometimes perform better outdoors due to the reasons you cite above.

  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    596
    +1 for that. I think you can isolate all sorts of variables on the trainer to get a more accurate picture but the mental stuff to do it seems to be a limiter for me. Structure on the trainer seems to work well for me but only if the session is under two hrs.

    Will a person test higher after getting use to being back on the bike? Im only doing three days on the bike a week, but feel 100% better than I did 2, or 3 weeks ago when I started.
    ATV = fat A$$

  4. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Poncharelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by butryon View Post
    Will a person test higher after getting use to being back on the bike?
    Oh, for sure. There's a lot of neuromuscular adaptations that happens when you start any activitity. Spinning pedals is still a skill.

    A cool thing to track is HR versus power while you're riding. You will find that over the weeks, you'll get more power at Z2 HR, which usually corresponds to LT Power improvement.

    Last year, my Z2 power went from 130W at 140bpm, to about 170W at 132bpm, over 2 months from the beginning of training. My FTP went from 210 to 270 over 3 months (at 163 lbs). I think a lot of it was not having any saddle time during the healing of a broken wrist.
    Head Coach, Ben Lomond HS MTB Team
    www.utahmtb.org
    Cycling Team and local Club:
    http://www.roostersbikersedge.com/

  5. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by jcm01 View Post
    I cannot comment from personal experience however I've read Friel where he says this pretty much exactly. Says that in theory, the test can be conducted indoors or outdoors, however in his experience, people sometimes perform better outdoors due to the reasons you cite above.
    Joe Friel - Indoor vs. Outdoor Bike Performance

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WR304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,790
    If you're going to be doing regular tests throughout the year then I think it's worth doing one at the start of the year too. That way you have an idea of what you can expect your trough to peak power outputs to be over the year.

    If you look at this chart of my 20 minute FTP test results between 01 January 2011 and 18 August 2012 (when I crashed badly and broke my leg) you can see how the initial test in January 2011 wasn't great. After being ill over Christmas and doing very little cycling for the previous few months, due to bad weather, it took a while to build up my fitness levels again. After that rapid increase in the first part of the year the test results plateaued. Despite continuing to ride regularly I didn't make any major gains in 20 minute power output in the second half of 2011.

    In January 2012 by contrast I'd kept riding and started the year at a higher fitness level. Both the initial test in January 2012 and my peak fitness in August 2012 were significantly better than the same dates in 2011.

    I've also added monthly hours riding to the chart so you can see my power output plotted against that.



    If you're using the Coggan power levels then 20 Minutes x 0.95 is supposed to be a rough estimate of your best 1 hour power. It seems to depend upon individual physiology how well it actually aligns though. 95% of my best 20 minute power is a lot higher than I can actually manage for an hour flat out. This chart is my best power outputs for different durations in 2012. You can see how I'm clearly "chasing numbers" a bit at particular durations.



    If you train for a certain duration then you're likely to find yourself improving at that duration but you have to be careful not to get too carried away with that, especially if power outputs below an hour aren't the main priority. Adding a report to show your longer duration power outputs can be helpful to stay focused.
    Last edited by WR304; 02-22-2013 at 01:12 PM.

  7. #32
    dru
    dru is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,642
    Wow are you on the bike a lot! Average of 12 to 15 hours a week or so. Kudos.

    I could be so lucky or committed.

    Drew
    occasional cyclist

  8. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WR304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,790
    If I didn't have bad luck then I'd have no luck at all.


    Here's a more detailed breakdown of my riding between 01 January 2011 and 18 August 2012. Looking at the big picture like this I'm quite surprised by some of the trends. It's a good example of what you can expect if you follow the philosophy of "just ride lots". I didn't really have a set plan or set goals. The only real aim was to be fit enough to get round the road club runs without getting dropped. I got hammered mostly in that respect. There were a few rides where I did make it to the coffee stop still in contact with the group though, so it was partially successful.





    For training I was doing more or less the same thing each year by starting off with hard rides in January, including some interval sessions and getting a good fitness improvement by March - April. In past years when I was racing I'd have been "racing myself fit" from that point on. As the weather improved I was losing interest in training for the sake of it and spending more time riding trails offroad instead. Enjoyable and good for bike handling but not very focused on fitness. In my power data my offroad rides always have a lower power output than road miles, which increases the amount of time spent in the lower power zones.


    The (in)frequency of interval sessions is what I find surprising. I'd have thought that I would have done more than I actually did. I tend to have themes for each year. All I did outdoors was 6x4 minute intervals in 2011 These were 4 minutes on followed by 4 minutes off. In 2012 I only did 3x9 minute over-under intervals outdoors. Of the two types of intervals I think the 3x9 minute intervals worked better for what I was trying to do. Outdoors intervals were always part of longer rides. I'd usually do intervals in the first hour and then another 2-3 hours in the hills afterwards.





    Along with the 20 minute tests I also did several 1 hour tests during 2011-2012 to see how they compared. You can see from the table above that my actual 1 hour power was a lot lower than the 20 minutes x 0.95 would suggest. The 1 hour power results were as good as I could do at the time. I definitely wasn't holding back.

    There are other test protocols too. If you read any of the Chris Carmichael books then they use the CTS test instead. That will give you different power results to 20 min x 0.95 so the specific training zones aren't interchangeable. This PDF sets out that test procedure and explains what a under over interval consists of.


    http://www.trainright.com/assets/dow...ptions2010.pdf


    LTHR Test Findings, Need Help


    My favoured turbo training session (done when the weather was bad or my mountain bike was broken) consisted of this 1hour interval session by Dr Andrew Coggan. It's a routine that I've done quite frequently in the past. I like it because it breaks the turbo training time into manageable chunks. The wattage figures are just his figures, you aim for your own zones (heart rate or power) at those durations. 30 second sprints are flat out.

    "Seriously, the best season I've had in recent years followed a winter
    during which I did the following '90/90'90' workout 3 d/wk:


    5 min w/u
    20 min @ 275 W
    5 min easy
    5 min @ 325 W
    2.5 min easy
    5 min @ 325 W
    2.5 min easy
    0.5 min at 500 W
    2 min easy
    0.5 min at 500 W
    2 min easy
    0.5 min at 500 W
    2 min easy
    0.5 min at 500 W
    2.5 min easy
    5 min warm-down


    The '90/90/90' refers to the fact that (almost by chance) the powers
    used were about 90% of the best that I could produce for that duration
    when at peak fitness. That made the session challenging enough that I
    didn't lose too much fitness over the winter, but not so hard that I
    ever dreaded the workout or burned out from doing it."
    Andrew Coggan
    Last edited by WR304; 02-23-2013 at 03:28 AM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •