FTP Test Pacing Strategies

jmoss70

 I searched a dozen different ways and couldn't find this post from some EN Vets.  Here's a cut/paste from my Evernote file.

 

Had my best result with this approach. 1st 10 min@ 95% of old FTP number, 2nd 10 @ 100%, 2 min rest, 3rd 10 @ 100%, 4th 10 targeted 105% for the first half, then ramp it up each min by 5-10 watts. Last min just buried myself! Whatever you decide, I found it very helpful to go conservative early!! I used my Ipod with some motivating tunes and watch some TDF race Dvd's too. I think this thing has a BIG Mental aspect to it. Good Luck!

 

Here is my n=1 results over the last 3 years and easily over 15 tests on the trainer. It may not work for some, but does for me. All of my best tests where I have exceeded my expectations or seen the best results have been paced with a "negative split" strategy. 1st 20 - stay steady and don't do anything dumb. I stay as close to my current FTP as possible and do not exceed it during the first 15' ever. If I am really feeling great or my last FTT was not a good one, I go a little harder in the last 5'. This of course is dependent on a accurate current FTP and not a good startegy for folks new to power or the OS plan. For the rest I just spin super easy, no reason to try and hold any watts here 2nd 20 - this is where the work is done. Whatever number I think my new FTP should be I now try to hold for the first 10'. This is hard but not horrible, if it is too hard then my expectations were off. I then re-assess at 10' - if feeling ok I kick it up a little, if I'm already starting to suffer I stay steady. At 15' I do the same re-assessment again and typically no matter how bad I suffered I can suck it up for the last 5' and go harder. By about 17' into the 2nd interval of a good test I'm at the point were I litterally feel like I'm about to blow up any second but somehow I usually can manage to just hold it together. The clock definitely goes backwards here and each second feels like 30. FWIW, I have never had a great test where the 2nd interval was lower  than the first. Everytime I went even just a little to hard in the first 20', I gave back much more in the 2nd.

 

Joe Matchette

I don't know about the 1st quote, but the second is from this thread:

http://endurancenation.us.dnnmax.com/Training/TrainingForums/tabid/101/aft/4456/Default.aspx

liebs45

What a great re-post, thanks! And that's exactly how I'm gonna do Monday's test.

[Deleted User]

Good advice. I want out way too hard for the first 20 minutes last time, and almost bailed halfway through the second 20''. Overall did not do near as well as I had thought I would. Was a little over-confident going into that test, but now I've learned my lesson!

Woody Freese

I like this approach - thanks for sharing Jim.

Prior to beginning of the test, I will reset the torque for my PowerMeter.

During the 2 minute rest, do I start the Power Meter over again? What kind of wattage should I be coming up with during the break?

Thanks... another Noob!

Al Truscott

 @ Woody - the entire 42 minutes, 2 x 20 minute intervals plus the 2 minutes "recovery" in between, is used for the test. It (the whole 42 minutes) should be thought of as one interval. The normalized power for those 42 minutes becomes your FTP for training and racing purposes.

There are no rules for how to manage those two minutes. Personally, I go as easy as I can, since I want to have enough energy to push the second 20 minutes harder than the first.

Joseph Lombardi

  So used Trainerroad today for my bike test; I had previously done one other bike test 6 weeks ago with Trainerroad...but I used their 5/10/20min test  (I also used my roadbike)...today...I should have chosen their FreeRide program but selected the Eichorn which is a 2x20 but with a 5min. recovery segment....I figured I would just start my second interval after 2min recovery and end the segment 3 min. early...in theory this work fine as far as the work goes...but it somewhat messes up the NP/FTP calculation because TrainerRoad give you the Avg. for their prescribed 20min. segments...so by starting the second one early and ending early I mess up the avg. data for the second workset......also you get an NP for the warm up and cooldown segments as well... Not a total wash...but just something I need to not do again....

My FTP for this test ended up probably close/few points higher (4-5) than my first test 6 weeks ago (my first power test ever)...but I am pleased by the result for the following reasons: 1.) I rode my tri bike v road bike...and my understanding is that you tend to push lower watts with a tri bike on trainer than road bike...and 2.) this test was the full 2x20 v my first was the 5/10/20 protocol...

It still was only my second test ever...and the reason I posted it here was not only for feedback but also...their is a real learning curve about how to pace these test for optimum result without crashing and burning.....

foolio_mugoolio

@Jim Moss, I used your protocol yesterday and it worked well for me. Thanks for posting it. I felt like I really got the most watts I could.

Joseph Lombardi

 Very cool ...I was able to download the tcx file from Trainerroad into Training Peaks WKO then slice out the test minutes...to get the Normalized FTP  for the test...240..which as I noted was slightly belwo the 242 of my first test ...but because this was the full blown 20/2/20 I feel it is a better representation...I could have pushed much harder knowing I only had 1x20 segment as in the 5/10/20 protocol (which I might repeat for fun on my Tribike just to see how it goes)

tim cronk

I have some different thoughts and theories. We are looking for FTP which is the power one can hold for one hour correct? At best 95% of 20 min tests and or NP of 42 min tests are simply estimates of this number. How we get there and what number we come up with really doesnt matter as long as we can then use that number for training and racing consistency. Having said that once you have your FTP , and you have completed weeks of intervals using that number, you already have a good idea of what you can do. I already know I can do 2x20 of my old number. What I want to know is how much higher I can go. So when I start my 2x20, I start right at FTP or a little higher and then go by feel adding as I go along (after all my goal is higher than last one). I would personally rather be dropping a few watts by the time I finish the second 20 min interval indicating that I truly gave it my all and found the edge of what I was capable of. I think finishing strong indicates there may have been more left? A negative split on watts isnt as important as a negative split on effort!

Last year I tested 2x20's 42 min NP , 95% of 20-30 min all out efforts, and 1 one hour 10 minute TT effort. They all yielded good results and found them all to be credible but each one had to be pace differently. To be honest the 20 min all out efforts were the absolute hardest IMO.

liebs45

So having done a few of these now, a teammate suggested I post my "mental protocol" for my 2x20'(2') bike FTP test since it worked well for me yesterday. My old FTP was 248w, and yesterday I spun a Pnorm of 280w. So, the way I planned and rode yesterday's FTP test was as four ten-minute "quarters" in my mind: 1st quarter = 251w x 10' = approx 100% FTP; 2nd quarter = 301w x 10' = approx 120% FTP; then (153w x 2' = approx 60% FTP as rest interval); then 3rd quarter = 277w x 10' = approx 110% FTP; and then 4th quarter = 297w x 10' = approx 120% FTP. I split this last quarter into 5' subs ridden as 279w x 5' then all-out 315w x the last 5'. I felt like I was dying at the end of the test (and the rest of the night), so I didn't leave much if anything on the table. The weighted avg says 275w but both PowerAgent & Golden Cheetah read the best 42' interval Normalized Power as 280w & 278w, respectively. I was very happy with both the new testing strategy for me, as well as the results. So, in summary, I negative-split each 20' interval by about 10-20% from current FTP number, but importantly I placed the highest-power block as 2nd rather than 4th. Thanks to teammate David Ambrose who suggested this last critical detail, which helped me successfully complete the test at those levels.

jmoss70

@Tim & @Jonathan - This is interesting.  You guys are basically saying, "go in the red" earlier and see if you can hang on.  I can see what you mean that if you are hedging for 60-75% of the test then you are not reaching your potential.  Have you done your tests with your approach regularly and with good results?

mgraffeo

Everybody is different, and there's no question that leaving a bunch of time on the table early is impossible to get back.

That said, very few people have huge bumps test after test after test. So, starting at your previous 5k pace, and kicking it up a touch after half a mile, is likely only leaving 5-8 seconds on the table, maximum.

I'd always rather hit the 1mi or 1.5 mi mark thinking that I can get a little stronger, rather than thinking that I probably overdid it. Makes the last 8 minutes of the test much more manageable. YMMV.

tim cronk

@Jim Yep thats it..... I have had mixed results .... It tends to work on subsequent tests better... Test 1 this OS I went out aiming for my last known FTP of 222 , hit 218 first 20 and then 206 next 20 (ouch) but NP was 210 and that is what I used.....8 weeks later test 2 in the OS (after slowly climbing above 210 and nailing the last few weeks intervals in the mid 220's) , I aimed high 220's and ended up with 226 and 227 , 42 NP of 224 (so that one worked better starting closer to known numbers)... I have one coming up sunday and after doing several 2x20's (4') at my 224 I see absolutely no reason to spend anytime there I already know I can do that number. I need to know how much higher I will aim for just a couple above so maybe 230ish and see what happens! What could possibly go wrong?

tim cronk

Just a follow up to my test. After a good warm up started at planned watts of 230 and tried to keep the first two number in the watt meter reading 23. 1st 20 was 234 , 2nd 20 232 , 42min NP 231 new high. It wasnt pretty in fact it was quite ugly but they always are. I was most certainly coming apart towards the end of second interval and feel very good about not leaving anything on the table. After all the work done at last FTP of 224 and slightly above I feel this was a good strategy to aim just above that. I really see no reason to be too conservative on FTP tests unless its your first one in a while like beginning OS.