Determining FT

BtonRider said:

I'm sure determining one's FT is like anything else and there are a bunch of different methods. What's the "best" way of determining FT?

[font=Arial]
Shamelessly cut and pasted from the Topica Wattage lists.....

RE: Seven deadly sins...[/font] [img]lists.topica.comicon pencil.gifOpen ↗[/img] [font=Geneva] Andy Coggan[/font] [img]lists.topica.comicon clock.gifOpen ↗[/img] [font=Geneva] Jun 21, 2004 13:51 PDT [/font] [font=Geneva]
Andy Coggan wrote:
[/font][font=Geneva]
...er, ways of determining your functional threshold power (roughly in
order of increasing certainty):

1) from inspection of a ride file.
2) from power distribution profile from multiple rides.
3) from blood lactate measurements (better or worse, depending on how it

is done).
4) based on normalized power from a hard ~1 h race.
5) using critical power testing and analysis.
6) from the power that you can routinely generate during long intervals
done in training.
7) from the average power during a ~1 h TT (the best predictor of
performance is performance itself). [/font][font=Geneva]
BTW, another method that could be added to this list would be to do an
incremental exercise test to determine 'MAP', then estimate functional
threshold power as being ~75% (range 72-77%, using Ric Stern's
guidelines) of this value. You could then use this estimate as is, or if
necessary/desired, further refine it using one of the methods described
above (e.g., by doing a TT).

BTW, the reason this approach works is because in trained cyclists, LT
falls within a fairly narrow range as a percentage of VO2max, and there
is tendency for those with the highest LTs to have the lowest anaerobic
capacities (and therefore a slightly lower MAP relative to power at
VO2max), and vice-versa. In any case, at the very least knowing your MAP
will help 'bracket' what could be considered a reasonable range into
which you expect your threshold power to fall.

-Dave
P.S. I like number 6 because it happens every time you do a session of L4 work and you don't have to plan any special testing days. If I'm gonna test I like #5 since it gives me good predictions of the power I should be able to sustain for shorter periods which is real useful for pacing the 10-20k time trials common in weekend stage races.
[/font]

daveryanwyoming said:

[font=Arial]
Shamelessly cut and pasted from the Topica Wattage lists.....

RE: Seven deadly sins...[/font] [img]lists.topica.comicon pencil.gifOpen ↗[/img] [font=Geneva] Andy Coggan[/font] [img]lists.topica.comicon clock.gifOpen ↗[/img] [font=Geneva] Jun 21, 2004 13:51 PDT [/font] [font=Geneva]
Andy Coggan wrote:
[/font][font=Geneva]
...er, ways of determining your functional threshold power (roughly in
order of increasing certainty):

1) from inspection of a ride file.
2) from power distribution profile from multiple rides.
3) from blood lactate measurements (better or worse, depending on how it

is done).
4) based on normalized power from a hard ~1 h race.
5) using critical power testing and analysis.
6) from the power that you can routinely generate during long intervals
done in training.
7) from the average power during a ~1 h TT (the best predictor of
performance is performance itself). [/font][font=Geneva]
BTW, another method that could be added to this list would be to do an
incremental exercise test to determine 'MAP', then estimate functional
threshold power as being ~75% (range 72-77%, using Ric Stern's
guidelines) of this value. You could then use this estimate as is, or if
necessary/desired, further refine it using one of the methods described
above (e.g., by doing a TT).

BTW, the reason this approach works is because in trained cyclists, LT
falls within a fairly narrow range as a percentage of VO2max, and there
is tendency for those with the highest LTs to have the lowest anaerobic
capacities (and therefore a slightly lower MAP relative to power at
VO2max), and vice-versa. In any case, at the very least knowing your MAP
will help 'bracket' what could be considered a reasonable range into
which you expect your threshold power to fall.

-Dave
P.S. I like number 6 because it happens every time you do a session of L4 work and you don't have to plan any special testing days. If I'm gonna test I like #5 since it gives me good predictions of the power I should be able to sustain for shorter periods which is real useful for pacing the 10-20k time trials common in weekend stage races.
[/font]

or perhaps it's 8 deadly sins...
RE: Seven deadly sins... Andy Coggan
Jun 21, 2004 13:51 PDT

Andy Coggan wrote:

...er, ways of determining your functional threshold power (roughly in
order of increasing certainty):

1) from inspection of a ride file.
2) from power distribution profile from multiple rides.
3) from blood lactate measurements (better or worse, depending on how it

is done).
4) based on normalized power from a hard ~1 h race.
5) using critical power testing and analysis.
6) from the power that you can routinely generate during long intervals
done in training.
7) from the average power during a ~1 h TT (the best predictor of
performance is performance itself).

BTW, another method that could be added to this list would be to do an
incremental exercise test to determine 'MAP', then estimate functional
threshold power as being ~75% (range 72-77%, using Ric Stern's
guidelines) of this value. You could then use this estimate as is, or if
necessary/desired, further refine it using one of the methods described
above (e.g., by doing a TT).

BTW, the reason this approach works is because in trained cyclists, LT
falls within a fairly narrow range as a percentage of VO2max, and there
is tendency for those with the highest LTs to have the lowest anaerobic
capacities (and therefore a slightly lower MAP relative to power at
VO2max), and vice-versa. In any case, at the very least knowing your MAP
will help 'bracket' what could be considered a reasonable range into
which you expect your threshold power to fall.

Ric