How much can I increase my FTP?

A FTP of 400 watts would give you a power/weight ratio of 4.76, totally doable. As to how long it takes, there's too many factors to get into that. 10% is a big jump that becomes more and more difficult to attain the closer you get to your physiological peak. But it seems that you have been making very good progress so far. Keep on training and let us know!

Bikeridindude said:

A FTP of 400 watts would give you a power/weight ratio of 4.76, totally doable. As to how long it takes, there's too many factors to get into that. 10% is a big jump that becomes more and more difficult to attain the closer you get to your physiological peak. But it seems that you have been making very good progress so far. Keep on training and let us know!

I was in a similar position to you, in the sense that I was frustrated with my FTP. However, i used to do what you are doing now - lots of 20 min intervals, pretty much all year round.

Last autumnI gave up full time work (got an elite license) and set about training totally differently - lots of really long endurance rides all winter, and then some training races. Right now I race 2x a week (classics / crits) and the rest of my training is pretty much all inner ring, recovery or endurance with some sprints (eg. 10 x 10 second with 1 min rest) If racing schedule allows I have done (will do) some 5 / 10 min intervals - but I prefer to save my hardest efforts for racing.

The result is that not only have I put a good 15-20 watts on last autumns testing, but I am also riding reasonably competently at elite level Euro....even crits which I thought I sucked at. The main difference is that I am not tired all the time this year, only after hard races. Last 2 years with all the intervals and intensity training I was always fatigued and sore. The ideal that most elite riders round here strive for is 2 races a week max (often not possible depending on team schedule) and one more intense (intervals) training session per week. Training races are good sweetspot workouts, and can work endurance with some training immediately beforehand. The rest of the time training is light and endurance orientated. The idea is that training prepares the engine - racing is where you apply the gas. Of course you do need a busy racing schedule for this approach to work.

I think FTP can be like an elastic - detrain it over winter, build the engine, then use racing to rebuild it - if you have a big base to work with you'll be surprised at the gains.

BullGod said:

I was in a similar position to you, in the sense that I was frustrated with my FTP. However, i used to do what you are doing now - lots of 20 min intervals, pretty much all year round.

Last autumnI gave up full time work (got an elite license) and set about training totally differently - lots of really long endurance rides all winter, and then some training races. Right now I race 2x a week (classics / crits) and the rest of my training is pretty much all inner ring, recovery or endurance with some sprints (eg. 10 x 10 second with 1 min rest) If racing schedule allows I have done (will do) some 5 / 10 min intervals - but I prefer to save my hardest efforts for racing.

The result is that not only have I put a good 15-20 watts on last autumns testing, but I am also riding reasonably competently at elite level Euro....even crits which I thought I sucked at.

Remember this list? [img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img] I ain't trying to catch you out Bulldog 😕

July 2006

BullGod...............365W....70kg......5.21W/Kg

April 2008

BullGod...............340W (KK)69kg......4.9W/Kg (elite, Benelux)

acslater said:

Here is the situation. Currently a cat 2 with about 3-4 years of racing. I have recently learned how to really train. Basically before I was just riding tempo and doing group rides and races to get into shape. Now I am really focusing on FTP. Doing FLT interals 2-3 x 20 min with 10 min rest in between these are really hard. I have been working on it since Nov of 06. Things have progressed. I estimate that my FTP has gone from 345 to 365-370.

I am 31. I am wondering how much FTP can increase given a certain amount of time like 6 months or a year. Is 10% too much to ask. I would love to be riding around 400 at LT next year around this time.

Right now I do my FLT intervals at 365 x 20 min. I am tired and I think these are right at or just below my FTP.

Weight is 84 kg.

What do you guys think. Is 400 watts out of the question?

AC

have a look at this ..

cyclingforums.comt441427.htmlOpen ↗

acslater said:

Here is the situation. Currently a cat 2 with about 3-4 years of racing. I have recently learned how to really train. Basically before I was just riding tempo and doing group rides and races to get into shape. Now I am really focusing on FTP. Doing FLT interals 2-3 x 20 min with 10 min rest in between these are really hard. I have been working on it since Nov of 06. Things have progressed. I estimate that my FTP has gone from 345 to 365-370.

I am 31. I am wondering how much FTP can increase given a certain amount of time like 6 months or a year. Is 10% too much to ask. I would love to be riding around 400 at LT next year around this time.

Right now I do my FLT intervals at 365 x 20 min. I am tired and I think these are right at or just below my FTP.

Weight is 84 kg.

What do you guys think. Is 400 watts out of the question?

AC

AC,

I believe 400Watts is feasible in one year. However I doubt that they could be feasible the way you train. Don´t know your physiological parameters but looking at your w/kg, it seems low to me and that you could increase it much more, but I doubt that doing so many intervals you can achieve it. On the other hand you say you are tired....Look at Bullgod´s post. He figured it out...I have been warning many cyclists about the "danger" of too much FTP and "power" training, but I doubt I will do it any longer...untill the "power training" fashion fades away...too much trouble convincing people!...on top being my personal opinion...🙂

Urkiola2 said:

.......Look at Bullgod´s post. He figured it out...

Sure, quit our jobs and train 20 hours a week. The answer is easy, wonder why more of us didn't see it 🙂

Urkiola2 said:

AC,

I believe 400Watts is feasible in one year. However I doubt that they could be feasible the way you train. Don´t know your physiological parameters but looking at your w/kg, it seems low to me and that you could increase it much more, but I doubt that doing so many intervals you can achieve it. On the other hand you say you are tired....Look at Bullgod´s post. He figured it out...I have been warning many cyclists about the "danger" of too much FTP and "power" training, but I doubt I will do it any longer...untill the "power training" fashion fades away...too much trouble convincing people!...on top being my personal opinion...🙂

as I posted on another thread here are my own results of training with power and following Dr. Coggan's guidelines from late 2002 onwards. I included a summary of the previous few years riding/training to show that I was *not* in the least untrained when I started:

[font=Arial Narrow]1998 no PM, rode ~ 8,000 km (no racing mostly commute and weekend riding, age 35)
1999 no PM, rode ~ 7,000 km[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2000 no PM, rode ~ 10,000 km[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2001 no PM rode ~ 15,000 km or about 500 hrs (no racing but a solid weekly regimen)[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2002 no PM rode ~ 18,000 km or about 600 hrs. Got back into local TT's at a good level. training partner did 2X IM that year.[/font]

[font=Arial Narrow]2002 October baseline tests for FTP upon getting Computrainer 325W @85-87kg in quite good (relatively!) e/o season form.[/font]

[font=Arial Narrow]2003 +7.7% (FTP as are all subsequent %'s, CT checked by PT Pro power, rear hub)[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2004 +5.7%[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2005 +2.7% by May then dropped close to 30% with a bad leg[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2006 Recovered to 2003 level (350W)[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2007 +14.3% (new training plan 🙂 )[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]2008 +4.8% (but it's only April 1st 🙂, targetting another 3% or so, age 45)[/font]

[font=Arial Narrow]Percentage FTP change over 5.5 yrs training with power: ~29%[/font]
[font=Arial Narrow][/font]
[font=Arial Narrow]Local TT course: ~31-minutes in 2002, targeting ~26-min this year or about 20% less slow :p [/font]

daveryanwyoming said:

Sure, quit our jobs and train 20 hours a week. The answer is easy, wonder why more of us didn't see it 🙂

No kidding!. 🙂

I appreciate your post. I definitley think it is important not to over train. I believe (now) in train hard and rest hard. My rides are either at LT or Sub LT with maybe a week or so of VO2.

I am very wary of overtraining. I have done it in the past and I think I have a good feeling for when I am on the edge. That said my week consists of 2-3 pure rest days. Which includes one day off the bike, and two days of recovery rides. So that leaves 4 days to hammer it and I usually clump them together...block training. So a week looks like this. But it varies.

Mon - Sub LT 3 x 20
Tue - off
Wed - Recovery ride
Thu - LT 2x20
Fri - recovery ride
Sat - criterium - if race was easy then do LT or Sub LT 2x20 min
Sun - criterium or road race

I recover from this well, and play it by ear. If I am tired I rest, if I feel good I go hard. I usually don't know until I am no the bike for 15 min.

The difference between this year and the last is structured intervals. I used to just ride around. Now my rides have a focus and a purpose and I am either trying to recover or I am recovered and trying to rip my legs apart.

So far it has been working.

Urkiola2 said:

AC,

I believe 400Watts is feasible in one year. However I doubt that they could be feasible the way you train. Don´t know your physiological parameters but looking at your w/kg, it seems low to me and that you could increase it much more, but I doubt that doing so many intervals you can achieve it. On the other hand you say you are tired....Look at Bullgod´s post. He figured it out...I have been warning many cyclists about the "danger" of too much FTP and "power" training, but I doubt I will do it any longer...untill the "power training" fashion fades away...too much trouble convincing people!...on top being my personal opinion...🙂

Urkiola2 said:

I have been warning many cyclists about the "danger" of too much FTP and "power" training, but I doubt I will do it any longer...untill the "power training" fashion fades away...too much trouble convincing people!...on top being my personal opinion...🙂

Can you say "sweet spot"? ;-)

Seriously, I tend to agree with you that, on average, a large volume of moderately intense training is likely to lead to greater improvements in performance than a much smaller volume of very intense ("power"?) training.

acoggan said:

Can you say "sweet spot"? ;-)

Seriously, I tend to agree with you that, on average, a large volume of moderately intense training is likely to lead to greater improvements in performance than a much smaller volume of very intense ("power"?) training.

Why?And what´s moderately intense (over distance training?)?

Urkiola2 said:

AC,

Look at Bullgod´s post. He figured it out...I have been warning many cyclists about the "danger" of too much FTP and "power" training, but I doubt I will do it any longer...untill the "power training" fashion fades away...too much trouble convincing people!...on top being my personal opinion...🙂

You obviously didn't here how ill he became. Surely over training is over training whether its with threshold efforts or classic base stuff
July 2006

BullGod...............365W....70kg......5.21W/Kg

April 2008

BullGod...............340W (KK)69kg......4.9W/Kg (elite, Benelux)

Ade Merckx said:

You obviously didn't here how ill he became. Surely over training is over training whether its with threshold efforts or classic base stuff
July 2006

BullGod...............365W....70kg......5.21W/Kg

April 2008

BullGod...............340W (KK)69kg......4.9W/Kg (elite, Benelux)

yeah - the 365w was caused by a Taxc related overestimation. The wattage readings on those things are pretty duff.

when you say "ill" do you mean the 3 colds I had in 3 months this year? Seriously that wasn't so bad or abnormal. That amount of training in the winter makes you very vulnerable, and unless you can isolate yourself from the sneezing and sniffing population you're gonna get sick. I read Kloden has had flu 3 times this year, and some guys are hardly ever off antibiotics in the spring. A Rabobank rider told us the only bad thing about hitting top form is that you get sick really easily.

What was concerning was the abnormal liver function I developed when doing L4/5/6 intervals every day on the trainer a couple of years ago ;-)

the guys i know who ride the fastest in races tend to train the longest, but not the fastest - and they ALWAYS do their recovery rides.

BullGod said:

yeah - the 365w was caused by a Taxc related overestimation. The wattage readings on those things are pretty duff.

when you say "ill" do you mean the 3 colds I had in 3 months this year? Seriously that wasn't so bad or abnormal. That amount of training in the winter makes you very vulnerable, and unless you can isolate yourself from the sneezing and sniffing population you're gonna get sick. I read Kloden has had flu 3 times this year, and some guys are hardly ever off antibiotics in the spring. A Rabobank rider told us the only bad thing about hitting top form is that you get sick really easily.

What was concerning was the abnormal liver function I developed when doing L4/5/6 intervals every day on the trainer a couple of years ago ;-)

the guys i know who ride the fastest in races tend to train the longest, but not the fastest - and they ALWAYS do their recovery rides.

You also have to consider other stressors like travelling, bad-weather competitions (like Paris-Nice) and so on. I think these are the major factors contributing to the riders´ vulnerabilty.

MIHECH said:

You also have to consider other stressors like travelling, bad-weather competitions (like Paris-Nice) and so on. I think these are the major factors contributing to the riders´ vulnerabilty.

Yep - anything under 4 degrees C, or under 12 degrees with rain, and I pretty much accept that I will feel lousy for a few days afterwards. Rain here in Holland can be a [censored] even in "summer".

Or come back from a 4hr race totally shagged to find your housemate has flu and has coughed and sneezed all over the place.

I can't wait til summer.

acoggan said:

Can you say "sweet spot"? ;-)

Seriously, I tend to agree with you that, on average, a large volume of moderately intense training is likely to lead to greater improvements in performance than a much smaller volume of very intense ("power"?) training.

Sorry Andy, but this statement begs a lot of questions.

1) What does 'on average' mean? Does it mean that there are exceptions?

2) What does a large volume mean?

3) What does 'moderately intense training' mean'?

4) What does 'much smaller volume' mean?

5) What does 'very intense' mean?

To my way of thinking, the meanings are very wide and one is likely to apply their own interpretation to each phrase.

I think Rapdaddyo would have said, whereas training at high intensity to one rider is endurable time after time (and dare I say actually enjoyable) to another it is pure purgatory. For the last 2 years plus since joining these forums, I would say I have trained (mostly for training sake) leaning towards shorter high intensity workouts. My improvement has been beyond my wildest dreams and is still continuing (approaching 66 years old). From 130W FTP to 315/320W. I will go on record now, as saying that before I race around Lake Biwa (140Km) in October my FTP will be closer to 340Watts! From what you and others are saying, I could possibly be way ahead of where I'm at present if I'd worked out at lower intensity - correct? Tyson

Sillyoldtwit said:

Sorry Andy, but this statement begs a lot of questions.

1) What does 'on average' mean? Does it mean that there are exceptions?

2) What does a large volume mean?

3) What does 'moderately intense training' mean'?

4) What does 'much smaller volume' mean?

5) What does 'very intense' mean?

To my way of thinking, the meanings are very wide and one is likely to apply their own interpretation to each phrase.

I think Rapdaddyo would have said, whereas training at high intensity to one rider is endurable time after time (and dare I say actually enjoyable) to another it is pure purgatory. For the last 2 years plus since joining these forums, I would say I have trained (mostly for training sake) leaning towards shorter high intensity workouts. My improvement has been beyond my wildest dreams and is still continuing (approaching 66 years old). From 130W FTP to 315/320W. I will go on record now, as saying that before I race around Lake Biwa (140Km) in October my FTP will be closer to 340Watts! From what you and others are saying, I could possibly be way ahead of where I'm at present if I'd worked out at lower intensity - correct? Tyson

Tyson,

It isn't working out ONLY at a lower intensity - the plan that most top cyclists follow is one of building a huge engine through massive amounts of lower intensity endurance training in the off season - followed by a combination of quality intervals, hard racing and rest, to fine tune the engine and add the turbo, if you like. This engine gets run down completely, then rested, recharged and exhausted all over again over the years to create an efficient and powerful machine.

Ask any pro how they train and they'll tell you they ride hours every day, a few sprints once in a while to avoid losing explosive power, rest before races and use "B" races as training, then push themselves to the max in the "A" races. Racing at top level inflicts such a deep and powerful exertion on riders that through regular competition and appropriate resting they actually stress their bodies much harder than through interval training. This gives them those massive FTP numbers.

There are very few pros doing 2 x 20's, but these guys have the highest FTP.

I'm not knocking power training - If I worked full time or had family commitments it's what I'd do - But I am sure that riding fast needs a big engine - and you get a big engine from riding lots, and racing.

Sillyoldtwit said:

Sorry Andy, but this statement begs a lot of questions.

1) What does 'on average' mean? Does it mean that there are exceptions?

2) What does a large volume mean?

3) What does 'moderately intense training' mean'?

4) What does 'much smaller volume' mean?

5) What does 'very intense' mean?

To my way of thinking, the meanings are very wide and one is likely to apply their own interpretation to each phrase.

I think Rapdaddyo would have said, whereas training at high intensity to one rider is endurable time after time (and dare I say actually enjoyable) to another it is pure purgatory. For the last 2 years plus since joining these forums, I would say I have trained (mostly for training sake) leaning towards shorter high intensity workouts. My improvement has been beyond my wildest dreams and is still continuing (approaching 66 years old). From 130W FTP to 315/320W. I will go on record now, as saying that before I race around Lake Biwa (140Km) in October my FTP will be closer to 340Watts! From what you and others are saying, I could possibly be way ahead of where I'm at present if I'd worked out at lower intensity - correct? Tyson

cyclingpeakssoftware.comlevels.aspOpen ↗

Quoted post said:

L4: Just below to just above TT effort, taking into account duration, current fitness, environmental conditions, etc. Essentially continuous sensation of moderate or even greater leg effort/fatigue. Continuous conversation difficult at best, due to depth/frequency of breathing.

Quoted post said:

L5: Typical intensity of longer (3-8 min) intervals intended to increase VO2max. Strong to severe sensations of leg effort/fatigue, such that completion of more than 30-40 min total training time is difficult at best

Quoted post said:

L6: Short (30 s to 3 min), high intensity intervals designed to increase anaerobic capacity. Heart rate generally not useful as guide to intensity due to non-steady-state nature of effort. Severe sensation of leg effort/fatigue, and conversation impossible

have a read through the training power level descriptions again. Threshold training - though feeling hard to very hard at the 'end' of the intervals or efforts is really in the moderate to somewhat strong category or around 4 on the Borg 10-pt scale.

I can't speak for Dr. Coggan but, simply taking the baseline training level descriptions, I would rate very intense as L5 and above and moderately intense L2-3 right up to L4.

acoggan said:

Can you say "sweet spot"? ;-)

Seriously, I tend to agree with you that, on average, a large volume of moderately intense training is likely to lead to greater improvements in performance than a much smaller volume of very intense ("power"?) training.

I agree with you as well. I believe that the concepts you have developed are just brilliant!. I wish that 90% of Pro Tour level cyclists could know how to use a power meter...or at least a heart rate monitor!..Seriously, there are Pro Tour riders (fortunately less and less) who still have trouble turning a computer on...:eek: !. Anglosaxon cyclists due to their innovated culture are way more advanced than the old Europe...Most of the posters in this forum (if not all) know a lot more about cycling science than most of Pro Tour riders...

Anyways, about power training, I know I am unfair with it many times...I have just seen that many people tend to get overtrained because they don ´t know how to use info properly. I believe that the general public needs a bit more knowledge before using a power meter and terms like FTP; "sweet spot"...etc. But again, that is my opinion.🙂

Cheers