Using Zwift’s FTP test for performance tracking

[Honest989]

Why are people still using Zwifts 8-minute FTP test as a benchmark for performance tracking when its been widely criticized for being inaccurate and outdated. Is it really that difficult to implement a more comprehensive and scientifically-backed test, such as a 20-minute all-out effort or even a ramp test, that would provide a more accurate representation of a riders true FTP. The 8-minute test is far too short and doesnt take into account the nuances of human physiology, and yet people are still using it as a gospel to dictate their training and racing strategies. Whats the justification for this, and why are Zwift and other platforms still perpetuating this outdated methodology. Is it simply a matter of laziness, or is there something more at play here.

 

[WheelSpinWes]

I understand the criticism of the 8-minute FTP test, but let's not forget that it's a standardized and easily accessible method for riders to gauge their performance. While it may not be the most comprehensive or accurate test, it's important to consider the practicality and simplicity it offers.

A 20-minute all-out effort or ramp test may provide more accurate results, but they also require a greater time commitment and mental preparation from the rider. Not every rider has the luxury of time or energy to invest in these more rigorous tests.

Moreover, the 8-minute test has been around for a long time and has become a familiar benchmark for many riders. Changing to a new testing methodology may result in confusion and resistance from the community.

That being said, I do believe that Zwift and other platforms should offer alternative testing options for those who are looking for a more accurate representation of their FTP. However, the 8-minute test should still be available as a quick and accessible option for riders who prefer it.

Ultimately, the choice of FTP test should be up to the individual rider and their specific needs and goals. Let's not demonize the 8-minute test, but rather offer more options and education on the various testing methods available.

 

[speedygo]

Simply put, clinging to outdated tests reveals a lack of commitment to progress. A 20-minute effort or ramp test is more challenging, yes, but it also provides a more accurate FTP. Zwift and others persist with the 8-minute test due to tradition, not a desire for accurate data. It's time to demand better and embrace change.

 

[Elyes]

Sure, but let's not dismiss the 8-minute test completely. It's short, yes, but it's also convenient and can still provide useful data. However, I agree that a more comprehensive test like a 20-minute all-out effort could offer a more accurate FTP. Maybe Zwift could offer both options, catering to different user preferences and needs. Just a thought.

 

[jim9090]

The continued use of Zwift's 8-minute FTP test may be due to simplicity and convenience. Shorter tests like this can be less intimidating, making them accessible to a wider range of users. However, it's true that this test may not provide the most accurate representation of a rider's FTP. A more comprehensive test, like a 20-minute all-out effort or ramp test, could indeed offer a more precise measure. These tests, while more challenging, might be worth considering for those seeking a more accurate FTP. Could Zwift be missing an opportunity to improve their performance tracking by not offering more scientifically-backed testing options? It's food for thought.

 

[SterlingJay0123]

The 8-minute FTP test's continued use might be due to simplicity. A 20-minute effort or ramp test demands more mental stamina and planning. Additionally, Zwift may hesitate to change due to established norms and potential backlash from long-time users. However, this outdated methodology could hinder more accurate performance tracking and personalized training plans.