I’m working off virtual watts, but I’ve been using the same trainer and bike setup. So I figure even if the numbers aren’t that accurate, I should still be able to at least compare them.
For my first FF I was very green. Ran the LA marathon a monthly earlier and had almost a month off. So, even if I was a bit fatigued, my legs were fresh, tho since it was my first FF I knew I might not pace it quite right. I felt like I probably undercooked the 5 min effort. And then I went out way too hard on the final 1 min effort and died after 35 second, but tried to keep pedaling. My AC and MAP numbers both had to be boosted by the app because they weren’t high enough above FTP and MAP, respectively. Possibly because I didn’t know how to properly pace the 5 minute or 1 minute efforts. I want to say my FTP was too high to begin with. But, I never actually struggled with my FTP numbers in any of my subsequent workouts. I only struggled with MAP, AC, and NM efforts. lol. Probably because I never did those kinds of workouts before… heh.
First FF Test Results - April 4, 2020
Cyclist Type: Time Trialist
NM - 487
AC - 300
MAP - 273
FTP - 237
LTHR - N/A since i only had my Garmin watch and didn’t know how to get it connected to the app.
In the middle of my 12-week All Purpose Road training plan I did a HM test towards the end of a rest week, tho was feeling fatigued. This time I had bought a Wahoo TICKR to get my HR.
Half Monty (Ramp Test) - May 22, 2020
MAP - 283
FTP - 228
LTHR - 152
Notes: I failed the FTP portion, tho, because I didn’t stay inside the HR zones. The instructions said it should feel easy and I should be riding under FTP, but I had to keep riding harder and harder just to get my HR inside the target zone. In most of my workouts I am consistently at the bottom or under the target HR zones.
At the end of my 12-week training plan I did my second FF Test.
Second FF Test Results - July 10, 2020
Rider Type Rouleur
NM - 492
AC - 316
MAP - 287
FTP - 235
LTHR - 152
Notes: I killed myself on the 5 min effort. My lungs were burning and it really killed my FTP effort. The burning feeling never went away during the 20 min effort and I was coming around towards the end, but my legs and lungs were totally dead. Not sure if it’s possible to overcook the 5 min effort? I also totally screwed up my 1 min effort. I heard the app tell me to slow down and I thought I had already finished the full minute, but it was only the 30 second mark and so after 5 seconds of recovery I realized I wasn’t done and kicked it back up as much as possible, but by then it was too late and i had totally messed that part up. My LTHR was exactly the same, so even if my HR zones aren’t that accurate, at least the LTHR value is.
I’m now just over 8 weeks into my Metric Century plan. Doing a lot more extended efforts and not as many high intensity efforts each week. Just did another HM test 2 weeks ago and the results are kind of surprising, but not. I’ve always felt my threshold efforts at 235 felt a bit too easy. Doing the Defender and GOAT sessions in the 2 weeks prior to my last HM test I was consistently holding 10-15w higher than the target throughout the entire workout, so I had an idea I was improving. So, then I did my second HM test that next week.
Second Half Monty Results - August 12, 2020
MAP - 295
FTP - 255
LTHR - 157
Notes: My LTHR went up, which is good. This time I didn’t fail the FTP portion of the HM test. But, to keep my HR in the proper zone I had to ride around 240w the entire time. I bounced around 235-250 to keep my HR from going too low or too high. That was higher than my previous FTP, so I was very surprised I had to ride that hard. But, as I was able to do it after completing the ramp effort, it makes sense that my FTP went up from 235.
So, how comparable are the FTP results between the FF and HM tests? Just 6 weeks after my last FF test, should my FTP have gone up by that much? Especially when it barely even moved in the previous 12 weeks? Or am I benefiting from switching from the All Purpose plan to the Metric Century plan? Maybe I’m less fatigued? The FTP efforts were definitely feeling a lot easier as I said. Tho, I know I’m more of a time trialist, anyway and I enjoy the threshold and sweet spot efforts more than the high intensity efforts and find those efforts easiest, even in the middle of other hard workouts.
But really, just how comparable are the FTP results between the HM and FF tests? Does HM give slightly higher FTP numbers than FF? Or does it depend on your rider type? I feel like my FTP from the last HM test was pretty accurate while the FTP number from the FF test 6 weeks before seemed a little low. However, the MAP number from the HM test seems high and the number from FF seems more accurate. I nearly killed myself getting 287 just 6 weeks before but now I’m suddenly at 295? I love to see my numbers go up, but i’m just not sure about them.
But maybe that’s because I’m using virtual watts?
My MAP efforts seemed pretty spot on in my workouts in the 6 weeks after my last FF test. But, my the threshold efforts between my previous FF test and this last HM test were way too easy and I was pushing myself way above them. It felt like the 5 min effort in FF totally overcooked my legs for the 20 min effort and my FTP numbers ended up too low. In the 2 weeks since my HM test the FTP efforts are definitely more difficult, but seem more accurate. I just did The Bat on Wed. It was hard, I was able to hit the 4 min targets on every interval, but every effort was definitely hard and I didn’t feel like I was leaving anything in the tank. In short, So, the last HM test seems accurate, but maybe the numbers are a little too high. The previous FF numbers seems bit too low. But there are just so many factors to compare between them.
Anyway, just curious for some info and opinions.
Sorry for the long-winded post!