FTP on FF 60w lower than HM

[Savman]

Please can somebody help to interpret these results (picture below).

• Full Frontal (FF) Feb 2021 182W (Weakness sustained efforts)
• Half monty (HM) Feb 2021 241W
• FF Sep 2020 208W (Weakness VO2 max)

Each FF test has shown a strength in repeated efforts which allows me to over perform on the HM. [I find the sustained effort on the HM very hard] The last full frontal downgraded by MAP from 290 to 258…

I am interesting in track cycling under 60mins but have a issue with keeping in the group. I have the following questions:

1. Which numbers should I train on
2. Which plan should I do next to improve my FTP alone as I feel this is holding me back (i.e. Time trial?)

[Martin]

Hi there.

Prior to the two lost recent tests what was your physical prep like - so what are you doing for the 7 days prior to each test

Are you using a direct drive smart trainer (only asking that so we know that consistency of power output exists)

What is your max hr? (Looks like you’ve managed an estimated LTHR of 177 during the HM - which is very different to the LTHR in the FF)

———

If I had no other information other than that provided in your post though (to directly answer your question) I’d use your HM results.

And I’d create my own plan based around one VO2, one STR and one ftp workout a week. And add in any volume as I saw fit.

[JamesT]

Hi @Savman. If you need help interpreting your results then don’t hesistate to contact the minions. They have access to all your ride data so should be able to point you in the right direction regarding your numbers and training. Need help with The Sufferfest App? Contact the minions for fast support!

[Savman]

First test in September 2020 I had no prep. Just bought a crank power meter (with a dumb trainer). Think I had just come of cycling a bit before.

I updated to the Kickr in January did a HM with no prep got 227. Again no prep. I changed to using the kickr for indoor power meter readings. My Max heart rate is 197.

On the most recent tests I follow the one week HM & FM plan prep.

See below data of my best power numbers since having a power meter.

[Martin]

I’d use HM numbers …

And forget all numbers before you started using the (calibrated I assume? if it is one that need it) Kickr

And see James note above ^^^^^^

[Savman]

Thanks I have submitted a request. Will keep you posted on the response.

[pb07]

I had a similar experience recently - did a FF prior to starting a training program, but had to keep bumping up the FTP & MAP numbers in workouts to get a difficult feel. In my interview with Coach Spencer he asked how I felt after doing Nine Hammers which I’d just finished before our call (answer was “yeah I feel fine”). He raised his eyebrow slightly and said to do Half Monty before starting the program. My HM numbers were way higher than the FF, and suddenly a whole bunch of vids became a whole bunch harder. Interestingly the HM numbers were pretty close to what I’d been progressively (manually) increasing my FTP and MAP targets to, to get the desired RPE. Nine Hammers now feels like being smacked in the face repeatedly with increasingly large hammers.

My mid-program HM bumped my FTP & MAP again. I haven’t had a chance to go back and do another FF yet, so can’t report how it compares. If it drops my target FTP/MAP I’ll take @Martin 's advice - do another HM and just use the HM numbers. I’d be curious to find out what it all means physiologically.

[Sir_Paul]

Interesting thread. I’ve only ever done HM once but it did bump my FTP and MAP considerably. HM was planned at the half way point of my current plan but, from that experience, I skipped it as MAP sessions were already battering me. I want to be worked hard but I also want to be able to finish sessions. Perhaps it’s a psychological thing knowing that there’s no 1 minute effort to contend with which causes greater effort on the ramp? The 20 session also seems a slightly nicer experience. Same thing maybe?

I think HM is good idea but will sticking with FF as my bench mark unless things get too comfortable… can’t be having that!!

[devolikewhoa]

here are a few potential things that i can think of:

1. you progressed quickly after your FF, hence why you needed to bump up the intensity in your workouts, and the later HM reflected that. Some adaptations come on relatively quickly, like blood plasma volume, muscle coordination and things like anaerobic power.

2. your FF was on a bad day. There’s probably more variability in our day to day performance than we realize, and maybe you just had a bad day for it. Again consistent with having to bump up your workouts and your HM results

3. you didn’t pace the FF well enough to really reflect your strenght. Any “time trial” type test depends on pacing, some more than others. And pacing is a skill. mental toughness helps, but just doing the tests help as well.

bottom line is, i think your best for validating your numbers is how you feel during the workouts.

[Savman]

I have moved away from Sufferfest training plans for the next month. My aerobic engine is very low in comparison to my other metrics. I am going to follow a periodized training plan for the next month which consists mainly of zone 2 rides of varying length.

I believe my key issue is how I breath on the bike so will be focusing on that.

I received the following response from the minions:
During the constrained portion of HM they averaged 193W, which is 9W higher than what they averaged for the 20min in FF. The 20min portion of HM should always be lower than the 20min portion of FF. It looks like they were just on a really good day for HM, and not such a great day for FF. Based on their numbers from both tests I would say leave NM and AC as set by FF, set MAP to 290, and FTP to 210. Then do a few sessions to see how those values feel. Ideally they would take it easy for several days after FF, and then near the end of the week try 9Hammers. If they make it all the way through without issue then they should increase their MAP and FTP closer to what HM gave them.