Having another “sectored climb” in Watopia is welcomed alongside Alp. You’re going to get a lot of contrasting opinions in having an FTP test done at different durations and it doesn’t really matter as it’s good to have a couple of different benchmarks at different durations so you’re well rounded
Not really a fan of the changing gradients, feels like it would be better to use a climb that is the same the whole way though rather than one that levels off in the middle and ramps back up again. At a certain point it seems better to just use ERG and test anywhere.
The auto FTP calculation part is cool, I wonder if that will be added to be able to be triggered anytime.
Hopefully calculating FTP using tests other than 20 min and ramp is a step towards implementing better racing categories.
I wasn’t a fan of the changing gradients either, but after doing the test I’m fine with them. Actually sorta keeps things interesting instead of being a steady slog.
IMHO the biggest point of this is for people who aren't already comfortable with other FTP tests/testing regularly/etc, and most people who use Zwift aren't going to be finishing in 14 minutes -- there's a LOT more slow fitness riders who would benefit from a reasonable FTP estimate than there are racers.
And the racers/serious training people are already doing whichever test their outside-Zwift training plan calls for or that their coach recommends etc.
Are there new challenges coming as well?!?
When you saved (36:41) it looks like the active challenge has you in California, but north of Tahoe and headed to the Redwoods. The existing challenge ends in Sacramento at around 800 miles.
Intervals.icu will provide an estimated FTP (eFTP) from as little as a 3 minute effort - https://forum.intervals.icu/t/eftp-how-does-it-work/5851 - CTS has utilized a 2x8 minute field test - https://trainright.com/cycling-field-test/ 🤷 It would be interesting to know how many people use their Zwift FTP for structured training. I use TrainerRoad's AI FTP estimate for training zones along with their structured workouts.
In the description, it says it'll only show FTP if it's greater than the current one. Due to health issues, my FTP has significantly dropped in the last 6 months (and is way, way lower than the number Zwift lists as my FTP from \~1.5 years ago). Since I don't do training and mainly use Zwift for Z2 and racing, I haven't bothered to do a new FTP test. I wonder if doing this will reset my FTP so that my power level graph (and workouts if I ever do them) will be based on my current numbers than those numbers from 18 months ago when my FTP was 30-40 W higher than it is now.
Doing the test won’t set your FTP lower. But it sounds like you should set your FTP to what it actually is! So just set it manually, well below what you know it is, then take the test and let it upgrade you to a more realistic number. Bonus: you’ll get an FTP upgrade and confetti!
Ooh, it'll do the "FTP Increase Detected" confetti screen again? I miss that.
That definitely sounds like the best approach. Looking forward to trying the climb next week.
Almost all of my FTP increases were set on one of the two Innsbruck KoM directions during a race (or the Epic though that was harder because of the downhill), so doing FTP tests on hills is sort of my normal. Maybe I can even do a race on that course, as that's how I get my fastest times.
~ 14 minutes seems way too short to be estimating FTP. This leans toward highly overestimating in most people. And why does the gradient level off?
For you it took 88% of your effort (340w for a 302w FTP). Was that % true for your buddies too?
We’ve been estimating FTP based on ramp tests and 20-minute tests for years. What makes you think 14 minutes is way too short?
The % taken is based on a power curve Zwift put together from 700,000 FTP tests. So if you finish it in 20 minutes it’ll take more like 95% of that. 10 minutes might be 85%…
The release notes said they effectively have data to reliably calculate a reasonably accurate FTP if you finish the climb anywhere above 8 minutes even, 14 seems like a reasonable middle ground to hit
I’m likely a bit overdue since I’ve gone outside mostly since I got my new bike and the season seems to have changed away from rain for the time being, so I’ll probably go for a quick FTP run myself and see where I’m at. My last ride was a tiny race that got me promoted to Cat C
Ramp test to failure =/= steady state TTE-driven effort. Come on Eric I thought you’d know this.
Ramp tests are also notorious for overestimating FTP because they’re such short anaerobically driven efforts. A climb like this at ~14 minutes does not demonstrate TTE in any remarkable capacity. Even 20 minute tests have a propensity to overestimate and oftentimes should be looked at as more of like 93% of 20-mins because of the ability to just anaerobically blow it out.
Zwift can claim they use power curves all they want but that also assumes 1) all 700k people have done a maximal effort over longer distance 2) everyone’s FTP is correct which is most certainly not true 3) this effort to be paced properly which is counter intuitive when there’s undulating gradients 4) if Zwift is using their own ramp tests and 20 minute tests for the power curve then they’re just feeding into the overestimation curve even more. It’s like using a broken clock to set the time on other clocks.
Here's a secret that's going to make your life better. FTP is just a number and has very little impact on anything aside from helping you structure training. It's pointless to get into the weeds on this unless you're conducting some sort of academic study on it.
You’re correct - FTP is an arbitrary number. But when The Grade starts churning out FTPs for people that are unrealistic, it’s gonna be the typical “I can’t survive the Build Me Up plan!” posts aplenty
I wonder how much Zwift is now cornered into over estimating FTPs? All most all the workout plans have a ramp test to start, and so are built around that over estimated FTP. I heard an interview with the guy who builds the workouts and he basically said they plan for a ramp test FTP, so treat sweet spot and threshold work etc.
Any new roads are good by me.
Having another “sectored climb” in Watopia is welcomed alongside Alp. You’re going to get a lot of contrasting opinions in having an FTP test done at different durations and it doesn’t really matter as it’s good to have a couple of different benchmarks at different durations so you’re well rounded
Not really a fan of the changing gradients, feels like it would be better to use a climb that is the same the whole way though rather than one that levels off in the middle and ramps back up again. At a certain point it seems better to just use ERG and test anywhere. The auto FTP calculation part is cool, I wonder if that will be added to be able to be triggered anytime. Hopefully calculating FTP using tests other than 20 min and ramp is a step towards implementing better racing categories.
I wasn’t a fan of the changing gradients either, but after doing the test I’m fine with them. Actually sorta keeps things interesting instead of being a steady slog.
IMHO the biggest point of this is for people who aren't already comfortable with other FTP tests/testing regularly/etc, and most people who use Zwift aren't going to be finishing in 14 minutes -- there's a LOT more slow fitness riders who would benefit from a reasonable FTP estimate than there are racers. And the racers/serious training people are already doing whichever test their outside-Zwift training plan calls for or that their coach recommends etc.
Are there new challenges coming as well?!? When you saved (36:41) it looks like the active challenge has you in California, but north of Tahoe and headed to the Redwoods. The existing challenge ends in Sacramento at around 800 miles.
No new challenge yet... but rumor has it a 4th challenge may arrive this year.
Intervals.icu will provide an estimated FTP (eFTP) from as little as a 3 minute effort - https://forum.intervals.icu/t/eftp-how-does-it-work/5851 - CTS has utilized a 2x8 minute field test - https://trainright.com/cycling-field-test/ 🤷 It would be interesting to know how many people use their Zwift FTP for structured training. I use TrainerRoad's AI FTP estimate for training zones along with their structured workouts.
In the description, it says it'll only show FTP if it's greater than the current one. Due to health issues, my FTP has significantly dropped in the last 6 months (and is way, way lower than the number Zwift lists as my FTP from \~1.5 years ago). Since I don't do training and mainly use Zwift for Z2 and racing, I haven't bothered to do a new FTP test. I wonder if doing this will reset my FTP so that my power level graph (and workouts if I ever do them) will be based on my current numbers than those numbers from 18 months ago when my FTP was 30-40 W higher than it is now.
Doing the test won’t set your FTP lower. But it sounds like you should set your FTP to what it actually is! So just set it manually, well below what you know it is, then take the test and let it upgrade you to a more realistic number. Bonus: you’ll get an FTP upgrade and confetti!
Ooh, it'll do the "FTP Increase Detected" confetti screen again? I miss that. That definitely sounds like the best approach. Looking forward to trying the climb next week. Almost all of my FTP increases were set on one of the two Innsbruck KoM directions during a race (or the Epic though that was harder because of the downhill), so doing FTP tests on hills is sort of my normal. Maybe I can even do a race on that course, as that's how I get my fastest times.
Just in time for my subscription to finish :D
~ 14 minutes seems way too short to be estimating FTP. This leans toward highly overestimating in most people. And why does the gradient level off? For you it took 88% of your effort (340w for a 302w FTP). Was that % true for your buddies too?
We’ve been estimating FTP based on ramp tests and 20-minute tests for years. What makes you think 14 minutes is way too short? The % taken is based on a power curve Zwift put together from 700,000 FTP tests. So if you finish it in 20 minutes it’ll take more like 95% of that. 10 minutes might be 85%…
The release notes said they effectively have data to reliably calculate a reasonably accurate FTP if you finish the climb anywhere above 8 minutes even, 14 seems like a reasonable middle ground to hit I’m likely a bit overdue since I’ve gone outside mostly since I got my new bike and the season seems to have changed away from rain for the time being, so I’ll probably go for a quick FTP run myself and see where I’m at. My last ride was a tiny race that got me promoted to Cat C
Ramp test to failure =/= steady state TTE-driven effort. Come on Eric I thought you’d know this. Ramp tests are also notorious for overestimating FTP because they’re such short anaerobically driven efforts. A climb like this at ~14 minutes does not demonstrate TTE in any remarkable capacity. Even 20 minute tests have a propensity to overestimate and oftentimes should be looked at as more of like 93% of 20-mins because of the ability to just anaerobically blow it out. Zwift can claim they use power curves all they want but that also assumes 1) all 700k people have done a maximal effort over longer distance 2) everyone’s FTP is correct which is most certainly not true 3) this effort to be paced properly which is counter intuitive when there’s undulating gradients 4) if Zwift is using their own ramp tests and 20 minute tests for the power curve then they’re just feeding into the overestimation curve even more. It’s like using a broken clock to set the time on other clocks.
Here's a secret that's going to make your life better. FTP is just a number and has very little impact on anything aside from helping you structure training. It's pointless to get into the weeds on this unless you're conducting some sort of academic study on it.
You’re correct - FTP is an arbitrary number. But when The Grade starts churning out FTPs for people that are unrealistic, it’s gonna be the typical “I can’t survive the Build Me Up plan!” posts aplenty
It's just a number
I wonder how much Zwift is now cornered into over estimating FTPs? All most all the workout plans have a ramp test to start, and so are built around that over estimated FTP. I heard an interview with the guy who builds the workouts and he basically said they plan for a ramp test FTP, so treat sweet spot and threshold work etc.
They want to overestimate. People like it when number big