Cycling has become an appreciably data-rich sport and, with a major focus on 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:indoor cycling of late, one of the concepts that have risen to the fore is Functional Threshold Power🐭💦 – or FTP.
The most accurate way of measuring your FTP is by way of a performance test as it provides an individual with information on the characteristics associated with cycling performance. While the gold standard of performance testing is VO2max and lactate tests performed in a laboratory setting, you can also accurately determine it in the comfort of your own home using most of the currently available 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:indoor cycling apps, a turbo trainers or a power meter.
The most important aspect of any test is its val🃏idity and reliability, and ensuring that the results achieved are repeatable.
Performance tests are conducted for a range of reasons. However, the most applicable reasons for cyclists are to establish training zone prescription and performance monitoring. And while these tests have been performed in the lab or outdoors in the past, the 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:current global lockdown situation has forꦉced us to explore the ramp test and oth🐠er third-party FTP test protocols.
Functional Threshold Power
This is arguably the hottest term in cycling, with thousands of cyclists signing up to online cycling platforms such as Zwift, 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:TrainerRoad, Rouvy and 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:The Sufferfest, which utilise your FTP♕ value tꦦo establish your in-game racing category or workout difficulty.
Functional threshold power is defined as the highest po♏wer output a cyclist can maintain in a quasi-steady state for approximately 60 minutes (FTP60).
FTP was conceptualised in this way as it resembles physiol🌺ogical markers of performance such as the maximal lactate steady state (MLSS) and second lactate turn-point (LT2). Exercises sustained at intensi🎃ties higher than these physiological markers do not reach steady-state and lead to exhaustion.
As it is rather painful to perform a 60-minute sustaine🍷d effort as a test, Hunter Alleಌn and Dr Andrew Coggan suggested that FTP60 could be determined as 95 per cent of the mean power output in a 20-minute TT (FTP20). This would assist in reducing the effort time and improve the practicality for regular assessments.
A second method of determining FTP60 was suggested as performing 2x 8-minute time trials and utilising 90 per cent of the mean power output. Research has shown that FTP60 and FTP20 are more closely related to LT2, and should, therefore, be the preferred met൩hod of testing.
There is a large debate raging whether FTP is a thoroughly valid concept, due to large limits of agreement between most variables, suggesting a high level of interindividual variabili☂ty in the relationship between FTP20 vs. FTP60. These measures should therefore not be used interchangeably unless their relationship is tested on an individual basis. It has been suggested that FTP20 is used for training intensity prescription and regular monitoring, as the 20-minute time-trial performance is reliable, and is sensitive to training adaptations and cycling ability.
One of the major concerns of 20-minute FTP testing is the pacing strategy of the test. Starting too conservatively or too aggressively will not be a true reflection of your ability. While this can be corrected with a few familiarisatioওn trials, it's hard to get this correct every time, affecting the reliability of the test.
