Part of taking part in cycling coaching and training is improvement, after all, wouldn’t everyone just go and ride if they weren’t charging towards some goals?

Testing fitness is the act of measuring progress and can be done in multiple ways. While I will touch upon testing that isn’t power-based first, the nuts and bolts of this article investigates some of the most common power testing protocols that are prescribed by coaches, and the benefits and disadvantages of each.

First off: general testing

I had a question by a newer rider recently, after a bit of a conversation about power based training and numbers.

“Can I train without power?” she asked. Which is a legitimate question in some regards, if you’re only focussing on numbers then there may be a sense of riding without them isn’t useful, or a form of training. But back in the not so distant past, there was no easy access to power metres, and not even that long ago the best heart rate monitor that was available was a wrist based watch, which had no ability to upload data and analyse. It was literally just looking and seeing what your heart rate was doing moment by moment.

Despite this, bike races have been raced for over a century, so suffice to say that yes, you can train (and even fitness test) without power or heart rate.

The good thing about this is that it is super easy to do, and you can complete it almost anywhere. One of the easiest ways to test how your fitness is going is to climb a hill. Hit your lap button at the start and the end of the hill (for assessing aerobic ability a long hill >8min would be best, for a hill more representative of your aerobic capacity or VO2 select a hill 3-5min-ish). Once you’ve done this, make a note of where you’re at, then continue training and test again in 3-6 weeks.

The benefits of these unstructured tests without power and numbers is that for a lot of people it can reduce the anxiety around power numbers that some cyclists can get. It doesn’t take the energy and motivation that sometimes we feel like we have to bring to one of the other testing modalities.

Structured testing: The ramp test

Ramp testing has been around for aeons, initially paired in a lab with lactate or gas exchange testing in order to ascertain differing thresholds: essentially the onset of lactate accumulation (generally for most of us that point between our endurance and tempo training zones/VT1) and the threshold we know and love (the point of equilibrium of lactate, VT2), followed by V02 Max.

While we all don’t have lactate testing or gas exchange facilities enabling us to chart our progression of lactate or expired CO2 in order to pinpoint the points in a ramped wattage in which we start accumulating lactate, and the point at which our body is unable to clear it as quickly as it’s being produced by cellular metabolism.

But anyway it’s been a long time since I have studied this in university so we will skip through the lectures and get to how you can use the ramp test at home.

Many training apps such as Zwift and TrainerRoad feature a ramp test to use as a baseline fitness test and to retest throughout the season. It’s a reasonably quick and easy way to assess maximal aerobic power (essentially the power at VO2 max without the fancy lab measurements) and from that number we can assess–roughly–a threshold power which is usually in the range off 72-78% of the power in the last minute of the test.

The test starts aerobically and increases incrementally and reaches a point of capacity by the end of the test and it really doesn’t hurt…until it does…then it really hurts, then it’s pretty much over.

Different ramp test protocols will yield different results: a steeper ramp (ie 25w compared to 15w) will likely yield a larger map by the end as it reduces the total time spent aerobically and, above your threshold, accumulating lactate. Ergo, typically this test features shorter steps (1min) than lab based VO2 tests that often feature 3 or 5min steps (OW!) which result in smaller values expressed for the same reason mentioned above

RAMP TEST PROS:

-Easy to fit in with other training: the test itself should be around 20-25min

-Only hurts towards the end, but that’s when it counts

-good assessment of MAP

-Doesn’t require smart trainer, can do with power on old school trainer (requires concentration to ensure accuracy within each step)

RAMP TEST CONS:

-Not super accurate for threshold measurement for some athletes

-Periods of time off the bike can result in an spike in anaerobic capacity, driving the number up and not representing true threshold values

-Doesn’t allow a 360-degree look at how that athlete arrived at their MAP

-Doesn’t look at assessing other important factors in performance

Structured Testing: The Power Profile

A little more intensive and shedding a little more light on the rider as a person is the power profiling test. These are a series of tests that allow you or a coach to assess your performance over differing durations, essentially forming what we can call a critical power chart (maximal output at differing durations). You don’t even need fancy software to do this: you can manually draw out the chart and the line of best fit, and within that extrapolate where you will likely fit in between the tested durations, as long as you truly completed ‘all out’ tests.

So what are the tests? We look at the main energy systems and test them accordingly. So a sprint or neuromuscular power will be reflected in a 15sec output, anaerobic capacity at around 1min, VO2 at 4-6min and threshold >15min. Once you have these values it’s easy as plotting on a graph, or using third party training software such as TrainingPeaks to assess them. You can look to power profile charts to assess your strengths and weaknesses and assess what ‘phenotype’ you are (sprinter, pursuit, all-rounder, time-trialler).

You can do the maximal tests whichever way you like: if on the trainer I will jam all in one day which can be mentally challenging but time-efficient. For a rider using a power metre in the field I will split into two days: sprint and anaerobic, followed by VO2 and 20min. Some coaches prefer a dedicated ‘testing’ week, which allows for the best singular results but is very time demanding.

Whatever way you work your protocol, keep it consistent between tests. If you do a 5min test on its own it’s likely to be much better than if it’s preceded by sprint and anaerobic power duration tests.

PROFILE TESTS PROS:

-Gives you a more wholistic view of the athlete and how they best make power

-can target training based on power-durations to marry up with demands of the targeted event

-much easier to do in the field than ramp testing

PROFILE TEST CONS:

-Not as time-efficient as the ramp test or unstructured testing

-Requires adequate terrain applicable for each power duration (ie no coasting or red lights for the longer tests!)

-Longer duration tests are very mentally fatiguing and have a requirement to understand your body and pace accordingly for the best results

Structured Testing: Traditional FTP

The OG FTP test is a one-hour at maximal output. Sounds pretty gross, and TBH I have never done it. While it is the most accurate way to test your threshold values, this one hour test is a lot of mental and physical matches to burn for something you can more-or-less get a good gauge of via shorter tests.

Because of this, the 20min test was born, I’m which you complete a 20min all out test and subtract 5-10% of the final average value to get your FTP. Who takes 5 and who takes 10% off? Well the theory is more aerobically strong athletes will take 5% while those who are known to have more top end take 10%. Or you could split the difference if you don’t know and go 7.5%.

There are a range of other long-form testing protocols, too, such as the 95-100-105% test which starts at 95% of expected FTP for 20min, followed by 20min at expected FTP then as long as you can at 105%. Sounds terrible? It is. While the cognition behind this makes sense: those with a higher anaerobic contribution to shorter tests may ‘overperform’ in the 20min test, in the end this type of protracted testing throws up more questions and difficulties with mental matches, terrain, and even basing the whole test on predicted numbers instead of feel.

OG FTP TESTS PROS:

-Longer form tests are more likely to give you a reasonably accurate number for threshold

-Yes that’s about it

OG FTP TEST CONS:

-Requires adequate terrain applicable for each power duration (ie no coasting or red lights for the longer tests!)

-Longer duration tests are very mentally fatiguing and have a requirement to understand your body and pace accordingly for the best results

-If you’re not a TTer/Triathlete will you ever ride at steady state for an hour anyway?

Testing Roundup

So what test would I use? Simple: whatever the best test is for the athlete and their race goals and physiology.

I have many athletes that come to test certain power-durations to assess progress at my home set up as they’re not actively working with power on a daily basis. I have never made anyone do a 20+ minute test on the ergo because that’s just hell. I use the ramp test for a testing starting point, and if further power testing is required a full or partial profile is often the way to go.

Racing Cyclocross? Perhaps looking at 15sec, 1min and the fatigue resistance for multiple efforts is more race specific.

Racing XCO? The 30sec–4min duration is probably your #1 priority

Racing Road or Marathon? You will likely lean more heavily on the longer power durations.

There is no one easy answer, only more questions.

LIFE HACKS FOR POWER TESTING:

-Pick a protocol and ensure you make notes about the execution

-Ensure you’re using the same power metre, bike, and equipment (ie: water bottle on bike)

-Test at the same time of day at the same stage of your training cycle (ie: end of recovery week or start of first work week)

-Ensure oral intake is the same prior to each test

-Don’t do anything stupid that you won’t be replicating in training (ie if you don’t normally have 4x coffees, a mother and preworkout prior to a session, don’t do it before testing)

-Prepare to be uncomfortable and give it your best

-Your results are yours alone and not comparable to old mate next-door.

A plotted power duration curve with the ‘line of best fit’ you can see this athlete would benefit from more testing where the yellow line dips to improve the best fit (ie 45sec–3min and Peak Power)

Fitness Testing Q and A