I wanted to know how it calculates some parameters. I state that as an idea I would like to repeat it the same also in the run, with the only exception on watts or pace.
The continuous eFTP value is calculated for all rides indoor and outdoor. It isn’t calculated for other sports yet, I need to see if the cycling power model fits running power, rowing power etc. first. You can see what eFTP would be and what the modelled power curve looks like for other sports on the /power page.
The %MMP feature in the workout builder looks at the power model for all rides for the last 90 days, not just indoor/outdoor. You can see the curve it is using on the /power page (also tick “Show model curve” in “Options”):
For workouts specified as %FTP that are flagged as indoor it will use the athletes indoor FTP. Otherwise the outdoor FTP is used.
If this doesn’t clear things up please ask or send me examples if something doesn’t appear to be working as it should. I have just fixed a %MMP related bug for Garmin devices.
Hi, David. I saw the power curve as you told me to do and I am attaching a screen to show you that MMP 30s is 443. After I am attaching a structured workout with% MMP 85-90 30s and the calculated values do not coincide. In theory they should be (376-399) instead he proposes to me (391-414). I am attaching screenshots of this too. I would like to understand if I am wrong something?
Then I repeat that the same calculation would be nice to have it also for RUN with the variable watt or pace.
Power and HR targets in the same interval?
How this work?
I did some poking around and it has included runs in the ride power model. So the model is higher, hence the higher than expected power. I will fix and deploy tm. Tx for taking a close look at this.
If the athlete doesn’t have any power stuff setup then it will generate the workout for Garmin etc using the HR info. I am going to be doing some work soon to let the athlete choose per sport what to do for workouts with power, HR (and soon pace) targets. This is so coaches do not have to maintain 3 sets of workouts, plans etc… (tx @Vito_Nacci for the idea).
I still need to get all of this to work … but it won’t be long.
I have fixed this (for deployment Sat AM). However 85-90% of MMP 30s for you comes out at 343-363w because it uses the model power curve (model 403w vs actual 443w). I think your 1s power is a bit better than what has been recorded.
So, is it only a matter of not filling any or all of those fields?
Tks.
Hi Vito,
I presume this workout is not meant to run outdoor in Garmin device, is it?
I ask because last time I tried to use “ramp” and "range (garmin creates his own) it didn’t work.
Thank you,
@david For rowing, what is needed for this? If you just need some set pieces rowed and reported I can contribute those measurements.
I basically just need to look at the curve for “Rowing” on the /power page for some people and see how well the model curve fits the data. That already uses eFTP. I just had a look at yours and its not a bad fit IMO so likely eFTP is working ok.
Further into the future I can generate a set of rowing specific curves for eFTP from data on Intervals.icu.
Hi @Gato_Felix , I used it for outdoor. I live in southern Italy and it’s over 35 degrees. it is not possible to pedal inside. In any case Ramp automatically inserts it intervals when you create warm up. Personally, that’s okay with me, also because I don’t focus much on this fact. I wanted to test the construction of the workout with MMP, before proposing it to the athletes.
What about specify a “range”. In my last attempt of using it with a Garmin it didn’t work.
Wow, Southern Italy? Heading to Monte Grappa Bike Day tomorrow?
Grazie.
