Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2018; 39(10): 737-742
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-101546
Training & Testing
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Functional Threshold Power in Cyclists: Validity of the Concept and Physiological Responses

Fernando Klitzke Borszcz
1   Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Brazil
,
Artur Ferreira Tramontin
1   Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Brazil
,
Arthur Henrique Bossi
2   School of Sport & Exercise Sciences, University of Kent, Chatham, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
,
Lorival José Carminatti
1   Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Brazil
,
Vitor Pereira Costa
1   Centro de Ciências da Saúde e do Esporte, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History



accepted 15 January 2018

Publication Date:
25 May 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Correction: Functional Threshold Power in Cyclists: Validity of the Concept and Physiological ResponsesInt J Sports Med 2018; 39(10): e1-e1
DOI: 10.1055/a-0639-1221

Abstract

Functional threshold power is defined as the highest power output a cyclist can maintain in a quasi-steady state for approximately 60 min (FTP60). In order to improve practicality for regular evaluations, FTP60 could theoretically be determined as 95% of the mean power output in a 20-min time trial (FTP20). This study tested this assumption and the validity of FTP20 and FTP60 against the individual anaerobic threshold (IAT). Twenty-three trained male cyclists performed an incremental test to exhaustion, 20- and 60-min time trials, and a time to exhaustion at FTP20. Power output, heart rate and oxygen uptake representing FTP20, FTP60 and IAT were not different (p>0.05), and large to very large correlations were found (r=0.61 to 0.88). Bland-Altman plots between FTP20, FTP60 and IAT showed small bias (–1 to –5 W), but large limits of agreement ([–40 to 32 W] to [–62 to 60 W]). Time to exhaustion at FTP20 was 50.9±15.7 min. In conclusion, FTP20 and FTP60 should not be used interchangeably on an individual basis and their validity against IAT should be interpreted with caution.

Key words

cycling - time trial - performance - pacing strategy - noninvasive test - anaerobic threshold
 

  • References

  • 1 Abbiss CR, Quod MJ, Levin G, Martin DT, Laursen PB. Accuracy of the Velotron ergometer and SRM power meter. Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 107-112
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Allen H, Coggan A. Training and racing with a power meter. 2nd ed. Boulder: Velo Press; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Baron B, Noakes TD, Dekerle J, Moullan F, Robin S, Matran R, Pelayo P. Why does exercise terminate at the maximal lactate steady state intensity?. Br J Sports Med 2008; 42: 828-833
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bishop D. Warm up II: performance changes following active warm up and how to structure the warm up. Sports Med 2003; 33: 483-498
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1982; 14: 377-381
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bossi AH, Lima P, Lima JP, Hopker J. Laboratory predictors of uphill cycling performance in trained cyclists. J Sports Sci 2017; 35: 1364-1371
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Currell K, Jeukendrup AE. Validity, reliability and sensitivity of measures of sporting performance. Sports Med 2008; 38: 297-316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Davies MJ, Clark B, Welvaert M, Skorski S, Garvican-Lewis LA, Saunders P, Thompson KG. Effect of environmental and feedback interventions on pacing profiles in cycling: A meta-analysis. Front Physiol 2016; 7: 591
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 De Pauw K, Roelands B, Cheung SS, de Geus B, Rietjens G, Meeusen R. Guidelines to classify subject groups in sport-science research. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2013; 8: 111-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 de Souza KM, Grossl T, Junior RJB, de Lucas RD, Costa VP, Guglielmo LGA. Maximal lactate steady state estimated by different methods of anaerobic threshold. Rev Bras Cineantropom Desempenho Hum 2012; 14: 125-275
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Denham J, Scott-Hamilton J, Hagstrom AD, Gray AJ. Cycling power outputs predict functional threshold power and maximum oxygen uptake. J Strength Cond Res 2017; DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002253.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dickhuth HH, Yin L, Niess A, Rocker K, Mayer F, Heitkamp HC, Horstmann T. Ventilatory, lactate-derived and catecholamine thresholds during incremental treadmill running: Relationship and reproducibility. Int J Sports Med 1999; 20: 122-127
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Faude O, Kindermann W, Meyer T. Lactate threshold concepts: how valid are they?. Sports Med 2009; 39: 469-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Gavin TP, Van Meter JB, Brophy PM, Dubis GS, Potts KN, Hickner RC. Comparison of a field-based test to estimate functional threshold power and power output at lactate threshold. J Strength Cond Res 2012; 26: 416-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Grossl T, de Lucas RD, de Souza KM, Guglielmo LG. Time to exhaustion at intermittent maximal lactate steady state is longer than continuous cycling exercise. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2012; 37: 1047-1053
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Harriss DJ, Macsween A, Atkinson G. Standards for ethics in sport and exercise science research: 2018 update. Int J Sports Med 2017; 38: 1126-1131
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hoefelmann CP, Diefenthaeler F, Costa VP, de Lucas RD, Shambrook P, Guglielmo LG. Test-retest reliability of second lactate turnpoint using two different criteria in competitive cyclists. Eur J Sport Sci 2015; 15: 265-270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hofmann P, Tschakert G. Intensity- and duration-based options to regulate endurance training. Front Physiol 2017; 8: 337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J. Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 3-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kuipers H, Verstappen FT, Keizer HA, Geurten P, van Kranenburg G. Variability of aerobic performance in the laboratory and its physiologic correlates. Int J Sports Med 1985; 6: 197-201
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Miller MC, Moir GL, Stannard SR. Validity of using functional threshold power and intermittent power to predict cross-country mountain bike race outcome. J Sci Cycling 2014; 3: 16-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nimmerichter A, Eston R, Bachl N, Williams C. Effects of low and high cadence interval training on power output in flat and uphill cycling time-trialtime trials. Eur J Appl Physiol 2012; 112: 69-78
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Nimmerichter A, Eston RG, Bachl N, Williams C. Longitudinal monitoring of power output and heart rate profiles in elite cyclists. J Sports Sci 2011; 29: 831-840
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Nimmerichter A, Williams C, Bachl N, Eston R. Evaluation of a field test to assess performance in elite cyclists. Int J Sports Med 2010; 31: 160-166
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Sanders D, Taylor RJ, Myers T, Akubat I. A field-based cycling test to assess predictors of endurance performance and establishing training zones. J Strength Cond Res 2017; DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001910.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Seiler S. What is best practice for training intensity and duration distribution in endurance athletes?. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2010; 5: 276-291
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Tomlin DL, Wenger HA. The relationship between aerobic fitness and recovery from high– intensity intermittent exercise. Sports Med 2001; 31: 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar