FTP for the FF = 200
Half Monty = 176
I allowed recovery days after the FF assessment to be sure I could perform well in the HM. Why is there such a dip in wattage?
Without having a screenshot. I’d say it’s your heart rate. What was your threshold heart rate for the FF and for the HM.
External factors like the use of a fan or it being on a hot day may also have a factor
Your FTP as a percentage of your MAP is more “normal” in your HM test and unusually high in your FF test. I’m not sure what to read into that, but it does stand out in your test results.
1 Like
You lactate threshold heart rate is lower in the HM. You can use your heart rate to estimate fitigue levels.
Based on this I believe you may have been a little fitigue going into the HM test (vs FF). The heart rate section at the end of the HM would have given you a lower heart rate to work towards.
At that lower heart rate you would have produced less power. When SUF extrapolates it will predict a lower FTP.
Give yourself a bit more rest and try the HM in a few weeks. I would rest your numbers to the FF numbers for now.
Your reasoning sounds good, but for me a big difference in threshold HR made no difference to my FTP results in the tests. For HM I had a LTHR of 171 and for FF it was 182. In both tests my FTP was identical. By your reasoning my HM result should have been much lower.
I was well rested for both tests, so I just put the difference down to the test format. I already knew that my LTHR was above 180, so HM definitely produced an artificially low LTHR value for me, but it had no affect on my FTP score, even though I followed the HR target given for the latter part of the test.
Good point. Was you MAP for both tests the same?
I suspect they are different. The HM and FF gives different kind of results for different types of riders.
I’m going to guess here… You were not classified as a sprinter or attacker in your FF. I suspect more of a time trialist?
Purely guessing here.
My MAP was almost identical in both tests too. The only notable difference was in my LTHR and all I can say is that this difference definitely had no affect on either my FTP or MAP results. Why? I have no idea, but the difference in LTHR I saw was much larger than the OPs so I certainly wouldn’t jump to any conclusion based on LTHR differences alone.
A variation of 11 BPM between the FF and HM is large, but yet it seems to produce the same kind of metrics for FTP amd MAP for you.
My LTHR between the FF and HM it directly correlated to my FTP and MAP.
The only times that I have seen a reduction in my LTHR close to 11 BPM was when I was fatigued. However as I am more of a sprinter I can typically still perform well in a ramp test/HM but would fail in a 20min threshold effort.
Based on this you would also be a sprinter (not a time trialists that I said before).
In reality, the HR is too variable to make broad assumptions. Things that may work for one person may not be applicable to another.
Could you guestimate or provide an alternative explanation for @Nivada 's query?
It’s certainly interesting and I really don’t know why my LTHR was so low in the HM test. But I was feeling on form with no significant fatigue. I’m certainly not a sprinter either. MAP is my strongest metric and NM my weakest. I’m also pretty good at pacing 20 min efforts. SUF says I’m a Pursuiter.
As for @Nivada’s query I would suggest looking into why their FTP and MAP are so close together, especially on the FF test. Given that for most people FTP falls in the range of 72-77% of their MAP. It would suggest that they may well have simply under-performed in the MAP test, which could then have led to an over-performance in the FTP test.
@Nivada Are these your first time performing these tests? Or have you been on SUF for a while and done them before?
I’m the other way around 
FTP from HM - 232
FF - 197 (but I spectacularly exploded on the 5 minutes effort, trying to match the MAP from the HM … )
1 Like
Same here.
When I did the double my MAP went up 7 during HM from my previous. And then went up another 7 during FF.
But my FTP was at 248 from HM and then dropped down to 228 on FF as I was all over the place and died twice during the 20 min effort. 
1 Like
Can you message me the email you use for your SUF account? I’ll do some deeper diving on your tests and see if I can answer sort out why there is such a difference between the two tests.
5 Likes
I’ve been a Sufferlandrian since the beginning of the pandemic and completed both tests previously. Same bike, same setup, same prep.
=0
2 Likes
After 6 months of unstructured cycling and a lot of time in couchlandria, I did a few weeks of random workouts and started:
All-purpose Road Advanced + Strength + Yoga
Week 0
Full frontal:
@74.8 kg
1173, 427, 288, and 218 W (NM, AC, MAP, FTP)
LTHR: 157 bpm
Week 8:
Half Monty
@72.1 kg
317 and 252 W (MAP and FTP)
LTHR: 155 bpm
Week 12 (today):
Full Frontal
@68.8 kg
1111, 437, 311, 257 W
LTHR: 160 bpm
HM was quite good for power, not that much for LTHR.
Probably I have paced MAP a bit low and couldn’t reach 317 as expected. Last year I tested once 315 and another 329 W in FF, always @ close to 70 kg.
Good to see higher relative numbers since I didn’t lost power due to weight reduction.
Last plan I was dealing with sustained weakness, now I hope to improve MAP training for VO2 weakness, but still aiming to reach 4W/kg FTP with further increasing FTP and reducing weight.
Next will be Full century or Hilly Gran Fondo plan, advanced, with weekend out, +strength and yoga? Any advice?
1 Like
That’s a good result with weight loss. I would say your HM result gave a very good indication of subsequent FF result i.e. both within 2%. I also saw a low LTHR with HM, but it didn’t affect my power figures.
Based purely on my 3 FF tests: from April to October my FTP has gone down from 237 to 228. However my MAP has gone up from 283 to 311.
Based on my last 2 HM tests, my FTP should be between 255 and 248.
My last tests were done in the same week back in the second week of October when I did the HM/FF double.
- On that Monday from HM, my MAP was 302 and my FTP was 248. But my HR was low from fatigue from a 100 mile ride 3 days before.
- Then on that Saturday from FF, my MAP was up to 311, but for the first time I couldn’t hold a steady 20-minute pace and cracked twice before ending up with an FTP of 228.
I figure if I rest up from my KoS attempt I should at least be able to match my MAP and then get an FTP higher than 228. Unless, of course, all this bike training and reduced running has changed my fitness in such a way that I’ve been able to raise my MAP but reduced my ability to do sustained efforts. For a quick background, I ran a full marathon in March, but gradually reduced my running because of self-isolation and lockdown to the point where I haven’t done any runs over 3 miles since Sept, and I haven’t done any running at all in the past 5 weeks. I’ve been focusing instead on long bike efforts and my KoS attempt.
Hi,
I have the same problem with the Half Monty. At the beginning of my first training plan my FTP was 120 (I know it sucks 
) and my MAP was 151W. After 6 weeks, I did the Half Monty and my FTP is now 148W and my MAP 179W. I can’t do the trainings now at 100% of my FTP, I adjust it about 90%-92%. Should I do a Full Frontal which seems more accurate or just adjust my metrics like I do for now ?
Thanks for your answer and sorry for the english ! 
1 Like
Hey @PSGN. First of all your numbers are your numbers. They don’t suck, they just are. So much depends on your set up that it’s hard to compare
Next see elsewhere (or here, maybe) that some rider types e.g. attacker do better on HM vs FF. If you can pace FF correctly then it gives you more usable results. So if you think that your numbers are off then redoing FF is your best bet
2 Likes