Log in:  

Register

Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

12 Apr 2018 20:29

I know they’re not really climbing numbers but anyone have any recent classics power figures?
Durden93
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 19:16

Re:

19 Apr 2018 17:53

Durden93 wrote:I know they’re not really climbing numbers but anyone have any recent classics power figures?

There is a ton of (recent) data to scrape from Strava, if you have the time and inclination to do so (I intend to collect and organize some but haven't gotten very far yet).

For instance, none less than he-who-was-previously-known-as-El-Imbatido posted his Fleche Wallone ride from yesterday, including power data (kudos to him for doing so) - like some he keeps his account somewhat pseudonymous but it is not hard to figure out it is indeed the real Bala: https://www.strava.com/activities/1517846768#37869816295

On the final Mur de Huy ascent segment he averaged 513W for 3m14s. At a Wikipedia-listed weight of 61kg that makes 8.4 W/kg, not bad, but IMO not indicative of much except that he is a world class puncheur (not exactly news).

Another example of a good classics rider who tends to post his power data is Oliver Naesen. For both Flanders and Roubaix I think he averaged north of 300W for more than 5 hours, rather impressive.
zenoiz
Newly Registered Member
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 18 Oct 2012 15:40

Re:

06 May 2018 20:59

Durden93 wrote:I know they’re not really climbing numbers but anyone have any recent classics power figures?



https://cyclingtips.com/2018/04/by-the-numbers-what-it-takes-to-win-at-the-mens-ardennes-classics/
diegocamilo410
New Member
 
Posts: 18
Joined: 03 Apr 2016 16:36
Location: Colombia

Re: Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

19 May 2018 16:45

https://twitter.com/VelonCC/status/997869705624014848

420W with an average speed of 11,6km/h. LOL
User avatar Dekker_Tifosi
Veteran
 
Posts: 24,010
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:52
Location: Roermond, the Netherlands

19 May 2018 19:09

And @ 80rpm to boot. By modern standards these these super steep climbs present quite unique neuromuscular demands. Gearing helps some of course, but still very slow rpm.
User avatar meat puppet
Member
 
Posts: 1,973
Joined: 29 May 2011 06:57

25 May 2018 18:13

Would love to see numbers from today
More Strides than Rides
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,179
Joined: 15 Mar 2011 23:52

Re:

25 May 2018 19:07

More Strides than Rides wrote:Would love to see numbers from today


Stage 19. MTF Jafferau (7.25 km, 9.02 %, 654 m)

24:39 | Carapaz
24:46 | Pinot
24:51 | M.A.Lopez
25:02 | Dumoulin
25:03 | Froome
Today's fastest time (Carapaz) is 2:55 slower than record time 21:44 (Santambrogio/Nibali in 2014


Stage 19
Colle delle Finestre (18.40 km, 9.21 %, 1694 m)
Record time: Jose Rujano 1:02:16 (2011)

Froome climbed Finestre in 1:04:18.

Credit: https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily
SeriousSam wrote: Peña Cabarga is like Froome's Mount Doom, the place where his great power was forged into fearsome weapon. He was never going to lose here
User avatar silvergrenade
Member
 
Posts: 1,657
Joined: 23 Jan 2016 17:30

Re: Re:

25 May 2018 23:43

silvergrenade wrote:
More Strides than Rides wrote:Would love to see numbers from today


Stage 19. MTF Jafferau (7.25 km, 9.02 %, 654 m)

24:39 | Carapaz
24:46 | Pinot
24:51 | M.A.Lopez
25:02 | Dumoulin
25:03 | Froome
Today's fastest time (Carapaz) is 2:55 slower than record time 21:44 (Santambrogio/Nibali in 2014


Stage 19
Colle delle Finestre (18.40 km, 9.21 %, 1694 m)
Record time: Jose Rujano 1:02:16 (2011)

Froome climbed Finestre in 1:04:18.

Credit: https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily


Thanks for these data. Both of Froome's times on the climbs correspond to 5.40 W/kg by Ferrari's equation, well below the level considered more or less the limit of clean riding. Of course, most of the Finestre was climbed with the group; he would have been putting out more power after he attacked. And assuming he put out the same power on Sestriere, he was sustaining that level for about two hours of climbing, punctuated by what? 30-40 minutes of descending?

In his published data, Pinot recorded just 5.0 W/kg for 2 hours in 2013:

http://www.fredericgrappe.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/pinot-ppr.pdf
Last edited by Merckx index on 25 May 2018 23:51, edited 1 time in total.
Merckx index
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,759
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 19:19

Re: Re:

25 May 2018 23:46

Merckx index wrote:
Thanks for these data. Both of Froome's times on the climbs correspond to 5.40 W/kg by Ferrari's equation, well below the level considered more or less the limit of clean riding. Of course, most of the Finestre was climbed with the group; he would have been putting out more power after he attacked. And assuming he put out the same power on Sestriere, he was sustaining that level for about two hours of climbing, punctuated by what? 30-40 minutes of descending?


TTE is obviously not linear with effort. It's just a steep exponential drop at the very end.
hazaran
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 14 Jul 2015 00:37

Re: Re:

27 May 2018 07:47

silvergrenade wrote:
More Strides than Rides wrote:Would love to see numbers from today


Stage 19. MTF Jafferau (7.25 km, 9.02 %, 654 m)

24:39 | Carapaz
24:46 | Pinot
24:51 | M.A.Lopez
25:02 | Dumoulin
25:03 | Froome
Today's fastest time (Carapaz) is 2:55 slower than record time 21:44 (Santambrogio/Nibali in 2014

Stage 19
Colle delle Finestre (18.40 km, 9.21 %, 1694 m)
Record time: Jose Rujano 1:02:16 (2011)

Froome climbed Finestre in 1:04:18.

Credit: https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily



Image
Thems clean numbers
rick james
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,418
Joined: 02 Sep 2014 13:21
Location: Ecosse

28 May 2018 02:12

5.4 W/kg is the Clinic's new 6.4 W/kg.
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,269
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re:

28 May 2018 20:06

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:5.4 W/kg is the Clinic's new 6.4 W/kg.


We're not talking about a 30 minute climb to a finish, where the rider goes all out. We're talking about an hour climb, saving enough energy to ride 70-75 more km, including another climb at 5.4 W/kg.
Merckx index
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,759
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 19:19

Re: Re:

28 May 2018 20:30

Merckx index wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:5.4 W/kg is the Clinic's new 6.4 W/kg.


We're not talking about a 30 minute climb to a finish, where the rider goes all out. We're talking about an hour climb, saving enough energy to ride 70-75 more km, including another climb at 5.4 W/kg.


That’s not what we’re talking about either. There was a lot of descending after the Finestre. Obviously Froome did a tremendous ride on the descents to grow his gap but descending is much more about technical prowess than physical effort. The effort becomes a lot more normal when you consider that Froome’s effort on the descents was probably in the 3-4w/kg range, which is a tempo effort. For comparison’s sake, Barguil was at 6w/kg for 1 hour over 3 climbs in last year’s tdf. That’s not to say that Barguil’s performance was clean, but that Froome’s isn’t unprecedented.
Durden93
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 19:16

Re: Re:

28 May 2018 21:03

Durden93 wrote:
That’s not what we’re talking about either. There was a lot of descending after the Finestre. Obviously Froome did a tremendous ride on the descents to grow his gap but descending is much more about technical prowess than physical effort. The effort becomes a lot more normal when you consider that Froome’s effort on the descents was probably in the 3-4w/kg range, which is a tempo effort. For comparison’s sake, Barguil was at 6w/kg for 1 hour over 3 climbs in last year’s tdf. That’s not to say that Barguil’s performance was clean, but that Froome’s isn’t unprecedented.


The point is, he did 5.4 W/kg for an hour (probably less till he attacked, then more after that), had some rest or reduced effort, then was able to put out 5.4 W/kg again for a sustained period of time. I don't think we can easily determine how much the reduced effort would allow him to recover to make another sustained effort, but it looks to me to be beyond what most riders could do. As I pointed out before, Pinot couldn't sustain 5.4 W/kg for two hours (nor 6.0 for one hour, for that matter).
Merckx index
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,759
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 19:19

28 May 2018 21:25

What's Froome's threshold? Let's say 6.0 W/kg. It's probably higher but let's say 6.

5.4 is 90% of threshold. Less if we think his threshold is higher. 2 hours of that with a decent amount of endurance effort in the middle doesn't strike me as wildly strange. 90% of threshold is sustainable for quite a long time.

All the data says to me is it's well inside the bit fat fuzzy line demarcating the plausible/non-plausible zone and there's not a lot we can infer from it, per se.
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,269
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re:

28 May 2018 21:39

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:What's Froome's threshold? Let's say 6.0 W/kg. It's probably higher but let's say 6.

5.4 is 90% of threshold. Less if we think his threshold is higher. 2 hours of that with a decent amount of endurance effort in the middle doesn't strike me as wildly strange. 90% of threshold is sustainable for quite a long time.

All the data says to me is it's well inside the bit fat fuzzy line demarcating the plausible/non-plausible zone and there's not a lot we can infer from it, per se.


I’d say Froome’s threshold is around 6.2/6.3. But in the third week of a GT it’s still lower. Pinot’s data showed that he can hold 5w/kg for 5 hours so 5.4 for two hours for Froome isn’t too surprising.
Durden93
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 19:16

Re: Re:

29 May 2018 05:29

Durden93 wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:What's Froome's threshold? Let's say 6.0 W/kg. It's probably higher but let's say 6.

5.4 is 90% of threshold. Less if we think his threshold is higher. 2 hours of that with a decent amount of endurance effort in the middle doesn't strike me as wildly strange. 90% of threshold is sustainable for quite a long time.

All the data says to me is it's well inside the bit fat fuzzy line demarcating the plausible/non-plausible zone and there's not a lot we can infer from it, per se.


I’d say Froome’s threshold is around 6.2/6.3. But in the third week of a GT it’s still lower. Pinot’s data showed that he can hold 5w/kg for 5 hours so 5.4 for two hours for Froome isn’t too surprising.

Yes I was being deliberately conservative.

In his physiological testing post TdF he was 6.0 W/kg (at test weight, not race weight) with BL sustained at 4mmol/l.

Add 0.25 W/kg if you pare back to race weight. Not all that long after a grand tour.

4 mmol/l is probably under his real sustainable BL level at threshold, so I'd expect a fresh race weight Froome's threshold to be at least 6.25 W/kg and quite possibly higher (average BL at threshold for trained cyclists is closer to 7mmol/l but there is large individual variance).
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,269
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re: Re:

29 May 2018 10:10

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
Durden93 wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:What's Froome's threshold? Let's say 6.0 W/kg. It's probably higher but let's say 6.

5.4 is 90% of threshold. Less if we think his threshold is higher. 2 hours of that with a decent amount of endurance effort in the middle doesn't strike me as wildly strange. 90% of threshold is sustainable for quite a long time.

All the data says to me is it's well inside the bit fat fuzzy line demarcating the plausible/non-plausible zone and there's not a lot we can infer from it, per se.


I’d say Froome’s threshold is around 6.2/6.3. But in the third week of a GT it’s still lower. Pinot’s data showed that he can hold 5w/kg for 5 hours so 5.4 for two hours for Froome isn’t too surprising.

Yes I was being deliberately conservative.

In his physiological testing post TdF he was 6.0 W/kg (at test weight, not race weight) with BL sustained at 4mmol/l.

Add 0.25 W/kg if you pare back to race weight. Not all that long after a grand tour.

4 mmol/l is probably under his real sustainable BL level at threshold, so I'd expect a fresh race weight Froome's threshold to be at least 6.25 W/kg and quite possibly higher (average BL at threshold for trained cyclists is closer to 7mmol/l but there is large individual variance).


Any chance you’d know the difference or range of an elite cyclist’s threshold (eg peak vs early season)?
Durden93
Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 19:16

Re: Re:

29 May 2018 11:27

Durden93 wrote:
I’d say Froome’s threshold is around 6.2/6.3. But in the third week of a GT it’s still lower. Pinot’s data showed that he can hold 5w/kg for 5 hours so 5.4 for two hours for Froome isn’t too surprising.


Pinot’s best reported value for 2 hours was 5.1. And if you think there should be a big difference between Froome and Pinot, consider that on Zoncolan, Froome’s W/kg was about 5.8, vs. 5.7 for Pinot. And that extra effort cost Froome so much that the next day he finished nearly a minute behind Pinot.

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
In his physiological testing post TdF he was 6.0 W/kg (at test weight, not race weight) with BL sustained at 4mmol/l.

Add 0.25 W/kg if you pare back to race weight. Not all that long after a grand tour.

4 mmol/l is probably under his real sustainable BL level at threshold, so I'd expect a fresh race weight Froome's threshold to be at least 6.25 W/kg and quite possibly higher (average BL at threshold for trained cyclists is closer to 7mmol/l but there is large individual variance).


Swart said that 6.25 W/kg value corresponded to a 20-40 min effort. But two years earlier, Grappe said Froome’s power dropped 0.9 W/kg going from 20 to 60 minutes. So that 5.4 W/kg appears right on the cusp, just about what Froome might have managed to do in the lab. Again, this is not taking into account that he was in the third week of a GT.
Merckx index
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,759
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 19:19

29 May 2018 15:22

And for the sake of comparison with the last "great" solo

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/the-science-behind-an-exploit/
User avatar roundabout
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,160
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 11:43

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 70kmph and 31 guests

Back to top