2013 Santos Tour Down Under: 20th Jan - 27th Jan

[Spider1964]

never understood why in some countries like australia lab results were given such importance.

we have never seen lab results from guys like contador, schleck, gilbert, Costa and Valverde and we knew all along from the young ranks they would almost certainly be top riders.

In Australia we knew most of these guys were going to be top riders, prior to knowing their lab results. They only get tested once they're in the academies.

On Cam Meyer, he had a funny twitter exchange with Luke Durbridge early this week.. stole Durbridges Strava KOM at Kings Park (in Perth) after Durbridge had left town.

[PCutter]

Lab results have only been given high importance in Australia because of Evans breaking all of the lab records at the AIS and being described as one of the most talented athletes they have had at the AIS, according to the sport scientists. Due to the Evans achieving many top results, this has now become a defining indicator of talent on the road for future riders, which I believe is wrong.

Your wrong (often).

The focus on lab results isn't because Cadel has good numbers (but no surprise you place everything in the prism of how it compares to Cadel). Lab results in Australia and other countries (like the UK) are given prominence because so much of our junior development is based on developing track riders. This is because government funding is dependent on delivering Olympic success (as the government rightly doesn't fund the development of professional sports). There is thus a lot of data on these riders which is very useful for comparison of potential. For those with the outstanding testing results it can be a very good indicator, but of course, more than numbers makes a champion, so bad luck, injury, mental ability all come int to it when separating the talented to the talented with results.

I think given the achievements of Australian cycling over recent years (constantly ranked top 5ish on the World Tour with a regular stream of new talent) that there is significant evidence that what they do (checking the numbers) works. It is why the UK adopted a very similar structure, and is the reason why Italy has been studying the Australian Institute of Sport and Cycling Australia methodologies. Its also why when Richie Porte and Will Clarke were searching for WT teams that Bjarne Riis asked to see their numbers. Its not just text book theory. And has very little to do with 'what did Cadel do', though of course his numbers were fantastic. PS. Durbridge broke Cadels AIS record for ramps last year.

[PCutter]

never understood why in some countries like australia lab results were given such importance.

we have never seen lab results from guys like contador, schleck, gilbert, Costa and Valverde and we knew all along from the young ranks they would almost certainly be top riders.

That can largely be traced to the fact that Australian cycling development is more built around track racing (due to funding). Australia doesn't have as strong road cycling calendar on which juniors are able to show their abilities, more crits where its difficult to show your talent other than for sprinters.

If we had the same development road series of mountainous stage races like in Spain Im sure the likes of Cameron Meyer, Bobridge, Durbridge et al would be who we talked about without the numbers and testing as they would still be dominant juniors, but on track, numbers are monitored closely because of the more controlled environment of track riding and in particular pursuit.

[auscyclefan94]

Your wrong (often).

The focus on lab results isn't because Cadel has good numbers (but no surprise you place everything in the prism of how it compares to Cadel). Lab results in Australia and other countries (like the UK) are given prominence because so much of our junior development is based on developing track riders. This is because government funding is dependent on delivering Olympic success (as the government rightly doesn't fund the development of professional sports). There is thus a lot of data on these riders which is very useful for comparison of potential. For those with the outstanding testing results it can be a very good indicator, but of course, more than numbers makes a champion, so bad luck, injury, mental ability all come int to it when separating the talented to the talented with results.

I think given the achievements of Australian cycling over recent years (constantly ranked top 5ish on the World Tour with a regular stream of new talent) that there is significant evidence that what they do (checking the numbers) works. It is why the UK adopted a very similar structure, and is the reason why Italy has been studying the Australian Institute of Sport and Cycling Australia methodologies. Its also why when Richie Porte and Will Clarke were searching for WT teams that Bjarne Riis asked to see their numbers. Its not just text book theory. And has very little to do with 'what did Cadel do', though of course his numbers were fantastic. PS. Durbridge broke Cadels AIS record for ramps last year.

I was referring to the media's focus on the numbers. So in this instance, your attack is wrong. btw, the correct in English is "you're wrong" not "your wrong". Therefore, you are wrong again.

[PCutter]

I was referring to the media's focus on the numbers. So in this instance, your attack is wrong. btw, the correct in English is "you're wrong" not "your wrong". Therefore, you are wrong again.

Gee, a forum contributor trying to pull people up for grammar, how unusual - and from someone who doesn't understand the definition of 'walkover'.

Nor 'attack'. I simply stated why numbers matter.

[auscyclefan94]

Gee, a forum contributor trying to pull people up for grammar, how unusual - and from someone who doesn't understand the definition of 'walkover'.

Nor 'attack'. I simply stated why numbers matter.

I understand the definition of walkover thanks. See, I was able to admit that my language was too strong in that instance. That fact that you had to say "Your wrong (often)" clearly demonstrated you were trying to attack me, in a rather cheap manner.

[Parrulo]

enough with the bickering, both of you.

[blaxland]

All the numbers in the world won't help Orica/Greenedge in Grand tours"Until they hire someone with decent GC credentials.Cam meyer may end up being a good week long stage racer but i can't see him doing any better than a top 20 GC result.Hope they prove me wrong?
My pick for TDU is N.Haas (Garmin)

[auscyclefan94]

All the numbers in the world won't help Orica/Greenedge in Grand tours"Until they hire someone with decent GC credentials.Cam meyer may end up being a good week long stage racer but i can't see him doing any better than a top 20 GC result.Hope they prove me wrong?
My pick for TDU is N.Haas (Garmin)

Haas could do well. He climbed very well and was quite strong last year on the Wilunga stage and could finish highly in the finish to Stirling. With some decent form coming off nationals and Sun Tour, who knows what he could do?

[Ferminal]

No Ewan

http://mobile.news.com.au/sport/more-sport/policy-dictates-gun-youngster-caleb-ewan-wont-compete-at-tour-down-under/story-fndukor0-1226546610185?sv=7193d3e8604b8ac63973ffe1b822c6f3

lol, that is pretty funny considering TDU stages are shorter than U23 races.

[calinmarian]

lol, that is pretty funny considering TDU stages are shorter than U23 races.

The Tour Down Under will be live in Europe or only in Australia?Anybody knows why the Eurosport won't show the TDU live on Europe?

[auscyclefan94]

The Tour Down Under will be live in Europe or only in Australia?Anybody knows why the Eurosport won't show the TDU live on Europe?

Don't worry, there will be live feeds on the net which will not be geo-restricted.

[theyoungest]

Your wrong (often).

The focus on lab results isn't because Cadel has good numbers (but no surprise you place everything in the prism of how it compares to Cadel). Lab results in Australia and other countries (like the UK) are given prominence because so much of our junior development is based on developing track riders. This is because government funding is dependent on delivering Olympic success (as the government rightly doesn't fund the development of professional sports). There is thus a lot of data on these riders which is very useful for comparison of potential. For those with the outstanding testing results it can be a very good indicator, but of course, more than numbers makes a champion, so bad luck, injury, mental ability all come int to it when separating the talented to the talented with results.

I think given the achievements of Australian cycling over recent years (constantly ranked top 5ish on the World Tour with a regular stream of new talent) that there is significant evidence that what they do (checking the numbers) works. It is why the UK adopted a very similar structure, and is the reason why Italy has been studying the Australian Institute of Sport and Cycling Australia methodologies. Its also why when Richie Porte and Will Clarke were searching for WT teams that Bjarne Riis asked to see their numbers. Its not just text book theory. And has very little to do with 'what did Cadel do', though of course his numbers were fantastic. PS. Durbridge broke Cadels AIS record for ramps last year.

The "problem" is that track riders are usually good on ergometers. For instance, Rohan Dennis surprised Rabobank testers with his watts/kg (indicative of climbing talent) but then Jenning Huizenga put out the same numbers, he isn't a great climber by any stretch of the imagination. Whereas Bauke Mollema gets awful results in the lab, but no one is going to argue the guy can't climb.

I'm sure Bobridge and Meyer have great lab results, and on an ergometer they'll probably both outperform Alejandro Valverde, but who are you going to bet on to win Willunga? As you say, lab results do say something, but certainly not everything, with recovery probably the most important thing being ignored in them.

[swuzzlebubble]

Bobridge and Meyer probably better up say 5% for > 5km

[movingtarget]

never understood why in some countries like australia lab results were given such importance.

we have never seen lab results from guys like contador, schleck, gilbert, Costa and Valverde and we knew all along from the young ranks they would almost certainly be top riders.

Interesting comment seeing as though Australia's best sports physiologists and coaches have been poached by other countries that are now getting much better results.

[mherm79]

All the numbers in the world won't help Orica/Greenedge in Grand tours"Until they hire someone with decent GC credentials.Cam meyer may end up being a good week long stage racer but i can't see him doing any better than a top 20 GC result.Hope they prove me wrong?
My pick for TDU is N.Haas (Garmin)

Why does GreenEdge need a strong GC rider? They could focus on classics and stages in the way HTC did and the Belgiums normally do.

[blaxland]

To keep public interest up and thus more sponsorship dollars.Personally I would like to see someone from Australia competing at the top level in the biggest race on TV.(as we all know cadel is past his best)sorry ACF.They had a very good year this season and I hope that continues this year,but buy winning stages in two of the grand tours and winning a classic,the bar is set very,very high?

[Wilba60]

I think public interest is going along very well for the team without a GC rider at this point. For a fledgling team they are getting plenty of exposure with this style of racing, keep in mind that sometimes/often strong GC teams become a bit of a one trick pony and unless they are winning they can be boring to watch.

My feel for the average cycling fan here in Aust (not cycling purists) is that they normally barrack for an Aussie win or involvement to keep their interest. They are happy to support the OGE team and it's riders and then have other Aussie riders of interest to watch if the OGE boys aren't in the mix. With a race like TDF last year Aussies would flick across from a possible Goss win in a sprint stage to see how Cadel, Richie and Mick Rogers were doing in the mountains. In effect they may support OGE as the No. 1 team but have interests in Sky, Rabo and Garmin with their Aussie riders.

[mherm79]

They had a very good year this season and I hope that continues this year,but buy winning stages in two of the grand tours and winning a classic,the bar is set very,very high?

I think public interest is going along very well for the team without a GC rider at this point. For a fledgling team they are getting plenty of exposure with this style of racing, keep in mind that sometimes/often strong GC teams become a bit of a one trick pony and unless they are winning they can be boring to watch.

I agree and think that they can continue to build on the sucess, hopefully despite the fact the Matt White isn't there.

I think another Monument is possible as well as a podium in a classic. Remember Goss did not have a good year, Bobridge was focusing on the track and Meyer and Durbridge continue to develop.

They've also added the young gun Caleb Ewan, who under Robbie McEwen's wing is likely contest the Green jersey in about 3-4years.

That should bring enough attention to satisfy fan's and sponsors alike.

[mickkk]

The TDU seems to have suffered a form of breakdown, I think caused by its unwavering support of and association with lance Armstrong.

A lot of sponsors and people are gutted, the fall out tremendous. People just left burned.

Publicity in Australia has almost been zero this time around.

I think it has been knocked back a good 5 years in terms of development.