2010-2013 cleanest era of the sport?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.


I made a graph of watts/kg for top 6 TdF finishers each year this millennium using numbers from https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily. I have some reservations about his method as it's dependent on the length of the climbs - I'll try and make one that incorporates that in a sensible way and also splits out the individual climbs.

If we believe the numbers, it shows an increase every year since 2011, so that 2014 was the fastest since 2009, and the second fastest of the post-Armstrong era. Also note how much Puerto and Armstrong's retirement hit the quality of the field in 2006. As these numbers are calculated using Ferrari's method, I presume Ferrari has made graphs that look very similar to this - hence why Armstrong called the 2008 Tour a 'joke' and was so confident about his comeback.

(Apologies for the less than statistically rigorous descriptions and conclusions, but I'm pretty tired).
 
Re:

vedrafjord said:


I made a graph of watts/kg for top 6 TdF finishers each year this millennium using numbers from https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily. I have some reservations about his method as it's dependent on the length of the climbs - I'll try and make one that incorporates that in a sensible way and also splits out the individual climbs.

If we believe the numbers, it shows an increase every year since 2011, so that 2014 was the fastest since 2009, and the second fastest of the post-Armstrong era. Also note how much Puerto and Armstrong's retirement hit the quality of the field in 2006. As these numbers are calculated using Ferrari's method, I presume Ferrari has made graphs that look very similar to this - hence why Armstrong called the 2008 Tour a 'joke' and was so confident about his comeback.

(Apologies for the less than statistically rigorous descriptions and conclusions, but I'm pretty tired).
Get yourself a triple Gianni Bugno espresso my friend :D There's some interesting stuff in your graph, and I didn't know the website. Thanks for sharing.
Which further (if there was a doubt) shreds the article from that imbecile. But I suppose the average Joe can be fooled, has been fooled times and times again, so one more time :rolleyes: ... the entirety of his paper his rubbish, good to have in the back pocket of a cycling jersey in case of unexpected poop stop...
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Re:

vedrafjord said:
Can you explain the colouring + ranking some more please? In your legend you indicate dark orange is 3rd place but in 2007 & 2009 it appears as the 4th value, and in 2011 it appears above the winner. In 2006 the winner has the lowest value.

Is that simply saying you don't need the best P::W to win the Tour or am I colour blind or ...?
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
vedrafjord said:
Can you explain the colouring + ranking some more please? In your legend you indicate dark orange is 3rd place but in 2007 & 2009 it appears as the 4th value, and in 2011 it appears above the winner. In 2006 the winner has the lowest value.

Is that simply saying you don't need the best P::W to win the Tour or am I colour blind or ...?
When you put names on these numbers, maybe in '11 one went full genius, got eventually caught, while the vanilla slipped through the cracks. Fits the narrative, doesn't it?
Definitely, there's checking to do about the methodology. But the more I look at this, the funnier it gets.
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
Can you explain the colouring + ranking some more please? In your legend you indicate dark orange is 3rd place but in 2007 & 2009 it appears as the 4th value, and in 2011 it appears above the winner. In 2006 the winner has the lowest value.

Is that simply saying you don't need the best P::W to win the Tour or am I colour blind or ...?
Exactly. It only looks at average watts/kg on major climbs, so if someone lost time in the mountains but got it back in the time trial they might finish higher than their watts/kg suggests, like Cadel did in 2011. In 2006 Landis bonked big time on stage 15 which brought his average down.

Anyway, big thanks to ammattipyöräily for doing charts like https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/515962420129693697 for all the TdFs (and some of the Giros, but not enough to plot them all yet). All I did was bang the averages into Excel.

 
Mar 27, 2015
444
0
0
this graph only shows how ridiculous Nibali 2014 was

the main priority of the sport right now is to get rid of the Astana bad joke
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
So the winner in 2012 does not include 64 minutes at 6.4W/kg (!!) from the final TT.

Can you please confirm whether Lance's placing in Tours remains in play, or if everyone finishing after him was shifted up one? In particular it looks like Wiggo (4th 2009 including Lance) - in this limited dataset - generated less power on the climbs in 2012 (1st) than 2009 (4th), despite (allegedly) weighing less in 2012.
 
Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
So the winner in 2012 does not include 64 minutes at 6.4W/kg (!!) from the final TT.

Can you please confirm whether Lance's placing in Tours remains in play, or if everyone finishing after him was shifted up one? In particular it looks like Wiggo (4th 2009 including Lance) - in this limited dataset - generated less power on the climbs in 2012 than 2009, despite (allegedly) weighing less in 2012.
They're all in there - Armstrong, Landis, Rasmussen etc. The method being used to calculate W/kg seems pretty conservative - if we were somehow able to compare like with like, I doubt Wiggins' victory lap TT would come out at 6.4

I found a table with just the podiums



I recommend following https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/ as they post great stuff.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
I do follow him. Thank you for the responses. Also: go me for accurately guesstimating the difference of the winner in W/kg between 2013 and 2014. el oh el.
 
I made one for the Giro.



It's harder to draw conclusions from this because
1) It only starts in 2006.
2) The quality of the field in the Giro can vary from year to year.
3) The weather is generally a much bigger factor than at the Tour.
4) For much of the last 15 years it's seemed that the Italians have had an advantage probably due to easier doping logistics.
4b) RoboBasso!
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
vedrafjord said:
Can you explain the colouring + ranking some more please? In your legend you indicate dark orange is 3rd place but in 2007 & 2009 it appears as the 4th value, and in 2011 it appears above the winner. In 2006 the winner has the lowest value.

Is that simply saying you don't need the best P::W to win the Tour or am I colour blind or ...?
.
Well in 2009 Wiggins finished 4th but only because Armstrong outsmarted him on the flat and had a big headstart from the ttt. When it comes to who had more raw doped power that year it was obviously the 4th place wiggins
 
Mar 18, 2009
981
0
0
Interesting looking at some of the numbers.....if you look at 09 and 10 there was a bit of Alien action on the podium and then kablang! Bertie gets done for clen and in 2011 the numbers appear to be lower...

Clearly some journalists (using the term loosely) are not watching the same races that I am....there is doping going on, it never stopped...it will never stop.
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
I'm just glad that I wasn't the only person that was offended by the garbage Andrew Hood is spoon feeding the public. In typically Fox News fashion, he made claims and accusations that were based solely on bias, prejudice, and innuendo.

Congratulations Andrew Hood, you win douche bag of the year! :rolleyes:
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
So the winner in 2012 does not include 64 minutes at 6.4W/kg (!!) from the final TT.

Can you please confirm whether Lance's placing in Tours remains in play, or if everyone finishing after him was shifted up one? In particular it looks like Wiggo (4th 2009 including Lance) - in this limited dataset - generated less power on the climbs in 2012 (1st) than 2009 (4th), despite (allegedly) weighing less in 2012.
I've wondered for some time why time trials aren't analysed as much as MTF climbs, and why they aren't considered as indicative of "not normal".
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Re: Re:

SeriousSam said:
Dear Wiggo said:
So the winner in 2012 does not include 64 minutes at 6.4W/kg (!!) from the final TT.

Can you please confirm whether Lance's placing in Tours remains in play, or if everyone finishing after him was shifted up one? In particular it looks like Wiggo (4th 2009 including Lance) - in this limited dataset - generated less power on the climbs in 2012 (1st) than 2009 (4th), despite (allegedly) weighing less in 2012.
I've wondered for some time why time trials aren't analysed as much as MTF climbs, and why they aren't considered as indicative of "not normal".
Because climbing is predominantly overcoming gravity, which remains a constant for all riders. TT, being aerodynamically dependent, means you have to estimate the frontal surface area, and wind on the day, even to the closeness of following and leading vehicles, can have a dramatic impact.

Wiggo admitted his final TT power - that's how I know what it was.

Too many variables in the TT mean estimating it accurately is too difficult.
 
While I am no expert I would have thought a sudden improvement in TT ability, especially when winning a race is at stake, is a sign of doping. The sudden extra power to the extent of overcoming a poor position on a TT bike. There might explanations in some cases, like a rider who is not normally a team leader so might not usually go out with the intent of doing his best every TT hiding his real ability.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Re:

TheGreenMonkey said:
While I am no expert I would have thought a sudden improvement in TT ability, especially when winning a race is at stake, is a sign of doping. The sudden extra power to the extent of overcoming a poor position on a TT bike. There might explanations in some cases, like a rider who is not normally a team leader so might not usually go out with the intent of doing his best every TT hiding his real ability.
I read your post and am immediately reminded of the following pearler:

If I'm unbeaten in long time trials this year (and he was), that's because we've put a lot of thought into it. We worked a lot on cadence this winter. After Tony Martin won the world championship last year, my physiologist Tim Kerrison went away and looked at the figures; I still lost a minute and 20sec, which was high given the power I averaged. To keep my usual high cadence and go faster than Tony, I'd have had to average a power output that would have been mind blowing. So something else had to change.

Tim studied it over the winter and decided maybe it was the cadence which was the problem. They worked out Tony's rpm compared to mine and something to do with rolling resistance and with the gears. Tim and I then started working a lot on torque because I've always had good cadence coming off the track, and good power production. What we tried to do was keep the power production and bring the cadence right down, then see how it worked respiratory wise, so we started doing a lot of low cadence work on climbs for those powers – torque work we call it. So at the Tour, in the time trials I was making what I call a Jan Ullrich-esque effort – powering the gear a lot rather than spinning along, and that forward momentum for the same power has helped me go a bit further. It's made me stronger, too.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2012/jul/31/bradley-wiggins-olympic-time-trial?cat=sport
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
TheGreenMonkey said:
While I am no expert I would have thought a sudden improvement in TT ability, especially when winning a race is at stake, is a sign of doping. The sudden extra power to the extent of overcoming a poor position on a TT bike. There might explanations in some cases, like a rider who is not normally a team leader so might not usually go out with the intent of doing his best every TT hiding his real ability.
I read your post and am immediately reminded of the following pearler:

If I'm unbeaten in long time trials this year (and he was), that's because we've put a lot of thought into it. We worked a lot on cadence this winter. After Tony Martin won the world championship last year, my physiologist Tim Kerrison went away and looked at the figures; I still lost a minute and 20sec, which was high given the power I averaged. To keep my usual high cadence and go faster than Tony, I'd have had to average a power output that would have been mind blowing. So something else had to change.

Tim studied it over the winter and decided maybe it was the cadence which was the problem. They worked out Tony's rpm compared to mine and something to do with rolling resistance and with the gears. Tim and I then started working a lot on torque because I've always had good cadence coming off the track, and good power production. What we tried to do was keep the power production and bring the cadence right down, then see how it worked respiratory wise, so we started doing a lot of low cadence work on climbs for those powers – torque work we call it. So at the Tour, in the time trials I was making what I call a Jan Ullrich-esque effort – powering the gear a lot rather than spinning along, and that forward momentum for the same power has helped me go a bit further. It's made me stronger, too.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2012/jul/31/bradley-wiggins-olympic-time-trial?cat=sport
raises the question what the ferk was kerrison doing with froome dawg then. fa fux sake.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re:

TheGreenMonkey said:
While I am no expert I would have thought a sudden improvement in TT ability, especially when winning a race is at stake, is a sign of doping. The sudden extra power to the extent of overcoming a poor position on a TT bike. There might explanations in some cases, like a rider who is not normally a team leader so might not usually go out with the intent of doing his best every TT hiding his real ability.
80% of riders will ride the TT in a GT with the aim of making the time cut, but making it as much of a rest-day-ride as possible, but within the time cut.

then, if they start to compete for GC, they need to make efforts, and might then start riding TT's properly, and put some preparation in on the off-season on their CdA and their specific tt position power.

see for instance, the difference between Rasmussen's shocker year on the tt bike, then when he came back the next year to Win the tdf, with that Landis type breakaway, but inverted, start of Tour (think Mick Rogers was with him when he fell and broke his leg/hip)
see the difference Rass had made to his tt. He went from, rule-of-thumb estimate, giving about 5minutes up to the winner, when Rass HAD TO RIDE au bloc and make an effort defending a yellow, or riding for GC,
to coming back the next year, reassessing his tt technique, and rule-of-thumb estimate, merely giving up about 2 minutes to the winner.

see: Basso. could not tt a lick. Then he transformed it, to being in the final three on the tt classifications in the GT, and probably winning Giro tts v a lesser field, cos apart from Pinotti, no italians have even given a ferk about tts. OK, the guy in the 80s and early 90s.

So Basso went from worst, to best, but over a longer period.

Armstrong went from mediocre, to dominant.

If one looks at Wiggins tt palmares, from back when he was with Linda MAc, thru FDJ, thru Credit Agricole, it was a dearth, a paucity. He may have won the prologue at the l'Avenir. Or l'Avenir. He might have won a 2.2 French shortish tt, like Dunkirk, where there were only continental teams and fellow french div1 teams, but no major teams. He won nothing for his first ten years, he only had a undeserved profile as a timetrial rider because of his individual pursuits, when the Germans and Eastern European and former soviet states had stopped riding track, and even the best Australians had made their way to the continent to ride the road because that was where they could earn proper money. If there was not the National Lottery money, and the backing of the national budget by the exchequer because of the 2012 Olympics, then Wiggins career is never underwritten.

see: Raimondas Rumsas and the 2002 Tour where he was third. Neutralise it for the team timetrail. Rumsas beats Beloki. If Rusmas had the backing equivalent to Basso, Armstrong, Beloki, Wiggins, Froome, well all of you guys probably know of Rumsas being a champion of the sport. Because he probably has more ability than all of those guys. Its a freekin shell game.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS