56kh ITT

[The_Cheech]

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the new era of doping.

Nothing to see here. Carry on.

I wonder who is going to be used as a scapegoat now.

 

[The_Cheech]

And Nibali beating all three, Froome, Contador and Quintana.

Nothing to see. Carry on.

 

[Benotti69]

David Walsh is at the tour, this will be a laugh and a half.

We will be given every excuse going to explain away the speeds, power outputs, unbelievable, incredible, superhuman performances.......

Rohan Dennis telling ES that they were there in Utrecht a month ago checking out the course early in the morning. That is how he was able to ride faster than anyone before. Bollix! He dopes and today his form plus the dope worked.

 

[The_Cheech]

Unbelievable.

Surreal.

Almost 60kh and no one says diddly-squat.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

David Walsh is at the tour, this will be a laugh and a half.

We will be given every excuse going to explain away the speeds, power outputs, unbelievable, incredible, superhuman performances.......

Rohan Dennis telling ES that they were there in Utrecht a month ago checking out the course early in the morning. That is how he was able to ride faster than anyone before. Bollix! He dopes and today his form plus the dope worked.

Well Dennis is a former rider for St jonathan, so obviously Walsh is going to buy it was clean and that therefore high speeds do not = doping. Which is exactly the 100% opposite of what Jonathan told David a few years ago.

 

[hrotha]

"Almost 60kh".

The only thing less suited to drawing conclusions than the average speed of a single isolated stage must be the grossly inflated average speed of a single isolated stage.

The real speed is 55.446 kmh. Hell even the 56 in the title is rounded wrong just for the sensationalism.

 

[Walkman]

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lemond did what, 54 km/h (?) some 20+ years ago and the consensus seems to be that he was clean. Would a 56 km/h performance on a shorter course really be a case of Edgar?

Can it no be about aerodynamics?

Any way you slice it, Dennis was aero as *** today!

 

[JimmyFingers]

Re:

"Almost 60kh".

The only thing less suited to drawing conclusions than the average speed of a single isolated stage must be the grossly inflated average speed of a single isolated stage.

The real speed is 55.446 kmh. Hell even the 56 in the title is rounded wrong just for the sensationalism.

Very much this.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

David Walsh is at the tour, this will be a laugh and a half.

We will be given every excuse going to explain away the speeds, power outputs, unbelievable, incredible, superhuman performances.......

Rohan Dennis telling ES that they were there in Utrecht a month ago checking out the course early in the morning. That is how he was able to ride faster than anyone before. Bollix! He dopes and today his form plus the dope worked.

Well Dennis is a former rider for St jonathan, so obviously Walsh is going to buy it was clean and that therefore high speeds do not = doping. Which is exactly the 100% opposite of what Jonathan told David a few years ago.

Walsh was quoting speeds as proof of doping prior to Sky and recommended books to various people about how things like speed prove performances are not natural and clean.

http://sportsscientists.com/2014/07/the-2014-tour-performance-implications-a-reflection-on-the-origins/

 

[The_Cheech]

Re:

"Almost 60kh".

The only thing less suited to drawing conclusions than the average speed of a single isolated stage must be the grossly inflated average speed of a single isolated stage.

The real speed is 55.446 kmh. Hell even the 56 in the title is rounded wrong just for the sensationalism.

Are you trolling?

Are you seriously going to call me out over .004 of a second, ignoring the fact that we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in recent history?

Really?

Really?

 

[Benotti69]

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lemond did what, 54 km/h (?) some 20+ years ago and the consensus seems to be that he was clean. Would a 56 km/h performance on a shorter course really be a case of Edgar?

Can it no be about aerodynamics?

Any way you slice it, Dennis was aero as **** today!

Why did it take that long to break? Aerodynamics have been around for a long time now, not just introduced in 2015!

Anyway you slice it Dennis was powerful, fast and doped today.

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

Walsh was quoting speeds as proof of doping prior to Sky and recommended books to various people about how things like speed prove performances are not natural and clean.

http://sportsscientists.com/2014/07/the-2014-tour-performance-implications-a-reflection-on-the-origins/

That article, and what Ross Tucker and the other guys do, is about climbing times.

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

Are you seriously going to call me out over .004 of a second [...]

Really?

Really?

Yes. Don't misrepresent the data and you'll be fine.

 

[Walkman]

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lemond did what, 54 km/h (?) some 20+ years ago and the consensus seems to be that he was clean. Would a 56 km/h performance on a shorter course really be a case of Edgar?

Can it no be about aerodynamics?

Any way you slice it, Dennis was aero as **** today!

Why did it take that long to break? Aerodynamics have been around for a long time now, not just introduced in 2015!

Anyway you slice it Dennis was powerful, fast and doped today.

Well, do you consider Lemond to be a cheat? If not, he must be an outlier, right? And by definition, outliers don't happened that often… Maybe this is one?

Well, aerodynamics, much like, you know, all science, tend to develop incrementally. Thus if Lemond was an outlier, it would take some time to catch him.

And, it was broken, wasn't it? Those doped up americans in the 2005 Tour went faster than Lemond, did they not?

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

"Almost 60kh".

The only thing less suited to drawing conclusions than the average speed of a single isolated stage must be the grossly inflated average speed of a single isolated stage.

The real speed is 55.446 kmh. Hell even the 56 in the title is rounded wrong just for the sensationalism.

Are you trolling?

Are you seriously going to call me out over .004 of a second, ignoring the fact that we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in recent history?

Really?

Really?

Disagreeing with you with a simple fact can hardly be called trolling.

 

[The Hitch]

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lemond did what, 54 km/h (?) some 20+ years ago and the consensus seems to be that he was clean. Would a 56 km/h performance on a shorter course really be a case of Edgar?

Can it no be about aerodynamics?

Any way you slice it, Dennis was aero as **** today!

Why did it take that long to break? Aerodynamics have been around for a long time now, not just introduced in 2015!

Anyway you slice it Dennis was powerful, fast and doped today.

Well, do you consider Lemond to be a cheat? If not, he must be an outlier, right? And by definition, outliers don't happened that often… Maybe this is one?

Well, aerodynamics, much like, you know, all science, tend to develop incrementally. Thus if Lemond was an outlier, it would take some time to catch him.

And, it was broken, wasn't it? Those doped up americans in the 2005 Tour went faster than Lemond, did they not?

Froome and Martin went only slightly slower than Lemond on a course that was 8k longer in 2013. Froome only 2 days before that had matched Armstrong's time on Ax3

 

[2008885]

Re:

And Nibali beating all three, Froome, Contador and Quintana.

Nothing to see. Carry on.

Why are you so amazed that Nibali beat Quintana in a short flat ITT??

 

[Walkman]

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lemond did what, 54 km/h (?) some 20+ years ago and the consensus seems to be that he was clean. Would a 56 km/h performance on a shorter course really be a case of Edgar?

Can it no be about aerodynamics?

Any way you slice it, Dennis was aero as **** today!

Why did it take that long to break? Aerodynamics have been around for a long time now, not just introduced in 2015!

Anyway you slice it Dennis was powerful, fast and doped today.

Well, do you consider Lemond to be a cheat? If not, he must be an outlier, right? And by definition, outliers don't happened that often… Maybe this is one?

Well, aerodynamics, much like, you know, all science, tend to develop incrementally. Thus if Lemond was an outlier, it would take some time to catch him.

And, it was broken, wasn't it? Those doped up americans in the 2005 Tour went faster than Lemond, did they not?

Froome and Martin went only slightly slower than Lemond on a course that was 8k longer in 2013. Froome only 2 days before that had matched Armstrong's time on Ax3

Not sure what you are trying to say?

Eiter way, I am not defending Dennis and saying he is clean, I am just trying to understand why this must be a clear cut case? I mean, aerodynamics is a huge part of time trailing and that aspect just keeps improving. Add nutrition and new training methods and we are bound to see improvements over time.

Lemond's record was set 20+ years ago and if he was to be considered clean, I don't see why we can't trust performances such as what Dennis displayed today?

Maybe I am naive, but then please break it down for me.

 

[oldcrank]

I'm sure young Rohan will say that training and
racing team pursuits at speeds above 64 km/hr
is excellent preparation for riding short ITT's at
speeds of 55+km/hr. Parents with youngsters
wanting to join a cycling club, take note.

 

[the sceptic]

Is it really that unbelievable?

Lemond did what, 54 km/h (?) some 20+ years ago and the consensus seems to be that he was clean. Would a 56 km/h performance on a shorter course really be a case of Edgar?

Can it no be about aerodynamics?

Any way you slice it, Dennis was aero as **** today!

Why did it take that long to break? Aerodynamics have been around for a long time now, not just introduced in 2015!

Anyway you slice it Dennis was powerful, fast and doped today.

Well, do you consider Lemond to be a cheat? If not, he must be an outlier, right? And by definition, outliers don't happened that often… Maybe this is one?

Well, aerodynamics, much like, you know, all science, tend to develop incrementally. Thus if Lemond was an outlier, it would take some time to catch him.

And, it was broken, wasn't it? Those doped up americans in the 2005 Tour went faster than Lemond, did they not?

Froome and Martin went only slightly slower than Lemond on a course that was 8k longer in 2013. Froome only 2 days before that had matched Armstrong's time on Ax3

Not sure what you are trying to say?

Eiter way, I am not defending Dennis and saying he is clean, I am just trying to understand why this must be a clear cut case? I mean, aerodynamics is a huge part of time trailing and that aspect just keeps improving. Add nutrition and new training methods and we are bound to see improvements over time.

Lemond's record was set 20+ years ago and if he was to be considered clean, I don't see why we can't trust performances such as what Dennis displayed today?

Maybe I am naive, but then please break it down for me.

does Dennis have better aerodynamics and nutrition than Lance?

 

[blackcat]

Not sure what you are trying to say?

Eiter way, I am not defending Dennis and saying he is clean, I am just trying to understand why this must be a clear cut case? I mean, aerodynamics is a huge part of time trailing and that aspect just keeps improving. Add nutrition and new training methods and we are bound to see improvements over time.

Lemond's record was set 20+ years ago and if he was to be considered clean, I don't see why we can't trust performances such as what Dennis displayed today?

Maybe I am naive, but then please break it down for me.

the CdA (aerodynamic coefficient) and bike technology and other elements are diminishing marginal improvements. They are not even a rounding error. The main gain is the doping, see: Usain Bolt, and the 100metre time, this is what doping does.

now, since the oxygen vector era, the UCI did put a degree of handcuff(s) on the egregious doping like Riis and Pantani before the 50crit limit in the 90's.

But Rohan is looking really lean in upperbody, the AICAR and GW peptides with other stuff. Not quite as Wiggins and Froome lean in his upperbody, but almost, which is great for aero, but his legs still have all muscle. never leaned up his legs.

 

[Pulp]

Re: Re:

"Almost 60kh".

The only thing less suited to drawing conclusions than the average speed of a single isolated stage must be the grossly inflated average speed of a single isolated stage.

The real speed is 55.446 kmh. Hell even the 56 in the title is rounded wrong just for the sensationalism.

Are you trolling?

Are you seriously going to call me out over .004 of a second, ignoring the fact that we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in recent history?

Really?

Really?

You should learn maths since the speed seems to be the evidence for Dennis doping.

The difference between 56 and 55,446 is 0,554 km/h per hour to be fair... and 0,054 of the mathematically correct criteria for rounding off to 56. And at any rate, it`s strange to round up the speed by more than 0,5 km/h. In this instance. Strangely enough it seems these obvious things needs to be stated. The difference between the headline speed and the actual speed is pretty much a full 1%. I`m not a physicist, but I`m pretty sure the difference between the watt one would need to produce for 56 km/h run is well more than 1% more than what you would need to produce 55,446. (Im guessing some 3%, but I`m sure someone could estimate it). I`m not an expert, but again: take 1% off the speed he actually raced at, and you have pretty much 54,9 km/h.
Darned impressive, but we wouldnt suddenly say this is beyond the realm of possible anymore would we?
Just trying to illustrate that your headline is in fact sensationalist and distorting the factual achievement of the run Dennis did.

That said.. Darned impressive. I have no reason to call him a doper, but I`m not betting money on him not being one. Please carry on, call him a doper and me a troll.

 

[The_Cheech]

Re: Re:

Are you seriously going to call me out over .004 of a second [...]

Really?

Really?

Yes. Don't misrepresent the data and you'll be fine.

So... That you're the only one making an issue of .006kph doesn't seem "odd" to you?

 

[franic]

Wiggo has just broken the hour record of 54.526 with a bike that could have been used today in the ITT and you find unbelievable that, although the course had some corners, the guy rode at 54.446 for 13 km? Either Wiggo is a major cheater or Dennis' performance isn't incredible

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

Wiggo has just broken the hour record of 54.526 with a bike that could have been used today in the ITT and you find unbelievable that, although the course had some corners, the guy rode at 54.446 for 13 km? Either Wiggo is a major cheater or Dennis' performance isn't incredible

Both, Wiggo is a cheater and Dennis's performance is not credible.