56kh ITT

[Tonton]

Small contribution on my part, in the Fantasy Doping Draft I picked the doped David Millar TdF 2003. He won the famous stage 19 ITT when Ulle went down, in the rain, and averaged 56.610 km/h through 32.5 km of a 49K stage. Food for thoughts.

 

[movingtarget]

As far as *** performances go, I don't think it enters The Hall of Fame. He rode much earlier than the other favoured riders, the wind may have changed a little. He broke the world hour record so he has the pedigree and was already one of the favourites. Martin and Cancellara were not that far behind. He is also the up and coming TT specialist soon ready to take over from Martin and Cancellara who are now veterans. Cancellara has not done much of late and was off the bike for a long time. The course probably also suited him a lot more than the two heavier riders with lots of turns and position changes on the bike. If he was a few seconds behind Martin and Cancellara no one would have said anything. Martin and Cancellara also felt they were affected by the heat. Usually not a problem for Aussie sportsmen and he had been training for those conditions.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

If Dennis did any crit training in his amateur years it would have paid off big time in that TT. The course was crap and had more corners than a many-cornered thing.

 

[hrotha]

Some folks are saying the course was actually 400 m shorter than stated.

 

[Benotti69]

Yeah we can really trust professional cyclists.

GPS is not accurate anyway. It is always (Military reasons) inaccurate. But whether it was 400 metres inaccurate?

 

[Netserk]

Re:

Some folks are saying the course was actually 400 m shorter than stated.

When I map it by hand I get it to 13.8km. No way that it is 400m shorter, otherwise something is wrong with the official map of the course.

edit:

 

[Alexandre B.]

http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme-sur-route/Actualites/Le-chrono-etait-plus-court-qu-annonce/571926

Jumping to conclusions.

 

[hrotha]

Re:

http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme-sur-route/Actualites/Le-chrono-etait-plus-court-qu-annonce/571926

Jumping to conclusions.

Bear in mind L'Equipe doesn't quote any official sources. It's basically quoting the same info those folks at Cycling Pro reported on.

 

[The Hegelian]

Re:

As far as *** performances go, I don't think it enters The Hall of Fame. He rode much earlier than the other favoured riders, the wind may have changed a little. He broke the world hour record so he has the pedigree and was already one of the favourites. Martin and Cancellara were not that far behind. He is also the up and coming TT specialist soon ready to take over from Martin and Cancellara who are now veterans. Cancellara has not done much of late and was off the bike for a long time. The course probably also suited him a lot more than the two heavier riders with lots of turns and position changes on the bike. If he was a few seconds behind Martin and Cancellara no one would have said anything. Martin and Cancellara also felt they were affected by the heat. Usually not a problem for Aussie sportsmen and he had been training for those conditions.

Agree. There was only one entry to The Hall of Fame in the top 10, and it wasn't Dennis.....

 

[The_Cheech]

Re:

BTW the power differential for the same rider and conditions between riding at 55.446km/h and 56.0km/h is ~14-15W. It's a substantial difference.

To go 60km/h would require a further 112W over the 56km/h power demand.

I'm not contesting that an addition 14-15 watts isn't a substantial difference, in fact it is, I'm contesting the absurdity of making it The Centerpiece of a landslide of arguments (by others) when, at the end of the day, like it or not, we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in the history of the "clean" TdF.

 

[Eshnar]

Re: Re:

I'm not contesting that an addition 14-15 watts isn't a substantial difference, in fact it is, I'm contesting the absurdity of making it The Centerpiece of a landslide of arguments (by others) when, at the end of the day, like it or not, we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in the history of the "clean" TdF.

You're the one who's making it a drama. The initial remark by Hrotha was absolutely legit. Had you just immediately admitted that you exaggerated, you would have saved 50 posts.

 

[Punkan]

I doubt it was 13.8k. Several strava reports has it between 13.4k and 13.5k. Here is Kruijswijk's strava report:

https://www.strava.com/activities/338984240

If it was 13.4k, average speed would be 53.84 kph, still extremely high speed.

In the almost flat 8.9k ITT in TDF 2010 Cancellara crushed the competition and averaged 53.4 kph. Sure you can't compare different timetrails, but it gives an indication of the unlikehood of Rohan doing 55.45 kph on a course that was a few kilometers longer.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

I doubt it was 13.8k. Several strava reports has it between 13.4k and 13.5k. Here is Kruijswijk's strava report:

https://www.strava.com/activities/338984240

If it was 13.4k, average speed would be 53.84 kph, still extremely high speed.

In the almost flat 8.9k ITT in TDF 2010 Cancellara crushed the competition and averaged 53.4 kph. Sure you can't compare different timetrails, but it gives an indication of the unlikehood of Rohan doing 55.45 kph on a course that was a few kilometers longer.

I would not trust the calibration of team equipment

 

[Merckx index]

Re: Re:

Anyone able to estimate RD's frontal area?

Yes, but perhaps discuss elsewhere where fewer logical fallacies abound?

I estimate his track CdA from the hour record was ~0.20 - 0.21m^2. Typically add a little for road TT bike.

2250-2350W/m^2 would attain 55.4km/h on flat roads on a warm day with still air, nice smooth roads and good tyres.

At CdA of 0.20, that's ~460W
0.21m^2 =~ 480W
0.22m^2 =~ 500W
0.23m^2 =~ 520W

But for power estimates from outdoor TTs, even the slightest wind = large error bars which I've not included here.

e.g.:
i. winds affect CdA, often cross wind drops CdA somewhat
ii. for straight head/tailwind, even an imperceptible +/-0.3m/s wind* would result in a power estimate error of ~ +/- 20W

* that's not noticeable by feel, smoke still rises vertically, yet still has a major impact on power demand.

If we assume 460-480 watts, since his listed weight AFAIK is 71 kilos, that is in the range of 6.5 - 6.75 watts/kg. As I said before, that's higher than most climbing times, will almost certainly be higher than any power output on any climb in this Tour. Even taking into account that it was only a fifteen minute effort, it's still a very high power/weight output, particularly for a rider who isn't a climber. For a normal power-time relationship, it would still be well above 6.0 watts/kg for 30-40 minutes,and for whatever probably somewhat longer time someone wants to use for FTP.

But as I also said before, I don't know what the wind situation was. I thought I heard he had a tailwind in the first part of the course?

And by the way, what was Wiggo's power output in his recent hour record?

 

[The_Cheech]

Re: Re:

I'm not contesting that an addition 14-15 watts isn't a substantial difference, in fact it is, I'm contesting the absurdity of making it The Centerpiece of a landslide of arguments (by others) when, at the end of the day, like it or not, we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in the history of the "clean" TdF.

You're the one who's making it a drama.

Dude, I've being attacked left and right, what the heck do you mean I'm "making it a drama"? Do you even check what comes out of your mouth?

The initial remark by Hrotha was absolutely legit. Had you just immediately admitted that you exaggerated, you would have saved 50 posts.

Oh, ok, so your job is to give out legitimacy certificates? Did you just read what I said? Can you read?

The exaggeration is making 0.006 k/h your personal ego trip. If you, or anyone else, calls me out on it, I will respond. I live in a free country and, unless I break the forum rules, I have a right to defend myself.

If you don't want to see my response, don't respond. Cyclingnews has plenty of buttons.

 

[Eshnar]

Re: Re:

I'm not contesting that an addition 14-15 watts isn't a substantial difference, in fact it is, I'm contesting the absurdity of making it The Centerpiece of a landslide of arguments (by others) when, at the end of the day, like it or not, we've just witnessed one of the fastest ITTs/prologues in the history of the "clean" TdF.

You're the one who's making it a drama.

Dude, I've being attacked left and right, what the heck do you mean I'm "making it a drama"? Do you even check what comes out of your mouth?

You're been attacked because instead of admitting you've been wrong (because as a matter of fact, you have) you just attacked back. What else do you expect. Again, if you had just dropped it off immediately, none of this would had have any reason to happen.

 

[danielovichdk2]

Re: Re:

Anyone able to estimate RD's frontal area?

Yes, but perhaps discuss elsewhere where fewer logical fallacies abound?

I estimate his track CdA from the hour record was ~0.20 - 0.21m^2. Typically add a little for road TT bike.

2250-2350W/m^2 would attain 55.4km/h on flat roads on a warm day with still air, nice smooth roads and good tyres.

At CdA of 0.20, that's ~460W
0.21m^2 =~ 480W
0.22m^2 =~ 500W
0.23m^2 =~ 520W

But for power estimates from outdoor TTs, even the slightest wind = large error bars which I've not included here.

e.g.:
i. winds affect CdA, often cross wind drops CdA somewhat
ii. for straight head/tailwind, even an imperceptible +/-0.3m/s wind* would result in a power estimate error of ~ +/- 20W

* that's not noticeable by feel, smoke still rises vertically, yet still has a major impact on power demand.

If we assume 460-480 watts, since his listed weight AFAIK is 71 kilos, that is in the range of 6.5 - 6.75 watts/kg. As I said before, that's higher than most climbing times, will almost certainly be higher than any power output on any climb in this Tour. Even taking into account that it was only a fifteen minute effort, it's still a very high power/weight output, particularly for a rider who isn't a climber. For a normal power-time relationship, it would still be well above 6.0 watts/kg for 30-40 minutes,and for whatever probably somewhat longer time someone wants to use for FTP.

But as I also said before, I don't know what the wind situation was. I thought I heard he had a tailwind in the first part of the course?

And by the way, what was Wiggo's power output in his recent hour record?

We cannot compare TT outputs with mountain climb outputs, even though I am not sure if that's what you're doing ? And another thing you might have not taken into account is that the aerodynamic effects of TTing could lower power output. Around 450+ watts sound reasonable and normal for a guy like Dennis. Not sure about the wind.

 

[The_Cheech]

Re: Re:

You're been attacked because instead of admitting you've been wrong (because as a matter of fact, you have)

That IS NOT true. Have you read my comments? I invite you to read what I said. You're lying through your teeth.

you just attacked back. What else do you expect. Again, if you had just dropped it off immediately, none of this would had have any reason to happen.

LIKE I SAID, rounding up was incorrect.

Making it the biggest stink in the freaking world is NOT my doing. I'm merely defending myself at this point.

You yourself, just came barging in, not bothering to read what I said and immediately went on the offensive as though Hothra is your frigging father. Fight your own fight!

Only in a European cycling forum the guy that defends himself is the bad guy. You yourself seem to be OK with me getting attacked but your beef is with me defending myself. Awesome.

 

[Eshnar]

Re: Re:

You're been attacked because instead of admitting you've been wrong (because as a matter of fact, you have)

That IS NOT true. Have you read my comments? I invite you to read what I said.

you just attacked back. What else do you expect. Again, if you had just dropped it off immediately, none of this would had have any reason to happen.

LIKE I SAID, I did say rounding up was incorrect, I should've rounded down if need be.

Making it the biggest stink in recent forum memory is NOT my doing. I'm merely defending myself at this point.

You yourself, just came barging in, not bothering to read what I said and immediately went on the offensive as though Hothra is your frigging father. Fight your own fight!

I came in because one day later you're still going on with this, while all the others seem to have move on. This is an interesting thread, that YOU started, and you yourself are contributing to derail it. I admit I missed the part where you admitted that the rounding was stupid. To my defense I can tell you I was distracted by all the other posts of yours that were very near to grant you a ban by themselves. Even in this last one, you couldn't refrain to attack me, while I don't think my post was so offensive. That's what makes people keep attacking you.
Just move on.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

This topic is stupid, Dennis was about 20 seconds faster than Jos van Emben. Come on.

 

[2008885]

Re:

This topic is stupid, Dennis was about 20 seconds faster than Jos van Emben. Come on.

That's because he was doing 56 kph....

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

Anyone able to estimate RD's frontal area?

Yes, but perhaps discuss elsewhere where fewer logical fallacies abound?

I estimate his track CdA from the hour record was ~0.20 - 0.21m^2. Typically add a little for road TT bike.

2250-2350W/m^2 would attain 55.4km/h on flat roads on a warm day with still air, nice smooth roads and good tyres.

At CdA of 0.20, that's ~460W
0.21m^2 =~ 480W
0.22m^2 =~ 500W
0.23m^2 =~ 520W

But for power estimates from outdoor TTs, even the slightest wind = large error bars which I've not included here.

e.g.:
i. winds affect CdA, often cross wind drops CdA somewhat
ii. for straight head/tailwind, even an imperceptible +/-0.3m/s wind* would result in a power estimate error of ~ +/- 20W

* that's not noticeable by feel, smoke still rises vertically, yet still has a major impact on power demand.

If we assume 460-480 watts, since his listed weight AFAIK is 71 kilos, that is in the range of 6.5 - 6.75 watts/kg. As I said before, that's higher than most climbing times, will almost certainly be higher than any power output on any climb in this Tour. Even taking into account that it was only a fifteen minute effort, it's still a very high power/weight output, particularly for a rider who isn't a climber. For a normal power-time relationship, it would still be well above 6.0 watts/kg for 30-40 minutes,and for whatever probably somewhat longer time someone wants to use for FTP.

But as I also said before, I don't know what the wind situation was. I thought I heard he had a tailwind in the first part of the course?

And by the way, what was Wiggo's power output in his recent hour record?

6.5W/kg for 15 minutes?
Wiggo did 6.4W/kg on the penultimate stage for 64 minutes at the 2012 TdF.
Same wattage he allegedly did at the hour: 450W.

 

[blackcat]

something that should be now acknowledged as a caveat/qualifier/asterisk

the new drugs they are taking, the aicar the gw the lipotropin and them rendering up to 5% of non-functional body mass.

so this has fundamentally altered the function of p/w, and watts per kilo sum.


i would be more concerned if i was a rider or team doctor, about the internal body mass, if i can look at a rider, and it looks like he has a different physique to just someone anorexic or michael ramussen, on the outside if it is visible to me, what is it like on the crucial organs? the steroids and the cortisone they have always used, not overly dangerous, definitely not compared to the crazy descents in the GTs. but shoes physiques than Froome and Wiggins had, definitely NOT NORMAL. it is not like an anorexic person on google images, even on the same weight same height. Definitely not even like Rasmussen. it is like if Rass was on these drugs, his arms would be even skinnier, but his quads and glutes and calves would be even larger. again,NOT NORMAL. An anorexic person will lose weight everywhere, it wont be topical. And the faces of old pros like Jacky Durand, at 35, they looked like a weathered 45 yo. Now the new hormones, they have fresh faces, even if they are rendered of all subcutaneous tissue .they still look baby's bottom. lipotropin aicar and gw. definitely.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

This topic is stupid, Dennis was about 20 seconds faster than Jos van Emben. Come on.

but JVE has won tts and prologues. and 20secs over 9km, is material.

edit: it was 14km.

ok, that is different. 20secs over 14km, that is not too significant

second edit. it was only 15secs over 14 km!

 

[Tonton]

Re:

something that should be now acknowledged as a caveat/qualifier/asterisk

the new drugs they are taking, the aicar the gw the lipotropin and them rendering up to 5% of non-functional body mass.

so this has fundamentally altered the function of p/w, and watts per kilo sum.


i would be more concerned if i was a rider or team doctor, about the internal body mass, if i can look at a rider, and it looks like he has a different physique to just someone anorexic or michael ramussen, on the outside if it is visible to me, what is it like on the crucial organs? the steroids and the cortisone they have always used, not overly dangerous, definitely not compared to the crazy descents in the GTs. but shoes physiques than Froome and Wiggins had, definitely NOT NORMAL. it is not like an anorexic person on google images, even on the same weight same height. Definitely not even like Rasmussen. it is like if Rass was on these drugs, his arms would be even skinnier, but his quads and glutes and calves would be even larger. again,NOT NORMAL. An anorexic person will lose weight everywhere, it wont be topical. And the faces of old pros like Jacky Durand, at 35, they looked like a weathered 45 yo. Now the new hormones, they have fresh faces, even if they are rendered of all subcutaneous tissue .they still look baby's bottom. lipotropin aicar and gw. definitely.

It's even more telling to show pics, like the one of the Big 4 recently posted to non-cycling fans, which I did, trying to share my excitement about the TdF. Unanimously, the response/reaction was that no fit athlete should look like this: I heard comparisons with freed prisoners from Buchenwald or Auschwitz. Bones and skin. Cycling should be a display of fitness. With it would come the sponsors, bike sales, et caetera. What are these people thinking? That we are blind?