Climbing weight

[craig1985]

What is the ideal climbing weight?

I'm 188cm (6ft 2'' in old money) and 79/80kg (no idea in pounds), and barely have a lot of body fat on me, and I'm also 24 years old. And yet last Thursday we went and did a 6.5km climb (it goes on for longer, but time constraints said otherwise) and not only did I drop the rest of the group (the next guy was 30 seconds bhind me), I dropped them on the 3km climb ton the lead up the mountain (you ride for 3km and then make a right hand turn). I did a turn on the false flat after turning off a steepish 500m climb and went into a bigger gear and rode off on my own. One guy bridged across, but I dropped him pretty quickly. It should also be noted, I was just riding at a normal speed for myself, not accelerating. That 3km climb is about 5-6% and depending on which part, my speed is between 20-25km/h.

The thing is this not the first time this has happened. A month back, I did the same climb, but only I did it 3 times (not a wise thing) and all 3 times I dropped everybody, even when they were sitting on my wheel. Even in France 2007, I dropped the 3 other members of my group on the base of the Tourmalet and I was standing up there for 16 minutes before the next member rode up. Generally I'm a spinner when I climb and rely on getting into a rhythm , but struggle on steep ramps where you have to power climb up.

It should be noted I'm usually the youngest member of each group, but a vast majority of the members are on the same level as me, or even stronger and yet I still drop them. So with my height and weight, is it normal for me to drop riders and climb fairly well?

I'm starting to see myself a bit like Thor Hushovd, who for his size, climbs fairly well (and who can forget his break in the Alps to get Sprinters points?). Except that I can't sprint as fast he can or is a dare devil like him when he goes down hill (although I'm not bad). I'm not one for bragging or gloating, but if it stays this way, I will have some serious bragging rights soon.

 

[Tapeworm]

No such thing as the ideal climbing weight. There is a power to weight ratio, however.

The higher your power in relation to your weight the better you go up the hills. For example: a person who weighs 80kgs and has an FTP of 300 watts has a watts (power) to kilogram ratio of 3.75. A person who weighs 67kgs and has an FTP of 280 watts has ratio of 4.17 and hence climb better (based on raw data alone).

Some people get into the mindset that you have to be lighter to go up hills better. This is true if you can improve the ratio. Sometime you can put on weight and climb better because your power has improved more than the relative weight gain.

So all you need is to work out your power, plenty of sites have relevant calculators, or borrow a powermeter, work out your watts/kgs and have a look at this chart to get an idea of where you sit in the world...

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/media/69406/powerprofiling_v4.xls

 

[vladkips]

As tapeworm said. Power:weight ratios that exceed 5 are the 'general' benchmark, but beyond 5.8 I think was at least when state sport institute programs used to especially notice.

Seems to me you need to find another group who will challenge you more up hill. Or, start off at the back and give them 30secs or a minute then hunt them down. Power to weight is one thing but motivation is another (esp. on group rides). I've known big guys who could climb when they wanted to, but they were more interested in ripping your legs off on decents or flats - so maybe some of the others in your group are more along those lines.

Besides, dropping people in training means nothing when it comes to racing - when motivation levels are generally much higher.

 

[craig1985]

As tapeworm said. Power:weight ratios that exceed 5 are the 'general' benchmark, but beyond 5.8 I think was at least when state sport institute programs used to especially notice.

Seems to me you need to find another group who will challenge you more up hill. Or, start off at the back and give them 30secs or a minute then hunt them down. Power to weight is one thing but motivation is another (esp. on group rides). I've known big guys who could climb when they wanted to, but they were more interested in ripping your legs off on decents or flats - so maybe some of the others in your group are more along those lines.

Besides, dropping people in training means nothing when it comes to racing - when motivation levels are generally much higher.

That's what happened in the first week, by the 3rd set, I gave the others a head start and still caught them and rode them off my wheel. When on the flats, I tend to struggle when the pace gets over 45km/h.

 

[brianf7]

Almost Christmas so dont worry about climbing hills concentrate on going down them Eat Drink and be merry.

No use in being first over the hill if they all pass you going down.

Just do what your good at and do it at your best. Some climb hills fast by sitting in the seat and spinning others like me 6'2" tall 80-90 kg have to use long cranks big gears and out of the seat.

It worked for Patric Jonker and he was a great climber.

 

[Cracked Again]

As tapeworm said. Power:weight ratios that exceed 5 are the 'general' benchmark, but beyond 5.8 I think was at least when state sport institute programs used to especially notice.

.

The benchmark for what, world class?? What country are you from?

To the op, anything around a 4.0 ftp is pretty dam good, a good solid racer in most countries. Cheak out the link to see how you compare.


http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6821/powerprofile.jpg

 

[badboyberty]

What is the ideal climbing weight?

....
....
....
I'm 188cm (6ft 2'' in old money) and 79/80kg (no idea in pounds), and barely have a lot of body fat on me, and I'm also 24 years old.
It should be noted I'm usually the youngest member of each group, but a vast majority of the members are on the same level as me, or even stronger and yet I still drop them. So with my height and weight, is it normal for me to drop riders and climb fairly well?

The National Talent Identification Scheme have a set of climbs that are cerftiifed for talent ID. The info is posted at www.cycle2max.com and you can enter your times there (need a gps file or a witness to be taken totally seriously if you post something impressive). Unfortunately for some reason the only climb in the Queensland list is the climb up the back of Mt Gravatt. Not the longest or most challenging climb, and a bit of a miserable ride to get to it, but if you think you're a bit good you might as well put your money where your mouth is.

 

[vladkips]

The benchmark for what, world class?? What country are you from?

To the op, anything around a 4.0 ftp is pretty dam good, a good solid racer in most countries. Cheak out the link to see how you compare.


http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6821/powerprofile.jpg

Yes, 5.0-5.8, excellent-world class (FT) as the link suggests. That was the benchmark I was referring to in terms of sport institutes in Australia. I've known an 18 year old with a P:W ratio of 6.2 at FT.

I, personally, am in the order of 4.6.

 

[craig1985]

The National Talent Identification Scheme have a set of climbs that are cerftiifed for talent ID. The info is posted at www.cycle2max.com and you can enter your times there (need a gps file or a witness to be taken totally seriously if you post something impressive). Unfortunately for some reason the only climb in the Queensland list is the climb up the back of Mt Gravatt. Not the longest or most challenging climb, and a bit of a miserable ride to get to it, but if you think you're a bit good you might as well put your money where your mouth is.

Yeah thanks. Might be worth planning a ride out there. BTW I do race at a Cat 3 level and all my races are more or less crits.

 

[L29205]

That's what happened in the first week, by the 3rd set, I gave the others a head start and still caught them and rode them off my wheel. When on the flats, I tend to struggle when the pace gets over 45km/h.

Sounds like my problems when I raced actively. Climbing reduces the speed and makes the aerodynamic resistance negligible and it make gravity the main force. This makes weight to power the main factor. When you get to flats the weight to power shifts to surface area versus power. Almost all of us have a similar surface area when comes down to going through the wind, admittedly there are exceptions. When you get off the hill you are at a disadvantage due to the people that have a greater power capability. Also some of my problems had to due with the fact that I knew I could climb so I put to much into the the climb. I came over the top hoping that I could keep the gap but had overexerted and could not recover by the time the pack caught me.

 

[TourLeTour]

Climbing reduces the speed and makes the aerodynamic resistance negligible

As everyone has said right already power to weight is the all important number for climbing. Sounds to me like if you are getting to the top that far in front while being reasonably heavy for a climber (compared to guys like Evans or Sanchez, for example, who are around 65kg, you are carrying an extra 20%) you have plenty of power. To climb even better, you could loose more weight. Wiggins, for example went from 79kg to 71kg, and his climbing was radically different. You have to be careful though, if you are already lean you don't want to loose too much. I actually rode with Wiggins for a little while during the second rest day of this years TdF, and he was looking very skinny. I have since read 4% body fat, which is about where you start doing damage. I did mention to him that he was climbing impressively and I would be pretty happy to be doing that. He laughed, pointed to my 35kg of panniers, and told me to loose some weight!

As L29205 says, aerodynamics becomes less important when you are climbing, because you go slow, but the other side is that they become much more important when you go fast. The aerodynamic force you experience is proportional to the cube of speed you are moving at relative to the wind, so (assuming no wind and the same position) when you are doing 45km/h hour on the flat you get 8 times as much wind resistance as when you are climbing at 22.5km/h.

So then you get to the question of how much difference that makes. If you are nice and aerodynamic, then it is 8 times not very much, so you won't feel it that much. If you sit square to the wind the whole time and create lots of drag at low speeds (and at 188cm and 80kg this is quite probable) then it is huge drag at high speeds, and everyone else with less power but less drag disappears into the distance. Mark Renshaw's column in the latest 'Ride' mag actually talked about this regarding Hushovd and Cav. So might be worth spending some time looking at your position and aerodynamics. Obviously there is a trade off where improved aerodynamics can cost you power, but if you get it right you may find you are riding them off your wheel on the flat as well!

 

[craig1985]

I really want to get a power meter to seewhat sort of watts I can put out when I really push myself on the flats or climbing. One guy commented on the Friday ride, that I moved up to the front of the bunch doing 44/45km/h on the flat and into a head wind and said I must have an impressive V02 max capacity, since I wasn't really struggling.

Either way, I can most assure you that whatever I do, I'm 110% clean, since I don't even take any Vitamin C etc. tablets