- Apr 30, 2011
- 48,151
- 30,654
- 28,180
Big difference between not having the highest and being below the top 3 average.
Problem is if you average the indexes out youre gonna favor the shorter climbs with higher variation a lot.
But the clearest non winning average should be Contador in the 2008 Giro and probably 2012 Vuelta as well, in addition to Evans
Probably.If you want to average GT performance then weighted average is needed: duration or at least some power of it (between 0.5 and 1) should be a weight.
Normally it is easy to see who the best climber is in a race just by watching it. My Index is also not perfect to analyze this since riders often don't go all out or have 3 good performances but collapse later. It also weighs short climbs the same as long ones. Here is the average of the top 3 performances for the winner and the 'other best climber' in those races.How many grand tours the last 20 years were won by a worse climber than his direct competition in that race?
Perhaps operationalized as inferior avg.index (average of top three to five) in that race.
These comes to mind as more likely than not:
Wiggins 12'
Kuss 23'
Evans 11'
Dumoulin 17'
Depending on analytic choices perhaps:
Yates 25'
Froome 17'
Contador 15'
Bernal 19'
Aru 15'
Hesjedal 12'
Roglic 23'
Pogacar 20'
Many small gaps and Izoard was IIRC the fastest climb the entire TdF.Yeah, didn't think that question through before I asked. My bad.
But even stupid questions can provide some interesting answers, Warren Barguil in 2017? What?
Probably.
You still get funny results because you get very tactical climbs influencing results such as Sestriere 2025 or the random result everyone forgot about like Etna 2020
Or maybe just the combined climbing times of all the climbs that were GC relevant. But anyway, you're always gonna have some issue or another.You could select climbs that really made the difference but then again the best way to access general performance in the mountains is to look at the GC (minus TT results, echelons and crashes).
For tour 12 and Vuelta 23 do you have the climbing level data for the best non-teammate of the race winner.Normally it is easy to see who the best climber is in a race just by watching it. My Index is also not perfect to analyze this since riders often don't go all out or have 3 good performances but collapse later. It also weighs short climbs the same as long ones. Here is the average of the top 3 performances for the winner and the 'other best climber' in those races.
(The others have already mentioned shortcomings of this method, so use it for pure entertainment purposes.)
Tour 12: Wiggins 67.3 <--> 70.3 Froome
Vuelta 23: Kuss 80.3 <--> 86.3 Vingegaard
Tour 11: Evans 64.3 <--> 70.3 Schleck
Giro 17: Dumoulin 76 <--> 77 Quintana
Giro 25: Yates 78.7 <--> 85.3 Carapaz
Tour 17: Froome 70.3 <--> 73.3 Barguil
Giro 15: Contador 71.3 <--> 72 Landa
Tour 19: Bernal 76 <--> 77.3 Pinot
Giro 23: Roglic 80.7 <--> 77.7 Thomas
Tour 20: Pogacar 87 <--> 82.3 Roglic
I left out the Giro 12 and Vuelta 15, but Aru and Hesjedal might have been the strongest in these races.
I know that CdA means "coefficient of drag x area", but how do you know the CdA of an individual rider?Indurain in his hour record apparently pushed 509.5 Watts at 81 kg for 60 minutes. (Ganna beat that by like 3 kph with 50 Watts less, crazy how bad Indurain's CdA was)
Testing, or estimated based on reasonable estimates of the other variables, especially if power is knownI know that CdA means "coefficient of drag x area", but how do you know the CdA of an individual rider?
