Comprehensive Climbers Ranking

[Pozzovivo]

Regardless of which climb I have analyzed, my system has always been quite good and coherent (in my opinion). Today's performance by Pogacar literally exploded my database. This is at least an other level up from PdB.

On these kind of shallow climbs, I can always bring the numbers down by adjusting some things, but this would mean that I have overestimated all previous efforts (on shallow climbs) until now. Maybe I am still overestimating CdA and CRR or underestimating the motodraft.

Can anyone of you give me feedback on what you think Pogacar's CdA is on a climb like Cipressa? He is not the most aero guy for sure and also does standing attacks... (although his aero game has improved for sure over the years)


I probably won't post any numbers for today, but let's say that Mou's mythical 8.5 w/kg for 12 minutes is not so unrealistic anymore. At least for road cycling, this might be the best athletic performance in history.

(It should also be mentioned that Pogacar's descending (which he trained a lot) was very good and key to winning. he also managed the sprint quite well.)

Can you tell us if your system index depart heavily from w2w's index of 93 on Cipressa today?

Regardless forecasted conditions, I think Pogacar had excellent wind conditions judging from flags, leaves and bushes. Also, huge motordraft at all times. Something needs to be done about that.

....Or is this actually by design from the UCI/race org, idk anymore.

 

[Red Rick]

I don't know about actual CdA numbers, but if it's way out of line with steeper climbs I'd be very sceptical. I'll reference the study that simulated motor drafting effects. While it was simulated at 54 kph, I think the speeds of the Cipressa and Poggio still make it very relevant.

It basically finds like 15% less air resistance 15m behind a single motor at 54kph, and there's more than 1 motor in front at nearly all time, and sometimes they form an entire group just before the lead rider.

The simplest test for me is if Pidcock and MvdP get numbers that are over the top for their climbing chops then that's a big red flag.

 

[Peyresourde]

Can you tell us if your system index depart heavily from w2w's index of 93 on Cipressa today?

Regardless forecasted conditions, I think Pogacar had excellent wind conditions judging from flags, leaves and bushes. Also, huge motordraft at all times. Something needs to be done about that.

....Or is this actually by design from the UCI/race org, idk anymore.

I have not done a detailed video anlalysis yet, this will take some time. But at minimum, Pogacar should have done 2 consecutive performances above 100. W2W on Cipressa is already very low (but maybe in the realm of possibility), and a 71 Index for the Poggio is completely ridiculous.

Pogacar led basically the whole Poggio and almost equaled the record on the climb, thats after Cipressa and pulling on the flat! The wind was a bit favourable at least on the Poggio, but still..

I don't know about actual CdA numbers, but if it's way out of line with steeper climbs I'd be very sceptical. I'll reference the study that simulated motor drafting effects. While it was simulated at 54 kph, I think the speeds of the Cipressa and Poggio still make it very relevant.

It basically finds like 15% less air resistance 15m behind a single motor at 54kph, and there's more than 1 motor in front at nearly all time, and sometimes they form an entire group just before the lead rider.

The simplest test for me is if Pidcock and MvdP get numbers that are over the top for their climbing chops then that's a big red flag.

It is out of line, but also not so much that I can just categorically dismiss it. Just from watching I thought it was an incredible performance. Who is to say that it can't be better than PdB?
Pogacar also looks quite big this year, so he has a relative advantage on shallow climbs because I use 60kg etalon watts.

*Pidcock did not do a PB (at least in raw w/kg), though the two consecutive efforts are impressive. He is really a beast on this length of climb.

 

[Peyresourde]

Another big uncertainty factor for sub 10 minute climbs is getting the entry and exit speed right, especially if they are high.
An entry speed of 53 or 57 kph for Cipressa makes a substantial difference for the watt calculation.

 

[Red Rick]

I have not done a detailed video anlalysis yet, this will take some time. But at minimum, Pogacar should have done 2 consecutive performances above 100. W2W on Cipressa is already very low (but maybe in the realm of possibility), and a 71 Index for the Poggio is completely ridiculous.

Pogacar led basically the whole Poggio and almost equaled the record on the climb, thats after Cipressa and pulling on the flat! The wind was a bit favourable at least on the Poggio, but still..



It is out of line, but also not so much that I can just categorically dismiss it. Just from watching I thought it was an incredible performance. Who is to say that it can't be better than PdB?
Pogacar also looks quite big this year, so he has a relative advantage on shallow climbs because I use 60kg etalon watts.

*Pidcock did not do a PB (at least in raw w/kg), though the two consecutive efforts are impressive. He is really a beast on this length of climb.

I think being close to record on the Poggio isn't that strange, because I think when the Poggio is raced as normal, the pacing strategy is bad because the best riders don't come out of their shell until the final 800m of the climb or so. So a flatter or more positive split effort is considerably better in my view.

As for riding hard on the flat section in the middle, it's still a 3 man group that are probably not completely on the limit on the flat section, plus it's literally sea level. I think some relative recovery should be expected. Pretty sure we've seen the likes of Vingegaard, Evenepoel, and Roglic also do great short climbs with fairly limited drop off in their longer solo wins.

 

[Peyresourde]

I think being close to record on the Poggio isn't that strange, because I think when the Poggio is raced as normal, the pacing strategy is bad because the best riders don't come out of their shell until the final 800m of the climb or so. So a flatter or more positive split effort is considerably better in my view.

As for riding hard on the flat section in the middle, it's still a 3 man group that are probably not completely on the limit on the flat section, plus it's literally sea level. I think some relative recovery should be expected. Pretty sure we've seen the likes of Vingegaard, Evenepoel, and Roglic also do great short climbs with fairly limited drop off in their longer solo wins.

I don't believe that pulling on the flat counts as recovery, and my data shows that the second effort after riding hard for a while is almost always worse than the first.
Evenepoel actually does not have a single performance above 80 on a short climb and I don't know which Vingegaard or Roglic effort you are referring to.

I agree with you that the Poggio record is not very strong and easily beatable, but getting close with only the motodraft after the effort he has already done is really serious.

 

[Red Rick]

I don't believe that pulling on the flat counts as recovery, and my data shows that the second effort after riding hard for a while is almost always worse than the first.
Evenepoel actually does not have a single performance above 80 on a short climb and I don't know which Vingegaard or Roglic effort you are referring to.

I agree with you that the Poggio record is not very strong and easily beatable, but getting close with only the motodraft after the effort he has already done is really serious.

Yes there should be drop off but I don't think it needs to be that extreme.

 

[AmRacer]

I don't believe that pulling on the flat counts as recovery, and my data shows that the second effort after riding hard for a while is almost always worse than the first.
Evenepoel actually does not have a single performance above 80 on a short climb and I don't know which Vingegaard or Roglic effort you are referring to.

I agree with you that the Poggio record is not very strong and easily beatable, but getting close with only the motodraft after the effort he has already done is really serious.

If they race only 50k or 100k before Poggio, they would smash the record.

 

[Peyresourde]

If they race only 50k or 100k before Poggio, they would smash the record.

Yes, of course. And the Poggio is even more difficult to calculate than the Cipressa (shorter, shallower, tight hairpins). Previously, I even used to adjust up the watts manually on Poggio because they had to break in some corners (or at least not pedal for a while).

Going forward, that is why I will probably not calculate the Poggio anymore (and maybe remove the old references I have in the OP). I will instead try to get it right with the Cipressa. I will redo my old calculations and look into every parameter that goes into the calc.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

What is the calculations resolution in your results? Are climbs divided into sectors of some length? (esp. when gradient varies). Or is it just an averaged result from climbing time and climb data?

 

[Peyresourde]

What is the calculations resolution in your results? Are climbs divided into sectors of some length? (esp. when gradient varies). Or is it just an averaged result from climbing time and climb data?

Normally I only calculate the watts for the whole climb. I try to adjust for irregular climbs (flat sections and short descents) as best as possible by increasing the w/kg by a certain percentage.

I have segmented some longer climbs with varying gradients to test my method and it mostly adds up. For Cipressa I have not done that yet, but I will probably calculate a segment of the 5% sections (until left turn).

My results for Cipressa were also not that crazy (it will probably land in the 105-110 range after I do some more adjustments for motodraft etc.). I was mainly surprised by my preliminary Poggio results, which is why I decided to exclude them from now on.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Normally I only calculate the watts for the whole climb. I try to adjust for irregular climbs (flat sections and short descents) as best as possible by increasing the w/kg by a certain percentage.

Irregular climbs are indeed difficult to adjust accurately without dividing into sectors of similar gradient. For more regular climbs resolution matters much less of course.

 

[Red Rick]

If a climb is always climbing, so no flat sections or descents, I don't really think irregularity should affect the estimates as much other than that the gradient changes affect tactics.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

If a climb is always climbing, so no flat sections or descents, I don't really think irregularity should affect the estimates as much other than that the gradient changes affect tactics.

I think false flat section (i.e. 2-3%) should affect the estimates. They barely climb on those sectors so it lowers the average VAM more than the increased gradient for the rest of the climb can compensate.

 

[Red Rick]

I think false flat section (i.e. 2-3%) should affect the estimates. They barely climb on those sectors so it lowers the average VAM more than the increased gradient for the rest of the climb can compensate.

Ofcourse any inconsistencies are gonna be a net negative because air resistance isn't linear with velocity. But I also don't think it's gonna affect the results that much, and it's gonna be smaller than effects of drafting in a large group, motor drafting at high speeds, and entrance velocity

The simple option for Cipressa is to just cut the final 1.2km out, and I don't think there's a major mistake in that regardless.

 

[Peyresourde]

I think false flat section (i.e. 2-3%) should affect the estimates. They barely climb on those sectors so it lowers the average VAM more than the increased gradient for the rest of the climb can compensate.

As long as it is uphill, the effects are not big. Of course extended false flats do have an effect, but they have to be a significant part of the climb to be really relevant.

 

[Netserk]

As long as it is uphill, the effects are not big. Of course extended false flats do have an effect, but they have to be a significant part of the climb to be really relevant.

even descents should not be a big problem if they are short enough

was it really long enough on perthus for the riders to reach high speeds ( and brake ) or to majorly disadvantage their pacing ?

 

[Red Rick]

even descents should not be a big problem if they are short enough

was it really long enough on perthus for the riders to reach high speeds ( and brake ) or to majorly disadvantage their pacing ?

And if flats are short the acceleration on the flat section carries over extra speed into the steeper sections reconverting kinetic energy into VAM

 

[BubbaChuck]

He did 7.5 on cipressa and 7.3 on poggio. Two nukes,but he was affected. He could go higher,cause he did 7.5 in chase.

 

[BubbaChuck]

Seixas is gonna be real danger in classics too,if he develops snap. Its becoming watts per kilo contest,just like in Merckx era.

 

[Peyresourde]

After redoing my Cipressa and Poggio segments, my numbers for MSR:

Tadej Pogacar | 108 (+1): 7.94 W/kg for 8:49 on Cipressa (MSR 2026)

Pidcock and van der Poel did 7.47 and 7.42 w/kg respectively. As Pidcock is a bit under 60kg, he did even slightly more in real watts/kg and van der Poel (75kg) did much less (~6.9+ w/kg).

This is the third highest Index in my database, although Pogacar also slightly 'profits' from the use of 60kg eW/kg here. A consideration in the other direction is that the pacing was less regular than on PdB, making this more impressive.


[I said I won't publish my Poggio numbers anymore due the extremely high uncertainties, so take this with an extra grain of salt: Even after giving a substantial penalty for motor-drafting, I still calculated ~8 w/kg for 5:44 on Poggio. This would (after positive adjustments due to the prior Cipressa effort) result in a final Index of around 100 for the Poggio.]

Two consecutive efforts of 100+ are unprecedented, making this a candidate for the strongest overall w/kg performance in history. Of course you can argue that the watts are somewhat 'wasted' for a race like MSR, where there are easier ways to win. You can decide for yourself if this makes the performance more or less impressive.



Finally: Pogacar did around 0.2+ w/kg more than last year on both climbs (8+ Index points). Last years Cipressa (now 98 after recalc, which was in the Top 24 list will be replaced by this years).
MvdP did similar watts as last year on Cipressa and slightly more on Poggio (though with much more regular pacing making this easier).

Overall, I tried to be too low rather than too high with the result, but it is still not certain by any means. If I get new information in the future about CdA, CRR or measured power numbers etc. I might still correct the calculation again.

 

[Red Rick]

Those are very similar to the numbers I get with when I lazily put it into a calculator, and put in a CdA of 0.25

 

[Krzysztof_O]

@Peyresourde

How do you incorporate wind conditions? (i.e. stark difference between this and last year's Cipressa)
Is it some sort of adjustment at the end? Or is approximate wind speed directly taken into account when calculating resistive forces?

Pogi's brilliant tactic to simply push the pedals harder proves to be the best tactic again. Those wattage were not wasted: he needed them to terminate big boys of MSR as he's not an elite sprinter. Every race (no matter specificity) is a matter of watts: Teddy and Eddy are the only two men in history to have applied this universal truth!

 

[Pozzovivo]

@Peyresourde, considering that MVDP didn't even have motodraft on the poggio, it must have been his best index ever?

 

[Peyresourde]

Those are very similar to the numbers I get with when I lazily put it into a calculator, and put in a CdA of 0.25

The CdA I used is still a bit higher. 0.25 really seems unrealistically low if you look at their (or specifically Pogacar's) position on the bike while climbing, especially considering the standing attacks. Or do you have a source/basis for using 0.25?

Instead I liberally applied drafting 'penalties' for motordrafting especially on Poggio.

@Peyresourde

How do you incorporate wind conditions? (i.e. stark difference between this and last year's Cipressa)
Is it some sort of adjustment at the end? Or is approximate wind speed directly taken into account when calculating resistive forces?

Pogi's brilliant tactic to simply push the pedals harder proves to be the best tactic again. Those wattage were not wasted: he needed them to terminate big boys of MSR as he's not an elite sprinter. Every race (no matter specificity) is a matter of watts: Teddy and Eddy are the only two men in history to have applied this universal truth!

I also (unironically) say that my #1 rule in tactics is trying your hardest. 50-90% of riders typically don't do that. Pogacar gives his all almost every race, which is why I will rarely criticize his tactics even if he wastes energy sometimes.

The approximate wind speed is directly incorporated into the formula for air resistance. This year, I used 0 for Cipressa. The exact speed is impossible to gauge, and depends on many orographic factors and things like spectators, rider position in the group etc. So I try to be conservative and mostly use much lower speeds than a local weather station would (also big difference between 10m and ground wind speed)

@Peyresourde, considering that MVDP didn't even have motodraft on the poggio, it must have been his best index ever?

His highest Indexes are Cipressa this year and last year, then Poggio this year and Mur de Bretagne from 2021. As I said, I tried to lowball the Poggio a little bit to be on the safe side, even for MvdP who did not get specific motor-assistance. Since it is also awkward to give a guy who got straight up dropped (Ganna last year or MvdP this year) a (much) higher number than those who did not (MvdP last year or Pidcock this year).