Critical Power Study of GT Winners

[Race Radio]

I believe the Eurosport footage was referenced per Kelly and observed soft pedal.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szLKrvffl4A&sns=em)

My view would be better for others to contribute, if they shall chose. I'd not like to see an excellent thread be derailed by a competitive posting matchplay.

Interpretation is open for all and all welcome to post their own views.

Eurosport's coverage is clear, at 42:50, with 1km to go they say clearly that there is "No place to hide, you either go quick or you don't" "Ritchie Porte is storming toward the line!"

I agree, this is an excellent thread. Please do not try to derail it by posting intentionally incorrect information designed to cause conflict not discussion.

 

[jens_attacks]

Lol ar anyone anyone who believes you can do col d'eze at 30 kmph with 6.4 w/kg...

 

[thehog]

It wasn't my intention to criticise Porte. It was an observation and I hope no offense was caused.

My previous comments were he;

"soft pedaled but it's open for interpretation and that he had the race won by the 5km checkpoint so didn't need to drill it all the way home".

I then referred to Sean Kelly's commentary and spoken disbelief then compared to Wiggins the year prior.

How that manifests and is construed as causing conflict, I don't know. Perhaps there is no conflict and it's imagined?

I don't sense conflict.

For others if they have interest the comments by Kelly are at 36:30 and prior and compare Porte to Talansky / Chavanel at 40:00s.

All views welcome. I don't believe this is something whereby one person is right or wrong, how the brain interprets visuals is different for all based on many factors.

Kelly and Harmon both saw Porte's effort very differently. Their commentary is indicative of this.

 

[jw1979]

The magic minimum healthy bf number is different for different individuals.

Additionally, I think he has a low amount of muscle mass. Taylor Phinney is on record as saying he's at 4%bf at 180lbs, quite clearly packing a lot more muscle for the same amount of fat. Phil looks nothing like Taylor. Phil's low muscle mass would support the low AWC hypothesis. (You still haven't explained how bone weight increases AWC).



why?

Come on, Taylor Phinney at 4%? For reference, and this is far from scientific considering the "bro" community probably put up the picture, check out this photo. http://www.nerdfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/malebodyfat11.jpg

If Taylor is 4%, Hoogerland must be .04% http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsajohj5J81qf9y1po1_500.jpg

I'm not going to be able to satisfy your questions, but based on Phil's results relative to other top riders across TTs ranging from a few minutes up to 30 minutes, he HAS to have somewhat normal AWC. Otherwise he would get completely trounced at efforts around 5:00 and would have no chance at winning a hillclimb that takes 13-15:00. If you look at a stage race like Redlands in '12, he would never have been able to win the overall there with an extremely low AWC. I'd go so far to say that anyone with an extremely low AWC just won't make it in professional cycling, it's too explosive.

If the final TT of Paris-Nice is being won on 6.35w/kg and 2nd place is 6.25w/kg, maybe I need to dust my bike off and move to Europe. I just can't believe that. The depth at Paris-Nice should be quite strong for a race of that caliber. Going down to 20th place in that TT is Westra @ 1:35. If he went 20:51, it should take roughly 13-14% more power to do a 19:16. If Porte was at 6.35w/kg that would mean Westra only did about 5.6w/kg. http://www.cyclingnews.com/paris-nice/stage-7/photos/255660

Guys, I don't know if you are trolling me here, but I can assure you that 20th place at Paris-Nice can't be had with 5.6w/kg for 20:51. That would indicate an FTP of right about 5-5.1 w/kg. Not believing that for one minute!

Versus Porte at 7.0w/kg (give or take 2-3%) and that puts Westra at 6.14w/kg on the day and an FTP of roughly 5.6w/kg. Much more believable. And totally in line with Sutherland's data from that race if one of them is slightly more aero (Westra) than the other.

 

[Race Radio]

Lol ar anyone anyone who believes you can do col d'eze at 30 kmph with 6.4 w/kg...

So JV, Talansky, and Vetooo are lying or was Talansky's powermeter poorly calibrated?

 

[Benotti69]

So JV, Talansky, and Vetooo are lying or was Talansky's powermeter poorly calibrated?

Talansky the defender of Armstrong? JV?

JV twice accused UCI blood analyzing machines of errors when the blood levels for Wiggins '09TdF and Hesejdal'12Giro returned values that increased in the 3rd week. Convenient.

 

[Race Radio]

Talansky the defender of Armstrong? JV?

And Kerrison and Porte?

On a positive note I think the times of riders lying about their weight, not sharing their powerfiles , etc. are rapidly moving behind us. There are just too many data sources from too many riders

 

[thehog]

The word 'lying' sounds most accusatory.

In the game of power profiles etc. there's a lot of interpretation. All the experts agree on this principle and always to caution and caveats to their results.

This, unfortunately, is not a practice of exactness. The variability of racing bikes on the wide open expanses of the globe makes sure of that.

All opinions and number values welcome. Inserted variable elements apply.

Reductio ad absurdum filter required.

 

[Benotti69]

And Kerrison and Porte?

On a positive note I think the times of riders lying about their weight, not sharing their powerfiles , etc. are rapidly moving behind us. There are just too many data sources from too many riders

Where are Sky's powerfiles and weights verified?

I think it should be done before every GT for team leaders and lieutenants in teams and make it televised like a weigh in for boxers.

 

[red_flanders]

And Kerrison and Porte?

On a positive note I think the times of riders lying about their weight, not sharing their powerfiles , etc. are rapidly moving behind us. There are just too many data sources from too many riders

I seem to recall a thread last year where there was a lot of dispute about Horner's weight.

There is no evidence that people are all of a sudden coming clean about weight. Is it easier to tell when they're lying? Yes, a bit if you have access to that data. However that data is not understood by the larger public and as always, lying about doping is aimed at those who don't deeply understand cycling. In other words most reporters and fans.

I do think it's great that it's getting easier to tell when people are lying about their weight, but there's no proof.

 

[red_flanders]

Where are Sky's powerfiles and weights verified?

I think it should be done before every GT for team leaders and lieutenants in teams and make it televised like a weigh in for boxers.

That would be a fantastic improvement in the sport, quite frankly. And I think quite achievable.

 

[Catwhoorg]

The Oxford Cambridge Boat race crews have a televised weigh in as well.

Doesn't have to be for every race, but sure why not make a 'thing' of it for a grand tour build up ?

 

[Race Radio]

Where are Sky's powerfiles and weights verified?

I think it should be done before every GT for team leaders and lieutenants in teams and make it televised like a weigh in for boxers.

Sky does not give anything, but other riders do. It is fairly easy to get accurate calculations if you have a few correct data points from other riders in the race.

 

[Race Radio]

I seem to recall a thread last year where there was a lot of dispute about Horner's weight.

There is no evidence that people are all of a sudden coming clean about weight. Is it easier to tell when they're lying?

Yes, Horner was lying about his weight. He was saying that he was 65 kg when he was actually 61-62. It was fairly easy to calculate using other riders power files and weights. He eventually admitted he was actually 62

It is significantly easier to get weights and power files these days. Sky still do not give them out but plenty of other riders do.

 

[thehog]

Horner said he was 64-62kg at the Vuelta and 62.5kg at the time he gave the talk and admission.

To drop weight during a GT is fairly normal. Not unexpected.

61kg? No. He had not stated those numbers. That would not be correct.

 

[Race Radio]

61kg? No. He had not stated those numbers. That would not be correct.

Who said Horner stated he was 61?

It is good that you are now interested in exactness,

This, unfortunately, is not a practice of exactness.

 

[thehog]

A range is exactness? Someone hasn't undertaken tertiary mathematics.

Environmental factors come under 'expanses' as stated. Perhaps that was misinterpreted? Not sure.

To the issue at hand. Horner's stated Vuelta weight is as he said. Which is normal for GT riders. To lose weight, during a GT that is. Froome I would imagine has a similar story but that we don't know. He's not revealed anything. Horner we have weight, SRM and passport. Froome we have nothing.

 

[Race Radio]

To the issue at hand. Horner's stated Vuelta weight is as he said.

During the Vuelta Horner said he was 65kg, this was not true......but of course you knew that.

 

[thehog]

I did know that? No, that's what you perceive and what you want others to believe.

As my late mother told me; always be skeptical of anyone telling you what you should believe.

I trust my analysis is solid and of impartiality.

I mealy reported the tweet which was verbatim Horner. Take it up with Chris if it doesn't fit the story or provide counter.

Sorry.

 

[red_flanders]

Yes, Horner was lying about his weight. He was saying that he was 65 kg when he was actually 61-62. It was fairly easy to calculate using other riders power files and weights. He eventually admitted he was actually 62

It is significantly easier to get weights and power files these days. Sky still do not give them out but plenty of other riders do.

And because the vast majority of people have no idea to even disbelieve them, let alone know where to find out they're lying, riders will continue to lie about their weights.

Just like the lie about being transparent, about their passport numbers and what they mean, etc.

 

[jw1979]

Where are Sky's powerfiles and weights verified?

I think it should be done before every GT for team leaders and lieutenants in teams and make it televised like a weigh in for boxers.

What exactly would you do with power files and verified weights?

You can't give an adverse analytical because someone puts out a ton of power.

Training and B races are supposed to elicit an increase of power during the A races, so it would be crazy to penalize guys because they actually timed it right.

All you can do is target test the guys at the front, and especially those who come out of nowhere.

In a competitive sport where there are no weight classes, it's not appropriate to demand athletes release their power and weight information. You have to give these guys the benefit of the doubt and trust the testing. It's just not fair to cast doubt on the top athletes in the world just because they are strong like bull; someone has to be the strongest.

 

[Merckx index]

Sorry, but I don't think this is right. Sky gave his numbers that day, Porte average 416 watts on the first half of Col de Eze and 384 on the second half and most calculations support those numbers. Porte was 63 kg at 2013 Paris-Nice http:/www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/richie-portes-high-hopes-for-tour-de-france-32689. That is 6.35? Makes sense as Talansky was 6.25 that day and he was only 23 sec back

https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/311126718867988480

Thanks for that Twitter link. Tucker himself comments that he thinks Porte's power is plausible, that he actually expected more. Regards 6.50 watts/kg for 20 min. in a climb the previous year as plausible. But clearly the latter figure is approaching the limit for him, because as I noted before, he said he believes 6.20 is about the best possible for 30-40 min. undoped. And AS disagrees.

However, something is off, I think with Sutherland's values. Using their times, and weights of 63 kg., I can derive the reported watts/kg values for Porte and Talansky making reasonable assumptions about their frontal area. But when I try to do that with Sutherland, I get about 415 watts, not 474. It doesn't make sense that if RP is 6.35 and AT, 23" back, is at 6.25, that RS, 2' back, would be at 6.15. I think his reported watts has to be too high.

Jw, if you can do 6.27 for 20 min. with 10% body fat, my advice is take some CB and join the peloton! If 1979 refers to your DOB, you have eight years to reach a Horner-type peak.

 

[Race Radio]

What exactly would you do with power files and verified weights?

You can't give an adverse analytical because someone puts out a ton of power.

Training and B races are supposed to elicit an increase of power during the A races, so it would be crazy to penalize guys because they actually timed it right.

All you can do is target test the guys at the front, and especially those who come out of nowhere.

In a competitive sport where there are no weight classes, it's not appropriate to demand athletes release their power and weight information. You have to give these guys the benefit of the doubt and trust the testing. It's just not fair to cast doubt on the top athletes in the world just because they are strong like bull; someone has to be the strongest.

Agreed, not possible to sanction.....but it would provide lots to talk about here.

Back when teams had internal testing programs Highroad and Slipstream both used output as a data point. Coupled with a blood profile it can be very useful. Spike in Hct, drop in rect, spike in W/kg.....ask questions

 

[Ripper]

What exactly would you do with power files and verified weights?

You can't give an adverse analytical because someone puts out a ton of power.

Training and B races are supposed to elicit an increase of power during the A races, so it would be crazy to penalize guys because they actually timed it right.

All you can do is target test the guys at the front, and especially those who come out of nowhere.

In a competitive sport where there are no weight classes, it's not appropriate to demand athletes release their power and weight information. You have to give these guys the benefit of the doubt and trust the testing. It's just not fair to cast doubt on the top athletes in the world just because they are strong like bull; someone has to be the strongest.

Not flaming here, but wrt the underlined - why?

 

[jw1979]

Ripper, I don't think it's appropriate because cycling is part chess, part poker, and part physiological; take any one of those away and the drama of the actual racing falls away.

Someone like Cavendish, who apparently has poor performance values in testing would look quite suspicious. Every once in a while someone has an altered state of consciousness and transcends themselves; witness Buster Douglas v. Mike Tyson! They should be tested vigorously when that happens, but such triumphant displays of our will over the body are what makes sport so beautiful.