I think Vaughters really wants to sign Contador:

Jul 1, 2009
320
0
0
"Vaugthers also pointed out factors such as rolling resistance and bike mass altering from the mid 90s to the present day, as well as the high-tech fibers within clothing, lighter components and that bikes are now on the limit of the UCI's weight minimum regulations of 6.8kg. "

"In the mid-90s bikes were 9kg, you had these heavy Carnac shoes that Pantani used to wear, and the clothing held more sweat, so four kilograms per watt for a rider like Pantani who only weighed 55kg is around seven percent, which would have had a massive effect on his ascent velocity."

"Then there are the tiny details like wheels being more aerodynamic, ceramic bearings, and so on..."


Sounds a bit much to me, what do you guys think?
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
I think JV started last year, when they knew Vande Velde was gonna charge, and released some PR propaganda into the press. Remember the "VDV was more talented than Armstrong at pre-season Solvang". So what, he had better lactate numbers, 10 years ago. Mean nothing when Vande Velde was attacking with Kohl, Cobo, Piepoli, etc. Not credible JV. Don't give us that BS, and do not justify PRIOR to the results being delivered. Just seems that their is a conspiracy at play.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
mikkemus23 said:
"Vaugthers also pointed out factors such as rolling resistance and bike mass altering from the mid 90s to the present day, as well as the high-tech fibers within clothing, lighter components and that bikes are now on the limit of the UCI's weight minimum regulations of 6.8kg. "

"In the mid-90s bikes were 9kg, you had these heavy Carnac shoes that Pantani used to wear, and the clothing held more sweat, so four kilograms per watt for a rider like Pantani who only weighed 55kg is around seven percent, which would have had a massive effect on his ascent velocity."

"Then there are the tiny details like wheels being more aerodynamic, ceramic bearings, and so on..."


Sounds a bit much to me, what do you guys think?

*Points to Fred Grappe's recent demonstration that 2009 equipment vs 1980 equipment is worth 10 watts at most*
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
mikkemus23 said:
"Vaugthers also pointed out factors such as rolling resistance and bike mass altering from the mid 90s to the present day, as well as the high-tech fibers within clothing, lighter components and that bikes are now on the limit of the UCI's weight minimum regulations of 6.8kg. "

"In the mid-90s bikes were 9kg, you had these heavy Carnac shoes that Pantani used to wear, and the clothing held more sweat, so four kilograms per watt for a rider like Pantani who only weighed 55kg is around seven percent, which would have had a massive effect on his ascent velocity."

"Then there are the tiny details like wheels being more aerodynamic, ceramic bearings, and so on..."


Sounds a bit much to me, what do you guys think?
it is a load of BS. Major declining returns. I reckon Ullrich would prefer his Pegoretti he rode with Telekom in 98. Would have been around 8.5, and perfect geometry.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
JV is a good guy, but this is a little ridiculous.

Pantani was a midget He rode a tiny frame and custom climbing wheels. It likely came under the 6.9 limit as they had no limits then. "Rolling resistance, shoes, water in the jersey?.....really? I have a pair of those old Carnac's. They are bulky but not that heavy. JV also forgets that ADA/Lightweight wheels have been around for over 10 years. I had one of these bikes. With the Lightweights it would be about 15.5 Pounds

 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Race Radio said:
JV is a good guy, but this is a little ridiculous.

Pantani was a midget He rode a tiny frame and custom climbing wheels. It likely came under the 6.9 limit as they had no limits then. "Rolling resistance, shoes, water in the jersey?.....really? I have a pair of those old Carnac's. They are bulky but not that heavy. JV also forgets that ADA/Lightweight wheels have been around for over 10 years.
dminishing returns. The harder JV makes his case, the more conspiratorial it becomes.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Digger said:
I want to believe in JV, I really do, but when I heard about him being interested in Contador, I thought this is just not right...
you wanted to believe. I believed. Past tense.

But JV also said he would sign Landis, if he beat the rap. Besides LAndis' crit rising a few points in the Tour.

What about Wiggins, his crit went up, what, 0.5 or one point. His hemoglobin went up 0.8. Ashenden will say this is unlikely and very suspicious.
 
mikkemus23 said:
"Vaugthers also pointed out factors such as rolling resistance and bike mass altering from the mid 90s to the present day, as well as the high-tech fibers within clothing, lighter components and that bikes are now on the limit of the UCI's weight minimum regulations of 6.8kg. "

"In the mid-90s bikes were 9kg, you had these heavy Carnac shoes that Pantani used to wear, and the clothing held more sweat, so four kilograms per watt for a rider like Pantani who only weighed 55kg is around seven percent, which would have had a massive effect on his ascent velocity."

"Then there are the tiny details like wheels being more aerodynamic, ceramic bearings, and so on..."


Sounds a bit much to me, what do you guys think?
I'd like to see him quantify the differences these "changes" in equipment have made as they apply to power numbers. I mean, if you're going to apply all this rigor to the power numbers, let's have some numbers on the difference a sweatier (!!) jersey makes.

I'd like to see some actual numbers on bike weight, and then I'd like to see the calculations on how that difference, whatever it really is, affects these numbers.

The sweaty jersey and heavy shoes thing borders on the ludicrous.

Is he going to start talking about PowerBars next?
 
blackcat said:
you wanted to believe. I believed. Past tense.

But JV also said he would sign Landis, if he beat the rap. Besides LAndis' crit rising a few points in the Tour.

What about Wiggins, his crit went up, what, 0.5 or one point. His hemoglobin went up 0.8. Ashenden will say this is unlikely and very suspicious.
Yeah EPO anti-doping experts in Denmark saw Wiggins' figures and whilst they said there wasn't anything completely leaping out, his crit going up in final week was definitely not right. :( F*** them.
 
issoisso said:
*Points to Fred Grappe's recent demonstration that 2009 equipment vs 1980 equipment is worth 10 watts at most*
Thanks Issoisso for pointing this out. I remember coming across something about it, but couldn't remember Grappe or the study. And that is going back 30 years. The difference in the last 20 is even less. And certainly not the huge watt increases we're seeing.

I too would like to believe JV. But it's like believing that "racing is clean with a few bad apples". I've wanted to believe that every year for the last decade; and every single year I'm shown how untrue it is.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
Digger said:
I want to believe in JV, I really do, but when I heard about him being interested in Contador, I thought this is just not right...
I want to believe in a cleaner peloton and JV too.....here are the straws I clutch at:
1) It was years till the media and cycling fans accepted that doping was epidemic in the peloton....it could take just as long for conventional wisdom to recognize a cleaner peloton.
2) The trend towards older, heavier riders doing well in TDF seems to be reversing a bit.
3) JV supports 'reformed characters' e.g. Millar. Even though AC was implicated in Puerto, it doesn't mean he is necessarily still prepared to push his luck with preparation, now the bio-passport has been invented.

Then I wake up sober.
 
Aug 17, 2009
125
0
0
JV is totally not right. The new carbon frames are in general wider and less aerodynamic (save a few like the soloist). The new bottom brackets have way more bearing seal resistance. They have to go to ceramic to match what we had before. I recall the campy stuff from the 80's was fantastic in terms of rolling resistance - the wheels and cranks would just roll and roll. Bearing technology was damn fine, racers would strip seals and remove the grease and use light oil for an advanctage.

Jeepers, they are still using hand sewn tubulars. The rubber technology may have improved a bit but that is it.

10 Watts at best sounds fair for the new modern technology.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
"I respect Walsh and his anti-doping stance. That being said, I don't like criticism of the biological passport. I understand that it isn't perfect, like any anti-doping technology, but it is the best technology that we've got right now, and I think it's something that the sport should be immensely proud of. No one has done this before and we're pushing the boundaries to the far edge. We've got to be proud of that."


I'm starting to think that the powers-that-be are willing to accept doping in cycling as long as it is within certain ranges (dead athletes being rather bad for business). Is it beacuse they truly are unable to weed out sophisticated programs so this is a comprimise or is it the fear of radically unpredictable performances and slow(er) race speeds, or both?

It seems as though JV has settled for a cleaner sport instead of a clean one.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Scott SoCal said:
I'm starting to think that the powers-that-be are willing to accept doping in cycling as long as it is within certain ranges (dead athletes being rather bad for business). Is it beacuse they truly are unable to weed out sophisticated programs so this is a comprimise or is it the fear of radically unpredictable performances and slow(er) race speeds, or both?

It seems as though JV has settled for a cleaner sport instead of a clean one.
+1..................................
 
Jun 9, 2009
403
0
0
Altitude and hematocrit

The following article suggests that hematocrit can be elevated by as much as 1% for every week spent at altitude, with this rate of increase being possible for as many as 12 consecutive weeks.

http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/csa/vol24/wolski.htm

With that in mind, the slim improvements measured in Wiggins (prior to the TDF are well within the possibility of a normal adaptation to stresses placed on the athlete by either high altitude training or sleeping in a hypoxic tent.

The Danish scientisis who were quoted as saying the values were suspicious are incorrect. Denmark, at its highest point, is 173 meters above sea level. It makes sense that these scientisis might not be the best in the world when it comes to understanding the effects of altitude training on hematocrit. I mean no insult toward the Danes, their beer is awesome.

JV and his team physiologist live at about 2000 meters and train their athletes as high as 6000+ meters.

And, by the way, who wouldn't want to sign Contador? If Contador were on Garmin, JV would have have a much better shot at achieving his goal of a podium finisher for the TDF from his squad. JV has stated that as a goal, so it makes sense to try to sign the talent that gives him the best chance of success.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
David Suro said:
The following article suggests that hematocrit can be elevated by as much as 1% for every week spent at altitude, with this rate of increase being possible for as many as 12 consecutive weeks.

http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/csa/vol24/wolski.htm

With that in mind, the slim improvements measured in Wiggins (prior to the TDF are well within the possibility of a normal adaptation to stresses placed on the athlete by either high altitude training or sleeping in a hypoxic tent.

The Danish scientisis who were quoted as saying the values were suspicious are incorrect. Denmark, at its highest point, is 173 meters above sea level. It makes sense that these scientisis might not be the best in the world when it comes to understanding the effects of altitude training on hematocrit. I mean no insult toward the Danes, their beer is awesome.

JV and his team physiologist live at about 2000 meters and train their athletes as high as 6000+ meters.

And, by the way, who wouldn't want to sign Contador? If Contador were on Garmin, JV would have have a much better shot at achieving his goal of a podium finisher for the TDF from his squad. JV has stated that as a goal, so it makes sense to try to sign the talent that gives him the best chance of success.
Hasbara alert!
 
blackcat said:
dminishing returns. The harder JV makes his case, the more conspiratorial it becomes.
Blackcat, I think you made an important point here. He is giving way too many explanations. Why? Is he reading our forums or is he just hiding something?

Well I have made the calculations for Contador and Wiggins again changing the 4 Kgs (Which I believe is way too much). These are my results:

Contador (Tailwind Case): 415 Watts to 449 Watts. 34 Watts increase
Wiggins (Tailwind Case): 443 Watts to 475 Watts. 32 Watts increase.

Just remember that we are assuming the same times, otherwise what’s the point of making the calculations. IMHO the actual weight gain, comparing to the nineties would be half the number that I calculated, which is around 15 Watts. I just don't see that much weight improvement from the nineties.

I currently working in a probabilistic model using all errors involved in the calculations on the Power Outputs. That way we will evaluate and cover all the ranges of possibilities of their performance in Verbier: wind, rolling resistance, weight, drafting time, etc. I’ll put those results in the other thread about the Power Calculations by the Critics are Wrong.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Escarabajo said:
Blackcat, I think you made an important point here. He is giving way too many explanations. Why? Is he reading our forums or is he just hiding something?

Well I have made the calculations for Contador and Wiggins again changing the 4 Kgs (Which I believe is way too much). These are my results:

Contador (Tailwind Case): 415 Watts to 449 Watts. 34 Watts increase
Wiggins (Tailwind Case): 443 Watts to 475 Watts. 32 Watts increase.

Just remember that we are assuming the same times, otherwise what’s the point of making the calculations. IMHO the actual weight gain, comparing to the nineties would be half the number that I calculated, which is around 15 Watts. I just don't see that much weight improvement from the nineties.

I currently working in a probabilistic model using all errors involved in the calculations on the Power Outputs. That way we will evaluate and cover all the ranges of possibilities of their performance in Verbier: wind, rolling resistance, weight, drafting time, etc. I’ll put those results in the other thread about the Power Calculations by the Critics are Wrong.
the more disconcerting view is, Vaughters using the media as a too, preparing and pre-justifying the results which are expected.

2008 CVV lactate testing better than Lance circa 1999.
2009 Wiggins losing up to 12 or 14 kgs from his heaviest pursuiting weight. Which was BS. He is still 190cm, I really doubt he got to 71kg. I would think, lowest weight, end of Tour, about 72, maybe 73. Starting weight, 73 or maybe 74.

Wiggins was not that much thinner, and his results were not because of the weight loss. And he timetrial ability was talked up, and his track dominance was blown out of all proportian when you assess the achievements of Lehmann and Bartko and the great pursuiters. If Wiggins went mano a mano v Mcgee, with the same preparation, no way Wiggins would have taken Mcgee. Mcgee was getting over half a million euro to ride the road for results, and he did, and he lost weight, track souplesse, and his anaerobic threshold. If he was 75kg, he would have pumped Wiggins on the track.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Read the whole interview

Ok, I know I'm nuts for even bothering here, but here goes:

My major point had to do with the percentage of anearobic work done in a 20 minute efforts vs a 40 min effort. The bike weight, etc etc, probably does only account for 20 watts assuming a perfectly steady effort (which is an invalid assumption if you've ever watched a bike race). However, the amount of power produced beyond what is produced aerobically in a 20 minute effort is considerable, it is not in a 40 minute effort - in my experience!

So, that was my point. If you fellows would like to keep going on about how we dope Brad and Christian, then have at it. It's really silly, as they aren't, but whatever, I've spent enough time trying to fight windmills for today. Have at it boys.

Sorry that I no longer have your respect - JV
 
money changes everything. when it's your ssa on the line, what are YOU going
to do? ignore reality? go with flow? my cynical eye says 'there but for the grace
of god goes me". the antidoping stance is admirable, but the public get tired of it. they just want to eat their snacks and enjoy some sports. they really don't care why said athlete is so fast, just that they are. sure they will give a nod and a wink to the "charged" aspect of things. but at the end, they just want a good race, as in entertaining. those of us who get up off the couch and race may feel different, but does citizen public really care that much? ask some casual fans or just anyone. it's not a priority. :cool:
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
JV1973 said:
My major point had to do with the percentage of anearobic work done in a 20 minute efforts vs a 40 min effort.
I saw an estimate that anaerobic work could make an average 30W difference on a 20min climb....do you have an estimate of the anaerobic component? This topic has received surprisingly little attention, possibly due to the amount of time spent debating what else was wrong with Vayer's numbers.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
JV1973 said:
Ok, I know I'm nuts for even bothering here, but here goes:

My major point had to do with the percentage of anearobic work done in a 20 minute efforts vs a 40 min effort. The bike weight, etc etc, probably does only account for 20 watts assuming a perfectly steady effort (which is an invalid assumption if you've ever watched a bike race). However, the amount of power produced beyond what is produced aerobically in a 20 minute effort is considerable, it is not in a 40 minute effort - in my experience!

So, that was my point. If you fellows would like to keep going on about how we dope Brad and Christian, then have at it. It's really silly, as they aren't, but whatever, I've spent enough time trying to fight windmills for today. Have at it boys.

Sorry that I no longer have your respect - JV
Firstly - welcome to the forum. Its great that you look in and even better that you contribute.

Second point is there are lots of diverse opinions on this forum and particularly here in the Clinic.
We all welcome Brad posting his numbers- for the sport to restore trust and credibility in the fans more cyclists need to do that.
But it is also right that those figures should be argued over and debated.

Regarding the Vayer report - quite simply there is no way of recreating the correct numbers unless they have access to the PowerTap.

As regards the Bio-Passport however, I don't yet share your confidence in the system - although I will acknowledge that it has narrowed the ability of riders to dope and therefore the difference between a clean rider and a doped rider has also narrowed. This does allow for a clean rider to be able to compete unlike what was evident in the 90's.

My main concern is that the Bio-Passport is being used to target riders with suspicious values - like Di Luca. However the purpose of the Bio-Passport was to sanction riders who had suspicious values- so why wasn't Di Luca sanctioned when his values were suspicious?
Although I concede -I might be being a little unfair - and we need to wait until the 5 cases have been legally dealt with.

I think anyone who loves this sport appreciates and respects your career and what you are doing in Garmin - but if you do hire AC, it would be wise to publish his values!
 
Jul 16, 2009
230
0
0
okay. we've determined that you are literate,. thats a start.

now are you being 100% honest, well, time will tell no doubt

perhaps if the tour directors removed maybe, ....1 week from the tour.

made team sizes smaller, ironed out a few mountains, then I could believe it

but i simpy can't see how a human being can ride at that pace with those mountains at that wattage for 3 long weeks and survive, let alone win., without extra "help"

i need to see some goodwill back from the race directors to feel that they are trying to help the clean riders win. i don't know

call me Fox Mulder. I want to believe, but then it seems the SUPER teams win, and to lead a race for that long and up those mountains seems SUPER human to me

thanks for taking the time, bear with us, we're trying to work it all out too
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY