Kwibus said:
The top in women cycling obviously isn't as wide as in men cycling. Besides that.. eh nevermind I'm not going there, but at the age of 52 these performances?
To know what to expect at age 52 you can go to WMA tables or look at the results obtained by Helge Schroeter-Janssen.
Average athletes lose about 9% of their potential by age 52 compared to their peak years, ie at 29 to 40 years of age(9% limits).
For a flat time trial, a 9% loss in power means a 3.3% loss in average speed (taking into account air and road resistance at 44 km/h).
In other words, between the ages of 29 and 41, if she aged the same as your average athlete, Jeannie Longo would have been faster than today by approximately 66 sec. She would have beaten Pooley by about 21 sec.
You could argue that the course is not flat, and I grant you that the difference would therefore have been slightly bigger. A younger Longo would have won by maybe 30 sec.
I am appalled at the incredible number of stupid comments that are made by people who pretend to know about cycling, and this probably(?) just because they despise women cyclists I guess. Or maybe the stupidty of their comments is just a reflection of their stupidity.
Luckily Longo is smarter than that and knows better than not to try.