I don’t think we saw Vingo at his max in the mountains. Based upon his beyond belief TT he should have the watts to go much quicker? This also explains why Pog couldn’t crack him despite many attempts. Water off a ducks back.
-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Be more lenient to the prodigy. Back then he was occupied with fishing business and only used a bike to get to his work place.
If you judge by absolute level, then I would say he is getting close to RoboBasso. But if it is about his relative level (to his trajectory and his competition), he is less absurd than the three Sky Brits.
The equipment changes haven't had a huge impact on climbing times.
Mostly aero and rolling resistance are improved with a few %.
The weight is limited and while theoretically they could have gained it is not allowed due to the min weight restriction. they are still on more or less same weigth bikes. (even a bit heavier than what they used to be. due to aero focus and disc breaks.)
I was looking for a picture as indication on what a climber needs to overcome in terms of resistance per % incline. Don't find it now, i'll try to find it this evening. But i thought wind+rolling contributed to less than 10% on 7% climbs.
It contributes to more than 10% on a 7% climb. To maintain a VAM of 1800 m/h on a theoretical super steep slope only about 5.5 w/kg is enough (when gravity is the only resistive force). In practise one would need 6.5 w/kg or more on not so steep (7%) climb.
Poeple also said Pogacar was holding back last year, and dropping off Vingegaards wheel on purpose, to make it seem more plausible. I very highly doubt that either of them have done that in their wins.
Keep in mind when talking about bike weights, that riders back then could take off their helmets. That's about 0.2 kg - 0.3 kg.
I see a few comparisons with Riis as well (often in the direction of Vingegaard = 'clean' by comparison based on his Hautacam ascent time), so let's keep in mind Hautacam 1996 was a flat stage until the final climb.
Vingegaard did l'Aubisque & a cat 1 climb before Hautacam, following Pogacar's attacks as well. Then on Hautacam, Vingegaard was paced by Sepp Kuss, WvA (lol) & still did the fastest final 4km ever & an overall ascent time only marginally slower than Lance Armstrong's 2000 ride when he attacked at the foot of the climb & blew Pantani, Ullrich & Zülle off his wheel.
So I think he's clearly juiced. I don't think that's a controversial opinion either.
Vingegaard did l'Aubisque & a cat 1 climb before Hautacam, following Pogacar's attacks as well. Then on Hautacam, Vingegaard was paced by Sepp Kuss, WvA (lol) & still did the fastest final 4km ever & an overall ascent time only marginally slower than Lance Armstrong's 2000 ride when he attacked at the foot of the climb & blew Pantani, Ullrich & Zülle off his wheel.
So I think he's clearly juiced. I don't think that's a controversial opinion either.
I'm trying to come up with similar TT performances by such lightweights.
I remember Pozzovivo finishing third in that Vuelta 2013 TT, but there was a long climb and he still finished more than a minute behind Cancellara.
You really have to go back to Annecy 2009.
At 58 (as reported) Vingo was arguably the lightest rider in this year's Tour. Perhaps Ciccone and Meintjes are lighter at the end of a GT?
I remember Pozzovivo finishing third in that Vuelta 2013 TT, but there was a long climb and he still finished more than a minute behind Cancellara.
You really have to go back to Annecy 2009.
At 58 (as reported) Vingo was arguably the lightest rider in this year's Tour. Perhaps Ciccone and Meintjes are lighter at the end of a GT?
He was quoted as being 58 kg at his lightest in 2018. I don't know what he weights now, but he was very trimmed already at the start of the Tour, that much is clear. He has the same height as Contador, and their legs seem similarly muscular. So maybe he is a kg or two lighter?
found it:
The biggest changes on the bikes are related to air resistance. so even if it is improved by 10% it would make less than a percent difference. (or 3W if the rider is pushing 300W). (@>6%)
on a flat it makes a big difference ~30W equivalent
So as long as the climbs are 6% or higher on average, i think we can perfectly compare climbing times, taken into account the load of the stage and the circumstances.
Not sure where this number comes from. Maybe that is with only taken the weight of the rider into account and not the bike?
if Pog pushes 6.4W/kg, it would be : 5.7W/kg including the bike (7kg bike, pog wheight 66kg. clothing/shoes/helms/flacon not included)
The biggest changes on the bikes are related to air resistance. so even if it is improved by 10% it would make less than a percent difference. (or 3W if the rider is pushing 300W). (@>6%)
on a flat it makes a big difference ~30W equivalent
So as long as the climbs are 6% or higher on average, i think we can perfectly compare climbing times, taken into account the load of the stage and the circumstances.
Not sure where this number comes from. Maybe that is with only taken the weight of the rider into account and not the bike?
if Pog pushes 6.4W/kg, it would be : 5.7W/kg including the bike (7kg bike, pog wheight 66kg. clothing/shoes/helms/flacon not included)
Last edited:
I mean, lol. If 2022's JV had climbed the Hautacam with 2000's Lance they would sprinted neck to neck at the finish line - if that doesn't raise eyebrows, then what does? 1996's Riis and Pantani in general were some of the highest doppers in the 90's, JV being slower than their record times in Hautacam and AdH is not really an assumption of innocence or "not riding on the heavy gear".
FYI: Hematocriet level of 50% was introduced in 1997. (unless you had an exception).
So you can assume anything before 1997 was unbound up until heart failure.
Everything afterwards was bound to be close to 50% (Hamilton was doping it up to 49.7% in 2005).
Here they slowly moved to microdosing to be undetectable as well when the epo test was made.
+ all other ways of doping of course.
Just saying that Pre 1997 is potentially the absolute max one can reach unless we have a completely new form of doping doping extravagance like motors, weight loss related doping, bio-mechanics, gen-doping, ..
So a clean peloton should not even come close to those values, unless they have feather bikes (limit <4kg) or negative rolling resistance.....
So you can assume anything before 1997 was unbound up until heart failure.
Everything afterwards was bound to be close to 50% (Hamilton was doping it up to 49.7% in 2005).
Here they slowly moved to microdosing to be undetectable as well when the epo test was made.
+ all other ways of doping of course.
Just saying that Pre 1997 is potentially the absolute max one can reach unless we have a completely new form of doping doping extravagance like motors, weight loss related doping, bio-mechanics, gen-doping, ..
So a clean peloton should not even come close to those values, unless they have feather bikes (limit <4kg) or negative rolling resistance.....
Last edited:
found it:
The biggest changes on the bikes are related to air resistance. so even if it is improved by 10% it would make less than a percent difference. (or 3W if the rider is pushing 300W). (@>6%)
on a flat it makes a big difference ~30W equivalent
So as long as the climbs are 6% or higher on average, i think we can perfectly compare climbing times, taken into account the load of the stage and the circumstances.
Not sure where this number comes from. Maybe that is with only taken the weight of the rider into account and not the bike?
if Pog pushes 6.4W/kg, it would be : 5.7W/kg including the bike (7kg bike, pog wheight 66kg. clothing/shoes/helms/flacon not included)
vertical velocity = 0.5 m/s (=1800 m/h)
gravity acceleration = 9.8 m/s2
mass (cyclist + bike) = 65 + 7 = 72
power = vertical velocity * gravity force = 0.5 * 9.8 * 72 = 353 watts
power to weight = power / cyclist mass = 353 / 65 = 5.42 w /kg (will be a bit more for a lighter cyclist and less for a bigger one)
This is consistent with the above charts since power difference (6.5 vs 5.4-5.5) is actually around 16 %.
Thanks, for some reason 6.4--> 5.5 looks more
but that doesn't change the outcome though. The rolling resistance/aero +-13% can't go to 0. So any optimization/improvement in those area are together maybe 0-6W (and thats ranging between 0-20% improvement which is humongous and probably unrealistic improvement).
S.Yates won the ITT at the Giro - And he was the fastest at the first checkpoint which was all flat.
Danish TV2 has an article on its website saying he's probably clean, so I can't see what all the fuss is about.
It's mostly due to the groundbreaking concept of marginal gains, apparently. And you obviously get the true answers from the national team coach and a sports physiologist, who works with the best Danish athletes. They have no reason to lie!
For some reason they always make it worse by argumenting these bs things... not only is the concept of marginal gains already used spit out and re-eaten already, it is also not a short-term effect. hence the name you look and find to get small gains here and there = long time. Adjusting positions, changing food & effect + trial and errors phases with everything.
Ofcourse they also don't have another option... since the performance has no real basis.
i'm confusing myself
Yes, I still remember when Yates "learned" how to time trial all of a sudden. Amazing stuff, really.
found it:
The biggest changes on the bikes are related to air resistance. so even if it is improved by 10% it would make less than a percent difference. (or 3W if the rider is pushing 300W). (@>6%)
This for a rider putting out 4w/kg (300w/75kg). For TDF climbing watts per kilo there'll be a significantly greater proportion of air resistance for a given gradient.
It's totally controversial! He's just trying harder and busting his a$$ in those next level altitude camps!I see a few comparisons with Riis as well (often in the direction of Vingegaard = 'clean' by comparison based on his Hautacam ascent time), so let's keep in mind Hautacam 1996 was a flat stage until the final climb.
Vingegaard did l'Aubisque & a cat 1 climb before Hautacam, following Pogacar's attacks as well. Then on Hautacam, Vingegaard was paced by Sepp Kuss, WvA (lol) & still did the fastest final 4km ever & an overall ascent time only marginally slower than Lance Armstrong's 2000 ride when he attacked at the foot of the climb & blew Pantani, Ullrich & Zülle off his wheel.
So I think he's clearly juiced. I don't think that's a controversial opinion either.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 985
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 24K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram