Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

[Dear Wiggo]

Cancellara is merely a reference point. Saying that "Wiggins needed to produce 4.9% more power to match Cancellara in 2012" is completely meaningless because Wiggins DIDN'T match Cancellara's time in 2012. You need to examine Wiggins' power in 2007 vs Wiggins' power in 2012.

Yes, I can see he didn't match Cancellara's time - that is quite obvious - I am glad we are in agreement there. To say that this meaningless is wrong, as all the CdA and weight and environmental conditions are already wrapped up in the result.

But if he had wanted to match Cancellara's time, on the day, he definitely WOULD have to increase his power 4.9%, given the speed indicating a flat course (> 50km/hr).

If you are arguing the laws of phsyics do not count, I welcome your reasoning.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Yes, I can see he didn't match Cancellara's time - that is quite obvious - I am glad we are in agreement there. To say that this meaningless is wrong, as all the CdA and weight and environmental conditions are already wrapped up in the result.

But if he had wanted to match Cancellara's time, on the day, he definitely WOULD have to increase his power 4.9%, given the speed indicating a flat course (> 50km/hr).

If you are arguing the laws of phsyics do not count, I welcome your reasoning.

Yes I agree. So what is your point? If Wiggins wanted to break the speed of sound he would have needed to increase his power by 10000000%. I'm sure we can all agree on that too.

It is the laws of physics whom are on my side of this debate. A small decrease in VO2max power resulting from a 7kg weight loss makes less difference to velocity when you are smashing along the flat at 50kph (because cda reduces as a result of that weight loss and therefore partially offsets the decrease in power), but that exact same weight loss makes a rather large impact on hill climbing performance when you're going at 15kph and the effect of wind resistance is vastly reduced.

edit: This is probably the reason that all of the world's best cycling time trialists are not 95kg and 2m tall with VO2max values of 6.5-6.7 L/min

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yes I agree. So what is your point? If Wiggins wanted to break the speed of sound he would have needed to increase his power by 10000000%. I'm sure we can all agree on that too.

So my point is - the difference in TT prolog times is small - but so is the distance. The difference in speed is enough that the power required from 2007 - 2012 drops significantly.

To do a bunch of calculations incorporating someone else's CdA based on someone else's weight, etc, etc, to calculate power required then show that there was not a lot of difference, etc - when the course in 2012 had many corners and 180 degree bends and the 2007 course was in LONDON - home ground advantage anyone? - seems less reliable than doing a straight out speed difference ^ 3 ~= power difference required for the same rider.

 

[dsut4392]

Well, if you cheat and win, by accepting your victory you are (1) layering a lie on top of your cheating and (2) denying a prize to someone else who might have deserved it. So, yeah, cheating and winning (and claiming the win) is worse than cheating and coming in 65th.

If cycling were an individual sport your argument would have merit, but it (cycling) isn't (an individual sport), so it (your argument) doesn't (have merit). The doper coming in 65th is working his backside off trying to help his team leader win. e's claiming his share of the glory on the finish line, his share of the prize purse, and getting a boost to his contract value.

 

[Bumeington]

So my point is - the difference in TT prolog times is small - but so is the distance. The difference in speed is enough that the power required from 2007 - 2012 drops significantly.

To do a bunch of calculations incorporating someone else's CdA based on someone else's weight, etc, etc, to calculate power required then show that there was not a lot of difference, etc - when the course in 2012 had many corners and 180 degree bends and the 2007 course was in LONDON - home ground advantage anyone? - seems less reliable than doing a straight out speed difference ^ 3 ~= power difference required for the same rider.

Why is assuming Cancellara's power is constant a safe assumption - 'specially when you are arguing Wiggo's is not?

 

[JimmyFingers]

Why is assuming Cancellara's power is constant a safe assumption - 'specially when you are arguing Wiggo's is not?

DW tends to believe a cyclist's performance is set in stone throughout his career, and any fluctuations are due to drugs or the lack of them rather than dips and increases in form, improved training regimes/nutrition, race tactics, bike-handling, the parcours or equipment. This means in a clean pelton the podium should always be indentical, and certainly in ITTs.

 

[Benotti69]

DW tends to believe a cyclist's performance is set in stone throughout his career, and any fluctuations are due to drugs or the lack of them rather than dips and increases in form, improved training regimes/nutrition, race tactics, bike-handling, the parcours or equipment. This means in a clean pelton the podium should always be indentical, and certainly in ITTs.

Jimmy are you part of Sky or Team GB?

You inhabit this part of the forum running from Sky related thread to sky related thread defending them against everything.

You seem to be uninterested in cycling outside of Sky, fanatically so, repeatedly defending them to the point of absolute predictability in your postings.

 

[andy1234]

Jimmy are you part of Sky or Team GB?

You inhabit this part of the forum running from Sky related thread to sky related thread defending them against everything.

You seem to be uninterested in cycling outside of Sky, fanatically so, repeatedly defending them to the point of absolute predictability in your postings.

Whereas you seem uninterested in cycling full stop.
You have no knowledge of the sport outside of this forum.

The absolute predictability of your postings is second to non.

At least there are people around here who can see both sides of the sport, which is something you are clearly unable to do.

Nearly 7000 posts and I doubt there are more than a handful with anything positive to say about anyone involved in the sport.

What a sad way to live.

 

[D-Queued]

Whereas you seem uninterested in cycling full stop.
You have no knowledge of the sport outside of this forum.

The absolute predictability of your postings is second to non.
At least there are people around here who can see both sides of the sport, which is something you are clearly unable to do.

Wait, wait.

You mean this forum is about something other than http://www.freeonlinegames.com/game/mountain-bike?

WTF, why didn't anyone tell me that before????

Dave.

 

[Benotti69]

Whereas you seem uninterested in cycling full stop.
You have no knowledge of the sport outside of this forum.

The absolute predictability of your postings is second to non.

At least there are people around here who can see both sides of the sport, which is something you are clearly unable to do.

Newcastle broonale gives you courage!

Nearly 7000 posts and I doubt there are more than a handful with anything positive to say about anyone involved in the sport.

What a sad way to live.

Thank you for reading all my work.

Cycling hey! A sport in the gutter. Boy am i am glad it landed in my lap. Kilburn scum n'all.

 

[andy1234]

Newcastle broonale gives you courage!




Thank you for reading all my work.

Cycling hey! A sport in the gutter. Boy am i am glad it landed in my lap. Kilburn scum n'all.

What you write here is not work. Its masturbation.


I very much doubt you call people scum to their faces. The internet really is perfect for cowards like you.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Why is assuming Cancellara's power is constant a safe assumption - 'specially when you are arguing Wiggo's is not?

Nowhere, and I mean absolutely nowhere, am I assuming Cancellara's power is constant. I am simply comparing their speeds and showing the relative power difference between the two riders is diminishing - significantly.

Krebs Cycle raised this example, like the l'Avenir stage and other examples to "prove" that either
1. Wiggins always had it (debunked)
2. Wiggins has not improved (debunked)

So if you have an issue with the example provided, have a chat with him.

 

[acoggan]

If acoggan is reading this I would be interested to know if that sort of change in cda is possible or reasonable? Is the default value of 0.2398 even correct??

how hard is it to alter cda by 0.01 units????????

1. A CdA of 0.24 m^2 is certainly believable for a rider of Wiggin's height and mass - see http://www.trainingandracingwithapowermeter.com/2011/04/estimation-of-cda-from-anthropometric.html

2. Most people are able to reduce their CdA by 0.01 m^2 the first time they get into a wind tunnel. At some point, though, it becomes very difficult to achieve further significant gains (at which you build your own wind tunnel to aid in seeking further marginal gains).

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

What you write here is not work. Its masturbation.

You spend your time cracking one off to Benotti's posts?

7000 posts - that's a lot of kleenex. Do they give you a bulk order discount?

JV outs his riders, Andy1234 outs himself.

 

[JimmyFingers]

You spend your time cracking one off to Benotti's posts?

7000 posts - that's a lot of kleenex. Do they give you a bulk order discount?

JV outs his riders, Andy1234 outs himself.

Is this really necessary? Homophobic crap like this?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I wasn't the one who introduced masturbation into this thread.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I wasn't the one who introduced masturbation into this thread.

Oh right, that makes the homophobic crap fine. Please, carry on. Call him a *** and throw him in a bin

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

You seem to have a very bizarre notion of homophobia, unless you think 'outing' is some kind of homophobic term - it isn't - you out anyone with a secret - Andy1234's is that he appears to pleasure himself to Benotti's posts.

Oh sorry, my mistake, because you like and agree with the person who started being offensive in this thread and who introduced masturbation into the discussion, that's fine...

 

[JimmyFingers]

You seem to have a very bizarre notion of homophobia, unless you think 'outing' is some kind of homophobic term - it isn't - you out anyone with a secret - Andy1234's is that he appears to pleasure himself to Benotti's posts.

Oh sorry, my mistake, because you like and agree with the person who started being offensive in this thread and who introduced masturbation into the discussion, that's fine...

It was childish however you want to spin it

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

It was childish however you want to spin it

Perhaps, but not as childish as introducing masturbation into a thread.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Perhaps, but not as childish as introducing masturbation into a thread.

No, exactly the same or more, as is using that to excuse your own action.

What was meant by masturbation was self-aggrandising post, more than the figurative aspect. And he was accusing Benotti of that, rather than himself.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

You can spin it any way you like

But thanks for proving my point. You are only offended by posts made by people who disagree with you. Posts made by people you agree with are fine and can be re-arranged and justified no matter what is said.

Hypocrisy much?

 

[blackcat]

what do you have against onanism JimmyFingers?

 

[silverrocket]

You can spin it any way you like

But thanks for proving my point. You are only offended by posts made by people who disagree with you. Posts made by people you agree with are fine and can be re-arranged and justified no matter what is said.

Hypocrisy much?

I'd be happy if nobody ever again used the term "masturbation" as a metaphor for self-indulgent posting on this forum. It landed us all in a sticky o) and off topic debate.

I knew I should have gone into the cyclo-cross forum today instead...

 

[del1962]

This thread is descending into farce!