Olympic Track Cycling

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

Derry said:
Rules don't apply for British cyclists?
- Froome can run and gets the time of other riders
- Cavendish can slam someone out of an event
- Arminstead can miss 3 doping tests
- Kenny can pass the derny
No, it seems they don't apply. Even the Empire crew must be starting to realise, surely?
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Well, welcome to 1976 rowing or 1988 swimming, and in the role of East Germany (mind you I am talking dominance, not doping) we have... rolling drums...

Tada !


Really the track events have been a farce. I can very much envision the Brits not being juiced up but justed having the best equipment by far making ginormous differences + the most optimized nutritional/medicational preparation that falls within the boundaries of the rules. All in all there is no cheating, but the stench of a competition that turned into a parody.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re:

Singer01 said:
does anybody think the Netherlands are just as suspicious as the UK? 2G 2S 1B from a country with about 1/4 of the population of the UK?
Nah... come on this is ridiculous.

First of all you are mixing things up by puttin Road cycling and track cycling together there, were a talking track here so don't try and sidetrack (ha !) the issue.

Second the issue isn't the number of medals relative to the size of the country. when one hungarian swimmer wins 3 gold medals, does it statistically speaking make Hungary a suspicious country in comparison with China or the US ? Your purely statistic approach is fallacious.

Third the main issue here is that one country managed to crush everybody else. No single talent from any other country could compete. In swimming for example numbers (talent pool) and quality of training, infrastructure, etc do speak and mean that countries like the US get lots of medals. But individual great talents from other countries still have their chance : a great hungarian or aussie or french or welsh swimmer can win, and the usual ebb and flow of great generational talent applies : give a country 2 or 3 great athletes and they get many medals on one olympic games or 2 but once that specific generation falters, that peak fades.

Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games we have had an utter crushing of the field by one country. Some athletes are sore losers, and some french comments were hilarious in that regard because (and I am french) our horrible results are because of our own bad preparation otherwise we would have many more silver and bronze medals, but to see french, germans, australians and more all make those veiled comments about not doing the same sports and basically there it being nothing to be done against the Britons does make track cycling a parody of competition for these olympic games.
 
This is not the clinic, go discuss doping there.


I'm not surprised by the GB performance in the velodrome to be honest. They have dropped off in the womens' sprint a bit but I think that's probably because of the loss of Victoria Pendleton and the attitude towards womens' cycling within the team that seems to be being revealed over the last few months. Other than that they have remained at a fairly constant level, either by keeping/bringing back top performers like Wiggins, Trott, Clancy, Rowsell, Burke, Kenny, Hindes and having replacements ready for the names who have dropped out like Thomas, Hoy, King, Kennaugh. GB are almost certain to win less gold medals this cycle than the last two but possibly one medal overall in Phillips delivers in the BMX. If you look at '08 and '12 they have performed at pretty much the exact level you would have expected.
 
Re: Re:

veji11 said:
Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games
This is not correct. Track cycling medals:

2008

7 Gold
3 Silver
2 Bronze

2012

7 Gold
1 Silver
1 Bronze

2016

6 Gold
4 Silver
2 Bronze


GB have got worse at each Olympics. Of course 2012 needs to be taken with the caveat that only one rider from each competing nation could enter, but even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have meant more Golds.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re:

King Boonen said:
This is not the clinic, go discuss doping there.


I'm not surprised by the GB performance in the velodrome to be honest. They have dropped off in the womens' sprint a bit but I think that's probably because of the loss of Victoria Pendleton and the attitude towards womens' cycling within the team that seems to be being revealed over the last few months. Other than that they have remained at a fairly constant level, either by keeping/bringing back top performers like Wiggins, Trott, Clancy, Rowsell, Burke, Kenny, Hindes and having replacements ready for the names who have dropped out like Thomas, Hoy, King, Kennaugh. GB are almost certain to win less gold medals this cycle than the last two but possibly one medal overall in Phillips delivers in the BMX. If you look at '08 and '12 they have performed at pretty much the exact level you would have expected.
Hey dude I haven't talked doping, I have been talking domination. That you only find similar domination in such medal rich sports as track cycling in east german rowing or swimming in the late 70s or 80s or soviet gymnastic in the 50s and 60s is a fact.

But you can go to the clinic if you want.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games
This is not correct. Track cycling medals:

2008

7 Gold
3 Silver
2 Bronze

2012

7 Gold
1 Silver
1 Bronze

2016

6 Gold
4 Silver
2 Bronze


GB have got worse at each Olympics. Of course 2012 needs to be taken with the caveat that only one rider from each competing nation could enter, but even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have meant more Golds.
True the end result is actually the same for those 3 olympiads (There are not getting worse though, don't play that card), they have achieved consistent domination over an 8 year period (or rather over 3 olympic games covering 12 years of preparation).
 
Re: Re:

veji11 said:
King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games
This is not correct. Track cycling medals:

2008

7 Gold
3 Silver
2 Bronze

2012

7 Gold
1 Silver
1 Bronze

2016

6 Gold
4 Silver
2 Bronze


GB have got worse at each Olympics. Of course 2012 needs to be taken with the caveat that only one rider from each competing nation could enter, but even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have meant more Golds.
True the end result is actually the same for those 3 olympiads (There are not getting worse though, don't play that card), they have achieved consistent domination over an 8 year period (or rather over 3 olympic games covering 12 years of preparation).
One less gold is clearly worse. ignoring 2012 due to the selection issues they have dropped a gold for a silver.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games
This is not correct. Track cycling medals:

2008

7 Gold
3 Silver
2 Bronze

2012

7 Gold
1 Silver
1 Bronze

2016

6 Gold
4 Silver
2 Bronze


GB have got worse at each Olympics. Of course 2012 needs to be taken with the caveat that only one rider from each competing nation could enter, but even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have meant more Golds.
True the end result is actually the same for those 3 olympiads (There are not getting worse though, don't play that card), they have achieved consistent domination over an 8 year period (or rather over 3 olympic games covering 12 years of preparation).
One less gold is clearly worse. ignoring 2012 due to the selection issues they have dropped a gold for a silver.
Clearly going from 12 medals to 9 then 12, and from 7 to 7 then 6 gold demonstrate a clear downward slope, a spiral dare I say....
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games
This is not correct. Track cycling medals:

2008

7 Gold
3 Silver
2 Bronze

2012

7 Gold
1 Silver
1 Bronze

2016

6 Gold
4 Silver
2 Bronze


GB have got worse at each Olympics. Of course 2012 needs to be taken with the caveat that only one rider from each competing nation could enter, but even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have meant more Golds.
True the end result is actually the same for those 3 olympiads (There are not getting worse though, don't play that card), they have achieved consistent domination over an 8 year period (or rather over 3 olympic games covering 12 years of preparation).
One less gold is clearly worse. ignoring 2012 due to the selection issues they have dropped a gold for a silver.
Weren't there less events in 2012 compared with 2008 (and also 2016 to 2012)? So the total number of golds may have gone down but the % of events where they got gold has gone up?
 
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
King Boonen said:
veji11 said:
Here since 2008 and getting more and more pronounced at each olympic games
This is not correct. Track cycling medals:

2008

7 Gold
3 Silver
2 Bronze

2012

7 Gold
1 Silver
1 Bronze

2016

6 Gold
4 Silver
2 Bronze


GB have got worse at each Olympics. Of course 2012 needs to be taken with the caveat that only one rider from each competing nation could enter, but even if that wasn't the case it still wouldn't have meant more Golds.
True the end result is actually the same for those 3 olympiads (There are not getting worse though, don't play that card), they have achieved consistent domination over an 8 year period (or rather over 3 olympic games covering 12 years of preparation).
One less gold is clearly worse. ignoring 2012 due to the selection issues they have dropped a gold for a silver.
Weren't there less events in 2012 compared with 2008 (and also 2016 to 2012)? So the total number of golds may have gone down but the % of events where they got gold has gone up?
No, there were 10 events each year. The changes were in the ratio of male to female events and which events were included in 2012. The events this cycle are the same as the last.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re:

King Boonen said:
If you're going to be silly the conversation is over. Have fun.
Come on saying that the results were worse, whereas statistically you were right to correct me in that they were astonishingly consistent in their excellence over the last 3 olympic games, was being silly wasn't it ?
 
Re:

TheSpud said:
Anyone have any views on the American left side drive track bike? Would it make any difference do you think?
Yes, it will. Aerodynamics play a huge part in track cycling, much more so than on the road. A lot of it can be a trade-off, most powerful position versus most aero versus comfort, but with the crank the only thing that can change is aerodynamics. It's a bit like shoe covers in road TTs, they are the best bang for your buck as they are extremely cheap and are only beneficial. Whether the difference is influential on results massively depends on the riders and the level of competition.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
TheSpud said:
Anyone have any views on the American left side drive track bike? Would it make any difference do you think?
Yes, it will. Aerodynamics play a huge part in track cycling, much more so than on the road. A lot of it can be a trade-off, most powerful position versus most aero versus comfort, but with the crank the only thing that can change is aerodynamics. It's a bit like shoe covers in road TTs, they are the best bang for your buck as they are extremely cheap and are only beneficial. Whether the difference is influential on results massively depends on the riders and the level of competition.
Certainly there is a logic putting it on that side - after all it will travel a shorter distance than if it was on the normal side. Also rotating parts that are also travelling (like cranks, or tyres on an F1 car) mess with drag and aero significantly. I wonder whether we'll see other teams (eg GB) doing the same.

I'm also surprised that more hasn't been done on tube / frame profiles to account for always riding anticlockwise. Or then again maybe it has and we just don't know about it.
 
Jul 13, 2009
504
0
0
Re: Re:

[/quote]
I wonder whether we'll see other teams (eg GB) doing the same.
/quote]
On the BBC commentary Boardman said BC had looked into the idea several years ago but dismissed it
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
JRanton said:
It's a real shame at least one more endurance event/bunch race isn't allowed into the Olympic programme. The Points race and Scratch race make for much more aggressive and entertaining riding when they aren't part of a multi-event competition like in the omnium.
Very true, although I quite enjoyed watching the Omnium which was much more fun than watching the speed events. I would get rid of one of the keirin, individual sprint or team sprint event and bring back the Madison for example. My choice would be to get rid of the individual sprint and keep the Keirin, where uncertainty is (normally) higher.
 
Re: Re:

veji11 said:
Hey dude I haven't talked doping, I have been talking domination.
That bit wasn't to you, just because my post came after yours doesn't mean it directly relates to it. The offending post has been removed, I didn't want to quote it and continue the discussion.

veji11 said:
King Boonen said:
If you're going to be silly the conversation is over. Have fun.
Come on saying that the results were worse, whereas statistically you were right to correct me in that they were astonishingly consistent in their excellence over the last 3 olympic games, was being silly wasn't it ?
Sorry, I have a low tolerance for responses like the one you gave, mainly due to interactions in the clinic.

You claimed they improved each Olympics, they didn't. The trend is downwards. I used the word clearly because a reduction in gold medals is clear. Clear does not mean large, it just means it's easy to see. The only real measure we can actually use is gold medals over the last two olympics, as that is really the only time the competition has been the same. Silver and bronze are a poor measure as the selection criteria changed and the 2008 events list was very different. In this case their achievement was 15% worse compared to 2012, that's a clear difference even if it's not large in this context.

veji11 said:
JRanton said:
It's a real shame at least one more endurance event/bunch race isn't allowed into the Olympic programme. The Points race and Scratch race make for much more aggressive and entertaining riding when they aren't part of a multi-event competition like in the omnium.
Very true, although I quite enjoyed watching the Omnium which was much more fun than watching the speed events. I would get rid of one of the keirin, individual sprint or team sprint event and bring back the Madison for example. My choice would be to get rid of the individual sprint and keep the Keirin, where uncertainty is (normally) higher.
Can't get rid of the sprints, they fill time. I don't know, but I'm sure that there is a requirement for the programme to last a certain length as the cost of building a velodrome is large. I would really like to see the kilo, madison, scratch and points racein with the omnium out, but I don't think they are allowed to increase the number of medals awarded.
 
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
zalacain said:
I wonder whether we'll see other teams (eg GB) doing the same.
On the BBC commentary Boardman said BC had looked into the idea several years ago but dismissed it
Interesting - I guess it doesn't make a big difference then
Surely it must have to make no difference or be detrimental for GB to not do it? If they did look at it several years ago they were basically making the frames as one offs so design costs can't have been a worry and in terms of the actual crank it's just a case cutting the pedals threads in the opposite direction. For a team of marginal gains I find it surprising it would be dismissed as I can't really see a down side.
 
Jan 15, 2013
1,129
0
0
To be honest this Olympics is the first time I paid attention to track cycling, or even watched a track race, but I've enjoyed it, and have seen friends who never watch any cycling on TV get quite absorbed in the action. It seems made for TV, especially when compared to the certain stages of this year's Tour...

I've also been surprised by the spread of the field compared to what I'd heard from people in the road racing forums here.

The perception is only Anglo countries care about track, but looking at the medals table for the last track world championships, there are lots of non-Anglo countries like Germany, Russia, China featuring heavily, and the 57 medals were shared between 22 countries, with 10 non-European countries and every continent except Africa represented.

Comparing that to, say, the podiums of last year's World Tour events - the 81 podium spots were shared between only 18 countries, with Australia, Colombia, and the USA the only non-European ones.

Obviously road cycling is way more popular in general, as road cycling can happen anywhere there's a road, but it's wrong to say only UK/Aus care about the track. I'd love if there was a Belgian track renaissance for example. Instead of one of the flat middle eastern stage races, imagine if there was a big, televised, pre-classics warmup track meet in a packed velodrome in Belgium featuring road sprinters and hardmen?
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re:

vedrafjord said:
To be honest this Olympics is the first time I paid attention to track cycling, or even watched a track race, but I've enjoyed it, and have seen friends who never watch any cycling on TV get quite absorbed in the action. It seems made for TV, especially when compared to the certain stages of this year's Tour...

I've also been surprised by the spread of the field compared to what I'd heard from people in the road racing forums here.

The perception is only Anglo countries care about track, but looking at the medals table for the last track world championships, there are lots of non-Anglo countries like Germany, Russia, China featuring heavily, and the 57 medals were shared between 22 countries, with 10 non-European countries and every continent except Africa represented.

Comparing that to, say, the podiums of last year's World Tour events - the 81 podium spots were shared between only 18 countries, with Australia, Colombia, and the USA the only non-European ones.

Obviously road cycling is way more popular in general, as road cycling can happen anywhere there's a road, but it's wrong to say only UK/Aus care about the track. I'd love if there was a Belgian track renaissance for example. Instead of one of the flat middle eastern stage races, imagine if there was a big, televised, pre-classics warmup track meet in a packed velodrome in Belgium featuring road sprinters and hardmen?
The issue has been on track that for the last 8/10 years the Brits have been overall the dominating country, but in a "normal" proportion at word championships and other events, yet have consistently (if you would allow this term King Boonen) trashed the opposition at 3 olympic games in a row, where the other athletes are suddenly left reeling and in no position to even hope to compete. Again I am not accusing them of doping, most probably they are super organised and have maximised the gains of physical preparation and some equipment optimization to peak at the olympics, but whereas at words one can watch the races not knowing the result in advance, at the olympics barring a fall or really shear insufficient athletic ability like this Cavendish bloke ( :p ) the Brits will get gold. The domination is breathtaking and shocking.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J Track Cycling 0
Similar threads
Track Through the Back!

ASK THE COMMUNITY