Parker said:Here's an example from a different sport - athletics. Compare and contrast the times in which 5000m and 10000m World and Olympic gold medals are won with the World Records (or even season's bests) in those events. The times are always a lot slower. (Mo Farah, for example, won the 5000m in 2012 with a time 80 seconds slower than the WR and almost a minute slower than his PB.) But I'm pretty sure everyone made the most effort they could in all those races - so why the discrepancy. Answer: It's how they proportion the effort that is key. And that's the variable that the power comparison guys ignore - the proportionality of effort.
Perfect example. 80 seconds slower than PB is not a max effort. It might be hard, he will be tired, but it is not, by definition, a max effort. He could have gone faster, but going faster carries a risk of blowing up and losing, so he didn't. Ergo, not max. Maybe there is a max 1k somewhere in there, but it is not a max effort for the length of the race
....which is why Vetoo typically focuses on segments of the climb rather than "the whole climb" to do his estimates. Eliminates early drafting or tactical riding, focuses on the steepest parts where the contenders are relatively isolated and most likely to be maxed out.
Like I said, we can never know if a winner gives a truly max effort. But the contenders who didn't win, most likely did.
Regardless, riders can not go faster than max efforts on extended climbs. So there shouldn't be too many super-fast surprises. Tactics will always cause them to ride slower. So for the most part, people do the estimates, they are 6+w/kg and we all hope it is really a max effort, cuz if it's not...