• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

Page 130 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
The forum is not unlike a virtual pub in a sense. I say this without a pejorative implication.

Despite the possible and impossible problems related to w/kg calculations, comparisons between climbs and riders, etc, I think they do have value and contribute positively. It is reasonable to be doubtful of performances (tirreno and PN) such as the ones that triggered the latest discussion above. The calculations tend to suggest so much, too.
 
If we're to believe Jens Attacks, Bala was 6.6 W/kg for 24 minutes. That would have basically every rider in the top 10 be out of this world.

If that's even true, that in itself means either super fast times are the new drug and flavour of the season, or circumstances were super good
 
Re:

Red Rick said:
If we're to believe Jens Attacks, Bala was 6.6 W/kg for 24 minutes. That would have basically every rider in the top 10 be out of this world.

If that's even true, that in itself means either super fast times are the new drug and flavour of the season, or circumstances were super good
The riders sure do seem to go faster and faster. Im sure someone way smarter than me has numbers to back that up...

Jens also compared the performance to Vino on Cobortoria in 2006. Damn that was a fun Vuelta by the way.
 
I don't like the normalized numbers. The figures for doping actually come from the actual W/kg numbers. These could be misleading. That's how Greg Lemond got in trouble in the past with the numbers. LOL.

Quintana is right at 6 W/kg.
Porte is right at 6.2 W/kg.

These numbers for a similar workout tell me more. Not to mention if in the calculations for Quintana they took into account the drafting in most of the ascent. :confused:
 
Nov 10, 2009
1,398
0
0
Re:

Escarabajo said:
I don't like the normalized numbers. The figures for doping actually come from the actual W/kg numbers. These could be misleading. That's how Greg Lemond got in trouble in the past with the numbers. LOL.

Quintana is right at 6 W/kg.
Porte is right at 6.2 W/kg.

These numbers for a similar workout tell me more. Not to mention if in the calculations for Quintana they took into account the drafting in most of the ascent. :confused:
Yes, Portoleau took drafting into account according to the Chronoswatts reference (113) :
Sa puissance moyenne estimée est de 6,2 w/kg en considérant qu'il était pendant 80% de temps abrité dans les roues pour profiter d'un léger « drafting » en côte à 22 km/h (30% de réduction des résistances aérodynamiques). La puissance étalon du « coureur témoin » de 78kg avec vélo se situe à 422 watts (+/- 3%).

Portoleau reduced the aero factor by 30% for the 80% fraction of the ascent during which Quintana was "drafting".
The 6.2 W/kg correspond to a 70 kg cyclist. As Quintana is considerably lighter, redoing the calculation with his actual weight would presumably increase that 6.2 figure to 6.3 or 6.4 W/kg. However, since the uncertainty is 3% according to Portoleau, we have 6.2=6.3=6.4 :)
 
Thanks Le Breton.

I am just not getting the power that you are getting that power is for a bigger person. Power should be smaller. I know he took into account drafting but in your calculation you are still using the normalized power instead of his actual power we should be smaller than 400 W. :)
 
Nov 10, 2009
1,398
0
0
Re:

Escarabajo said:
Thanks Le Breton.

I am just not getting the power that you are getting that power is for a bigger person. Power should be smaller. I know he took into account drafting but in your calculation you are still using the normalized power instead of his actual power we should be smaller than 400 W. :)
SORRY MY MISTAKE.

I read the article too fast.
Portoleau calculated 354 watts for Quintana, and 6, 2 W/kg. He must have assumed his weight to be 57 kg as 354/57 = 6.2 W/kg.
In the table, top of this page, he also calculate the power a "Standard 70 kg racer" would have had to produce to keep up with Quintana . 422 watts, i.e 422/70 = 6.03 W/kg.

Out of topic : have you heard of the "Conquista de los Andes" planned in Perù in August? 7 stages to go from Pisco to Cuzco. Highest pass = 4740 m. Total elevation gain > 15 000 m. 750 km + or -. It's on Facebook.
 
Re:

LaFlorecita said:
http://www.chronoswatts.com/news/113/




Contador, déjà brillant deuxième derrière Porte au sommet du col de la Couillole (estimation de puissance à 6,2 w/kg et 425 watts étalon), a montré de grandes capacités de récupération le lendemain. Il ose une attaque à 50 km de l'arrivée dans la montée de Peille. J'ai estimé sa puissance moyenne à 6,85 w/kg et 467 watts étalon (+/- 4%) pour une durée de 15min48s.
Full genius season :eek:
The absolute watts a guy like Dumoulin or Gesink have to pull out to be able to keep up with Quintana is insane.
They have to do 450/460W to even stand a chance against Quintana who has to do 350. :lol:

I know w/kg is therefore the most important for efficiency and length for drag reasons. But a tall and slightly heavier rider basically should not stand a chance.
I wonder how Froome does it.
 
Feb 21, 2017
757
0
0
Well normalized or not, the formulas (either way) do tend to make outliers somewhat obvious. I tend to think of the w/kg measurements as blunt tools anyway, but they can be useful despite lack of nuance.
 
Re: Re:

Dekker_Tifosi said:
LaFlorecita said:
http://www.chronoswatts.com/news/113/




Contador, déjà brillant deuxième derrière Porte au sommet du col de la Couillole (estimation de puissance à 6,2 w/kg et 425 watts étalon), a montré de grandes capacités de récupération le lendemain. Il ose une attaque à 50 km de l'arrivée dans la montée de Peille. J'ai estimé sa puissance moyenne à 6,85 w/kg et 467 watts étalon (+/- 4%) pour une durée de 15min48s.
Full genius season :eek:
The absolute watts a guy like Dumoulin or Gesink have to pull out to be able to keep up with Quintana is insane.
They have to do 450/460W to even stand a chance against Quintana who has to do 350. :lol:

I know w/kg is therefore the most important for efficiency and length for drag reasons. But a tall and slightly heavier rider basically should not stand a chance.
I wonder how Froome does it.
500 watts. Ask Ullrich!! :)
 
Since the TdF went back to pro team format in early 1960s, the average height and weight of those who are multiple winners* has been 1.79m and 69.4kg.

* Including Armstrong but not including Thevenet as I can't find his height and weight details.
 
Jens says this was the same as Froome psm, which is incredible really. I don't think Nairo has that much more room to improve until he reaches his peak. It means that effectively all the top 5 were doing 6w/kg or thereabouts. They are all in great shape. The Giro is still open I think.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts