Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

[Zoncolan]

Thank you, halamala.
If your calculation is correct, that settles it for me.
He should join the likes of Ricco and Piepoli.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Cobo had the lowest gearing of the favorites

The only one with an 34 inner blade
34x32

Wiggins rode 38x32, Froome and Mollema 36x28

I think that says a lot.

 

[Zoncolan]

Cobo had the lowest gearing of the favorites

The only one with an 34 inner blade
34x32

Wiggins rode 38x32, Froome and Mollema 36x28

I think that says a lot.

Yes, it does. It does explain why Wiggins almost came to a halt at one point.
However, it doesn't explain 6.2 W/kg. Unless you believe in the "miracle of cadence".

 

[halamala]

Thank you, halamala.
If your calculation is correct, that settles it for me.
He should join the likes of Ricco and Piepoli.

You're welcome.

Don't worry.

Cobo and Piepoli @ Hautacam, Tour 2008

 

[Polish]

Yes, it does. It does explain why Wiggins almost came to a halt at one point.
However, it doesn't explain 6.2 W/kg. Unless you believe in the "miracle of cadence".

Is it the "miracle of cadence" or the "science of cadence'?

Either way, I expect to be selling more SRAM 11-32 cassettes with their Medium Cage Rear Derailleurs and Compact Cranks.

Say Hallelujah.
Good God have mercy.

 

[webvan]

Yes, it does. It does explain why Wiggins almost came to a halt at one point.

Also possibly because he sat in the saddle on the 23% sections when the others didn't, how the heck is that even possible ?!

 

[luckyboy]

Cobo and Piepoli @ Hautacam, Tour 2008

lol, don't forget Simoni + Piepoli on Zoncolan, and Ricco + Piepoli on Tre Cime Lavaredo..

They liked a good 1-2 did Saunier Duval.


Would've been great/funny if Menchov was with Cobo today.

 

[Le breton]

Vuelta a Espana 2011, Stage 15, Final climb, Angliru

From 12.0 Km remaining to mountain points banner 0.5 Km remaining = Distance 11.5 Km

Juan Jose Cobo

Elevation / Höhenmeter [m] : 1194 m
Distance / Streckenlänge [Km] : 11.5 Km
Time in seconds / Fahrzeit in Sekunden [sec] : 2353 = 39 min 13 sec = 39:13
Weight rider / Gewicht Fahrer [kg] : 69 kg
Weight bicycle, clothes etc. / Gewicht Fahrrad [kg] : 8 kg

Grade / mittlere Seigung : 10.3 %
Average speed / mittlere Geschwindigkeit : 17.5 Km/h
Total weight / Gesamtgewicht : 77.0 kg

Power : 430.6 Watt
Power / kg : 6.2 Watt / kg

Thanks for your constant efforts.

It was not clear to me what road today's stage followed to Angliru.
However it seems to be the same as in 2002, for which I found the profile on cyclingnews :
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/road/2002/vuelta02/?id=stages/15

I have not found anything better.
Anyway, between km 5 and 6 the road goes up only 24 m. Which means that a 67 kg racer at 5.9 watts/kg almost hits 40 km/h, ie takes 90 s. to do that km - a climbing rate of 960 m/hr and a loss of about 40s compared to the >10% inclines found on average.

Therefore, to calculate the power using the source you mentioned you should first take 40s off the time of, say, Cobo. Your value then becomes 6.3 watts/kg.

 

[kielbasa]

Is it the "miracle of cadence" or the "science of cadence'?

Either way, I expect to be selling more SRAM 11-32 cassettes with their Medium Cage Rear Derailleurs and Compact Cranks.

Say Hallelujah.
Good God have mercy.

Neither exists. Cadence is as subjective as comfort. Which is another way of saying "cadence is red herring" (PPP courtesy of RChung).

 

[Anonymous]

You're welcome.

Don't worry.

Cobo and Piepoli @ Hautacam, Tour 2008

ah yes, the day poor old Bernie Kohl had to settle for fourth, a minute back

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJl2zixOZXs

and just for fun. Zoncolan video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymhQzwGH-BA

Lavedo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf2q9VwiJh4

 

[Polish]

Neither exists. Cadence is as subjective as comfort. Which is another way of saying "cadence is red herring" (PPP courtesy of RChung).

But that goes back to my original question....

Does a rider generate less power spinning a lower gear versus mashing a higher gear assuming speeds are the same?

Are you saying the power is the same - spinning versus mashing?
Seems to me Mashing would require more power, everything else being equal.

Or at least spinning a lower gear would be more efficient on some climbs.
More efficient is good.
More efficient = more power it appears.

That said, I hope Cobo gets busted on the rest day and the Jersey goes to Froome lol.

 

[Anonymous]

But that goes back to my original question....

Does a rider generate less power spinning a lower gear versus mashing a higher gear assuming speeds are the same?

Are you saying the power is the same - spinning versus mashing?
Seems to me Mashing would require more power, everything else being equal.

Or at least spinning a lower gear would be more efficient on some climbs.
More efficient is good.
More efficient = more power it appears.

That said, I hope Cobo gets busted on the rest day and the Jersey goes to Froome lol.

effectively you are still putting out the same wattage.

If you have $2, it doesnt matter if its two dollar bills, or 20 ten cent peices, its still 2 dollars.

 

[Polish]

effectively you are still putting out the same wattage.

If you have $2, it doesnt matter if its two dollar bills, or 20 ten cent peices, its still 2 dollars.

Yes, same wattage per the equations.

But spinning watts and mashing watts affect a rider differently.

If Wiggins had a bailout gear today - he would have generated more watts by finishing a bit quicker.

Heck, if he reconned the climb a few extra times, he would have probably finished quicker with higher wattage too.

Oh well, live and learn

 

[Ragerod]

Yes, same wattage per the equations.

But spinning watts and mashing watts affect a rider differently.

If Wiggins had a bailout gear today - he would have generated more watts by finishing a bit quicker.

Heck, if he reconned the climb a few extra times, he would have probably finished quicker with higher wattage too.

Oh well, live and learn

There's no way of knowing what Wiggins' wattage would have been with a bail out gear but considering he cracked I doubt an extra gear would have made much difference. Seeing how he was struggling when the camera bike he probably could've used an extra gear but there's no way it can account for the difference between Cobo and Wiggins.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

is cobo 69kg?

6.3 is pretty impressive. If that is the word.
Of course the leadup to the climb wasn't too difficult.

Out of interest what was wiggans w/kg today?

 

[Velodude]

Yes, same wattage per the equations.

But spinning watts and mashing watts affect a rider differently.

If Wiggins had a bailout gear today - he would have generated more watts by finishing a bit quicker.

Heck, if he reconned the climb a few extra times, he would have probably finished quicker with higher wattage too.

Oh well, live and learn

You tacitly allude to your wonder boy, Lance Armstrong, as the precedent example of the statements in bold?

According to close family friend, Dr. M. Ferrari, LA had to adopt high cadence as through contracting cancer in 1996 he had lost power.

But you rightly claim a high or low cadence approach produces the same wattage from a rider then Dr. Ferrari's claim was part of the developing LA collection of myths.

One only has to look at the discredited claims by fellow Texan and physiologist Dr. Ed Coyle in his paper "Improved muscular efficiency displayed as Tour de France champion matures" , that contrary to Ferrari's justification for LA's improvement through high cadence LA was improving his power.

To run endurance high cadence you must enhance your aerobic power. Chemical assistance?

 

[Escarabajo]

Vuelta a Espana 2011, Stage 15, Final climb, Angliru
...
Source: [ http://www.rst.mp-all.de/bergauf.htm ]

Thanks Halamala for your constant efforts.

Cobo's numbers should be more accurate than Froomes' because he had a steadier pace. Froome's numbers are more variable because of its constants accelerations and decelerations. Those things are never taken into account in the formula. For more constant gradient and less acute angles the values should be less variable and more reliable. So if anything Froome's numbers should be higher.

Cobo’s numbers are pretty damning unless he has the VO2 max of Merkx or Hinault. Froome’s numbers are suspicious for who he is. We go back to the same question that is being asked on his thread constantly: Has he done this in the past? Again, I expect his numbers to be higher than 6 w/kg.

 

[Parrot23]

That said, I hope Cobo gets busted on the rest day and the Jersey goes to Froome lol.

Gotta have a Running of the Bulls at Pamplona for the perps. Get a herd of the most recent dopees together once a year for a Pamplona exclusive. A real culturally relevant experience.

We'll see lots of watts/kg, extra high cadence then. Ha, ha! Make it uphill. Have the Gianetti, etc., directing from the team car behind the bulls. No passing or blocking allowed.

Have Al "Gored" narrate the video, be the TV director, award the prize. Graham Watson take the pics from the moto. Special collectors' edition signed by Lancey boy. The works

 

[Parrot23]

We go back to the same question that is being asked on his thread constantly: Has he done this in the past? Again, I expect his numbers to be higher than 6 w/kg.

Agree. So heart-warming to see all of his 6.2 watt/kg efforts last year:

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider_palm.asp?riderid=1861&year=2010&all=1&current=0

 

[Parrot23]

Froome’s numbers are suspicious for who he is. We go back to the same question that is being asked on his thread constantly: Has he done this in the past?

I don't follow it closely, but only precedent I can see for Froome is one: the year in the Tour with Barloworld cycling when he was riding a fantastic mountain stage (think he was leading; haven't looked it up again) till he ran off the road on a descent (down some shale or something). Inexperience in descending or overexcited (which he claims to have been in the past; too impulsive, he says).

Only other possible mitigating factor I would think is his Kenyan background. It's quite possible he's spent years, his formative years, at altitude constantly.

That's it, for what I know at least.

So if anything Froome's numbers should be higher. .

I don't agree with that. If the more variable pacing hypothesis is correct on Froome's part, it would mean his average watts should be lower than a rider riding his own pace alone. The physiological demands are more stressful/less energy efficient with changes in pace, so the average mechanical output in watts should be lower (because he's "burning more matches", more high octane/anaerobic, etc.) not higher--taken in toto/on average.

 

[Ragerod]

Thanks Halamala for your constant efforts.

Cobo's numbers should be more accurate than Froomes' because he had a steadier pace. Froome's numbers are more variable because of its constants accelerations and decelerations. Those things are never taken into account in the formula. For more constant gradient and less acute angles the values should be less variable and more reliable. So if anything Froome's numbers should be higher.

Cobo’s numbers are pretty damning unless he has the VO2 max of Merkx or Hinault. Froome’s numbers are suspicious for who he is. We go back to the same question that is being asked on his thread constantly: Has he done this in the past? Again, I expect his numbers to be higher than 6 w/kg.

People have but it's a simple question with a simple answer. No.

The question we should be asking; what has Froome changed/introduced to his training regime that explains his drastic improvements? Same for Cobo but that's a bit clearer.

 

[palmerq]

I don't follow it closely, but only precedent I can see for Froome is one: the year in the Tour with Barloworld cycling when he was riding a fantastic mountain stage (think he was leading; haven't looked it up again) till he ran off the road on a descent (down some shale or something). Inexperience in descending or overexcited (which he claims to have been in the past; too impulsive, he says).

Was that froome? I thought it was the south african fellow, augustyn or something like that, I remember the stage you mean.

 

[luckyboy]

Yeah it was Augustyn on the Cime de la Bonette-Restefond.

Vaughters just tweeted (at me ) that he thinks the numbers for Cobo + Froome here might be a tad high and they're closer to 6.0 and 5.7. And he'll try and work it out on Tuesday.

https://twitter.com/#!/Vaughters/status/110526529179623425

 

[Escarabajo]

...


I don't agree with that. If the more variable pacing hypothesis is correct on Froome's part, it would mean his average watts should be lower than a rider riding his own pace alone. The physiological demands are more stressful/less energy efficient with changes in pace, so the average mechanical output in watts should be lower (because he's "burning more matches", more high octane/anaerobic, etc.) not higher--taken in toto/on average.

No it should be higher.

The changes in Kinetic energy are not taken into account in the cycling power equation, mainly for being negligible. But in this case when somebody has a higher weight and comes almost to a stop and has to get up to push himself hard again would not be that case.

As for your assessment, use the car fuel usage as you analogy. One car goes from point A to point B at a constat pace. The other one stop in stop lights but goes faster where it can. Both employ same time, but one of them consumed more fuel. Guess which one? Stopping and starting from low speed again takes more energy everything else being equal.

 

[Escarabajo]

Yeah it was Augustyn on the Cime de la Bonette-Restefond.

Vaughters just tweeted (at me ) that he thinks the numbers for Cobo + Froome here might be a tad high and they're closer to 6.0 and 5.7. And he'll try and work it out on Tuesday.

https://twitter.com/#!/Vaughters/status/110526529179623425

Thanks.

Please keep us informed.