Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

[Bumeington]

Thanks. Empathically, I'd never describe a power I'd done previously as "ridiculous" - that would be reserved for a big jump / PB. Even to Joe Public.

The cycling model people modeled Brad's power for both the 2012 Olympic TT and final 2012 TdF TT at 480W / 6.8W/kg.

Curiously, after calculating a maximum theoretical power of 9W/kg, and then a more realistic theoretical max power of 6.8W/kg, acoggan simply stated the cycling models website had overestimated something.

They got so many other things right or within 2% that it was difficult to just dismiss them like that.

Anecdotally - via Darryl Webster - the other question that needs to be asked is, was Boardman's performance natural?

The cycling power models site has over estimated Brajkovic's power as he has published his SRM data.

 

[acoggan]

eh?

Based on Wiggins' time, they estimated his power at 447W.
Xavier told wattage groups Wiggins' power was 453W.

They underestimated it by 6W. Not 6%.

Sorry, I thought that Xavier had provided data for London, for which cyclingpowermodels estimated (using our model, BTW) 480 W (at 69 kg).

 

[acoggan]

The cycling power models site has over estimated Brajkovic's power as he has published his SRM data.

GIGO (as they themselves recognize).

 

[Bumeington]

http://www.cyclingpowermodels.com/ProRaceAnalysis.aspx

This is the link to the estimates, Shane Sutton said 492W for the tour prologue so they do quite well there (489W).

Estimates for Wiggins: tour stage 19 479W and Olympics 480W.

Brajkovic was 358W according to training peaks file for the tour stage 9 and is estimated at 386W for olympics so the numbers are likely a bit high.

 

[acoggan]

http://www.cyclingpowermodels.com/ProRaceAnalysis.aspx

This is the link to the estimates, Shane Sutton said 492W for the tour prologue so they do quite well there (489W).

Estimates for Wiggins: tour stage 19 479W and Olympics 480W.

Clearly there is a problem, then, because somewhere on their site (can't find it now) they indicate that they ignore acceleration. Thus, if they're close in the prologue, they're actually overestimating CdA (and/or Crr).

 

[BigBoat]

If Wiggins had 72 kg on the scale before the TDF he'd be 69-71 kg in the morning. I guess it depends on when you take your weight, morning or afternoon. I suspect the 69 kg is the lowest weight he sees.

 

[Krebs cycle]

If Wiggins had 72 kg on the scale before the TDF he'd be 69-71 kg in the morning. I guess it depends on when you take your weight, morning or afternoon. I suspect the 69 kg is the lowest weight he sees.

Also since this is the "clinic" and I can get away with being a ****, I'll say that as Tyler Hamilton put it a "bb" will add some weight. A couple of "bbs" before the prologue would give him extra ballast.

A colleague of mine actually did a PhD on the topic of hill climbing performance and bodyweight changes. In this example of course everyone should know that the acute changes in bodyweight (ie: from day to day) are due to hydration and bowel movements. So they examined the effect of dehydration on hill climbing performance. Its clear that dehydration decreases performance (3% of bodyweight lost will decrease VO2max for example), but if you loose some weight then your watts/kg goes up.... but the question is for how long and how much water can you lose before the trade off becomes detrimental.

I can't remember the exact the results but this paper shows a detriment over 13-20min @ 30deg

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17277597

 

[will10]

Espanjan ympäriajo, paremmuusjärjestys 2000-luvulla (W/kg)

1. Roberto Heras | 2004 | 6,32 W/kg
2. Aitor Gonzalez | 2002 | 6,16 W/kg
3. Denis Mentshov | 2005 | 6,05 W/kg
4. Denis Mentshov | 2007 | 6,04 W/kg
5. Angel Casero | 2001 | 6,00 W/kg
6. Roberto Heras | 2000 | 5,98 W/kg
7. Vincenzo Nibali | 2010 | 5,98 W/kg
8. Juan Jose Cobo | 2011 | 5,92 W/kg
9. Alberto Contador | 2012 | 5,88 W/kg
10. Alexander Vinokourov | 2006 | 5,85 W/kg
11. Alejandro Valverde | 2009 | 5,82 W/kg
12. Roberto Heras | 2003 | 5,82 W/kg
13. Alberto Contador | 2008 | 5,75 W/kg


Suurten ympäriajojen voittajat, keskitehot 2000-luvulla

1. Roberto Heras | Vuelta 2004 | 6,32 W/kg
2. Lance Armstrong | Tour 2003 | 6,18 W/kg
3. Alberto Contador | Tour 2009 | 6,17 W/kg
4. Aitor Gonzalez | Vuelta 2002 | 6,16 W/kg
5. Lance Armstrong | Tour 2004 | 6,09 W/kg
6. Lance Armstrong | Tour 2005 | 6,09 W/kg
7. Ivan Basso | Giro 2006 | 6,08 W/kg
8. Lance Armstrong | Tour 2001 | 6,07 W/kg
9. Denis Mentshov | Vuelta 2005 | 6,05 W/kg
10. Denis Mentshov | Vuelta 2007 | 6,04 W/kg
11. Denis Mentshov | Giro 2009 | 6,02 W/kg
12. Damiano Cunego | Giro 2004 | 6,01 W/kg
13. Angel Casero | Vuelta 2001 | 6,00 W/kg
__________________________________

14. Gilberto Simoni | Giro 2003 | 5,99 W/kg
15. Roberto Heras | Vuelta 2000 | 5,98 W/kg
16. Vincenzo Nibali | Vuelta 2010 | 5,98 W/kg
17. Bradley Wiggins | Tour 2012 | 5,98 W/kg
18. Lance Armstrong | Tour 2000 | 5,97 W/kg
19. Lance Armstrong | Tour 2002 | 5,97 W/kg
20. Danilo Di Luca | Giro 2007 | 5,93 W/kg
21. Gilberto Simoni | Giro 2001 | 5,93 W/kg
22. Alberto Contador | Tour 2007 | 5,92 W/kg
23. Juan Jose Cobo | Vuelta 2011 | 5,92 W/kg
24. Alberto Contador | Vuelta 2012 | 5,88 W/kg
25. Alexander Vinokourov | Vuelta 2006 | 5,85 W/kg
26. Carlos Sastre | Tour 2008 | 5,85 W/kg
27. Paolo Savoldelli | Giro 2005 | 5,84 W/kg
28. Alejandro Valverde | Vuelta 2009 | 5,82 W/kg
29. Roberto Heras | Vuelta 2003 | 5,82 W/kg
30. Alberto Contador | Tour 2010 | 5,78 W/kg
31. Alberto Contador | Vuelta 2008 | 5,75 W/kg
32. Alberto Contador | Giro 2011 | 5,73 W/kg
33. Cadel Evans | Tour 2011 | 5,68 W/kg
34. Floyd Landis | Tour 2006 | 5,67 W/kg
35. Alberto Contador | Giro 2008 | 5,64 W/kg
36. Ivan Basso | Giro 2010 | 5,63 W/kg
37. Ryder Hesjedal | Giro 2012 | 5,60 W/kg
38. Paolo Savoldelli | Giro 2002 | 5,54 W/kg

http://www.fillarifoorumi.fi/forum/...km-h-VAM-W-W-kg-etc-%29&p=1906952#post1906952

 

[JRanton]

What does that data refer to? Average power output on climbs?

And also Wiggins higher in 2012 than Armstrong was in 2000 and 2002? Yeah right.

 

[luckyboy]

No that data is the average w/kg in Grand Tours since 2000. List above is the Vuelta since 2000.

 

[JRanton]

No that data is the average w/kg in Grand Tours since 2000. List above is the Vuelta since 2000.

So it's pretty meaningless then given the differences in parcours etc? There was a post by the inner ring a few days ago suggesting that the Vuelta had the highest w/kg of all the grand tours this year and yet the list on the last page shows Wiggins 2012 Tour higher than Contador 2012 Vuelta.

 

[Ferminal]

It's a terrible way of looking at things.

The Tour there were probably only three climbs they looked at (none of which had any resemblance to Vuelta/Giro climbs). The Vuelta it was probably 7. The Giro they soft-pedalled the first 4 meaningful climbs so it brings the average well down not to mention overall stages being much harder.

 

[goggalor]

Vaughters thinks those numbers should be "HUGE news"... even though a guy like Flandis is way down in 34th, and Wiggins 2012 beats Lance anno 2000 and 2002.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Vaughters thinks those numbers should be "HUGE news"... even though a guy like Flandis is way down in 34th, and Wiggins 2012 beats Lance anno 2000 and 2002.

It cracks me up how you guys lap this sh!t up. Did you not understand the above posts that said it is a meaningless way to analyze performance?

besides if you check the actual link it is a post made by same random on a Finnish website 2 days ago. So where does Vaughters say "those numbers" and is specifically referring to the post on http://www.fillarifoorumi.fi?? It's certainly not something that I would bet on unless I had spent time doing a thorough analysis to first check and see if that poster has done it correctly to begin with. It seems clear they are using VAM to determine w/kg but have they corrected for altitude and gradient for example?

On doping matters I would take whatever Ferrari says with a grain of salt, but on pure performance matters I can see no reason to dispute the below....

VAM: Effects of Gradient & Altitude
By: Michele Ferrari
Published: 19 Jun 2009

When evaluating the VAM of a certain climbing performance we need to consider wind, drafting, asphalt conditions but also average SLOPE GRADIENT of the climb and the ALTITUDES at the start and end of the ascent.

There is quite a difference between a VAM obtained on an average gradient of 10% than one with the same value but obtained over a climb at 7%.
Over the years I have been putting together and using a simple formula which is useful when comparing VAM's expressed over different gradients.
For example, a VAM=1800 m/h corresponds to a different value in watt/kg, depending on the average gradient of the climb:

- gradient 11% 1800/3.1 = 5.80 w/kg
- gradient 10% 1800/3.0 = 6.00 w/kg
- gradient 9% 1800/2.9 = 6.20 w/kg
- gradient 8% 1800/2.8 = 6.42 w/kg
- gradient 7% 1800/2.7 = 6.66 w/kg
- gradient 6% 1800/2.6 = 6.92 w/kg

It is therefore simply enough to subdivide the VAM value with a certain number, between 2.6 up to 3.1, in accordance with the steepness of the climb (from 6% to 11%).

At higher ALTITUDES, barometric pressure and the partial oxygen pressure (PpO2) reduce by about 6% every 500m of elevation.

A very interesting study (J.Appl.Physiol. 1996;80:2204-2210) verified in laboratory how 11 elite cyclists (VO2max = 77ml/kg/min) presented an average decrease in their VO2max by 6.8% at an altitude of 580 m, compared to sea level values.

53x12.com

 

[goggalor]

It cracks me up how you guys lap this sh!t up. Did you not understand the above posts that said it is a meaningless way to analyze performance?

besides if you check the actual link it is a post made by same random on a Finnish website 2 days ago. So where does Vaughters say "those numbers" and is specifically referring to the post on http://www.fillarifoorumi.fi?? It's certainly not something that I would bet on unless I had spent time doing a thorough analysis to first check and see if that poster has done it correctly to begin with. It seems clear they are using VAM to determine w/kg but have they corrected for altitude and gradient for example?

On doping matters I would take whatever Ferrari says with a grain of salt, but on pure performance matters I can see no reason to dispute the below....

https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/246703068903788545

The full tweet has a link to http://www.fillarifoorumi.fi/forum/...km-h-VAM-W-W-kg-etc-%29&p=1906952#post1906952.

 

[Ferminal]

Climbing performances of the top3 from each GT (used Scarponi instead of TDG) on final climbs.

Data from this thread, Vetoo and jens. W/kg is Ferrari calc.

Cervinia 6.76%
Resinelli 7.86%
Giau 9.36%
Pampeago 9.90%
Stelvio 7.17%

Belles Filles 8.53%
La Toussuire 6.08%
Peyresourde 6.92%
Peyresourde 7.32%

Arrate 8.28%
Gallina 8.03%
Ancares 8.20%
Covadonga 8.85%
Pajares 7.00%
Cuitu Negru 13.32%
Bola del Mundo 8.60%

 

[Ferminal]

2011 very scattered, a brutal Giro, crazy tactics in the Tour and then pure power in the Vuelta.

Etna 1208m 6.36%
Kasereck 607m 9.63%
Zoncolan 1194m 11.94%
Gardeccia 618m 10.00%
Macugnaga 277m 5.54%
Finestre 1694 9.18%

Luz Ardiden 979m 7.36%
PdB 1245m 7.88%
Galibier 587m 6.83%
Galibier 1139m 6.82%
Alpe d'Huez 1119m 8.11%

La Covatilla 645m 8.10%
Manzaneda 271m 6.80%
Somiedo 521m 8.70%
Angliru 1194m 10.30%
Pena Cabarga 550m 9.20%

 

[Ferminal]

So far it's looking like 2010 > 2012 = 2011.

Terminillo 1133m 7,55%
Monte Grappa 1466m 8.14%
Zoncolan 1194m 11.94%
Mortirolo 1289 10.88%
Tonale 311m 6.22%

Avoriaz 831m 6.10%
Madeleine 1607m 7.08%
Croix Neuve 312m 10.10%
Bonascre 664m 7.46%
Bales 1178 6.10%
Tourmalet 1387m 7.46%

Xorret del Cati 440m 11.58%
Vallnord 655m 6.55%
Pena Cabarga 550m 9.20%
Covadonga 708m 8.85%
Cotobello 813 8.13%
Bola del Mundo 963m 8.60%

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Impressive work, Fermi. Are you going to do 2009 as well? The year of the coming of Wiggo?

 

[Ferminal]

I will go back as far as I can, getting harder to find the data already. I'm trying to avoid Ferrari's numbers as they seem inflated (surprise surprise). Remember these are just the pure numbers, there are many other factors which aren't explained, although taking a whole season I hope that there is some cancelling out. The final aim is to show the season averages against one another.

 

[Ferminal]

Need some info on Vuelta 2009 if anyone has some. At the end I'll try and find uncut videos to do any times that are missing.

Alpe di Siusi 830m 8.30%
Petrano 834m 7.92%
Blockhaus 1099m
7.20% Vesuvio 967m 7.40%

Arcalis 751m 7.10%
Verbier 632m 7.63%
Romme 818m 9.30%
Colombiere 640m 8.50%
Ventoux 1383 8.54%

Velfique 694m 6.94%
La Pandera 680m 8.10%

 

[Ferminal]

What it all looks like so far:

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not many long climbs in 2012. Wonder if that was deliberate or not.

 

[Ferminal]

There were some, but the time is not always taken from the bottom and Cuitu Negru/Pajares are separated.

Next year is a dream for 40+min climbs though.

 

[WinterRider]

I would love to see these graphs color coded so we can distinguish individual riders' efforts.