Power Data Estimates for the climbing stages

[Ferminal]

Anyone predicting times for the TDS St9 ITT?

If post hoc estimates are so popular, how about some predictions on the time up climbs?

Too late on the weekend for that

Without putting any thought into it, I think 5.8-5.9 Ferrari, so somewhere 33-34mins.

 

[Le breton]

A few min. ago the temp in Bad Ragaz was 25°, wind at 287° SW at ave 18 km/h

PS
http://www.tourdesuisse.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/2013/TDS/Hoehenprofil/Marschtabelle_9_Etappe.jpg

between intermediate 1 and finish
26.8-16.5 =10.3 km
1383-449 =934 m
seems like there might be some flattish stretches at bottom and top.

PS2
Checked on google,
10.3 km from finish is pretty much where indicated on that website
latest temp in Bad Ragaz 26°, wind 306° ave 9 km/h gust at 17

PS3
now the calculation assuming they are well protected from the wind
for 70 +8 kg
air density 1.0
SCx = 0.35 m^2

6.5 W/kg => 30:26
6.4 30:45
6.3 31:12
6.2 31:40

From 449 m to 1383 meters over 10.3 km
PS4
For a 70 kg racer with + 8 kg
as above
6.3 W/kg => 441 W
11 watts lost in transmission
of remaining 430 watts :
381 watts against gravity
32 watts against air resistance
17 watts rolling resistance

PS5 I had looked for, but missed a better profile of the climb
given here
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=20863

-----------------
PS 6
If I'm not mistaken :
Rui Costa 51:56-18:53 = 33:03
minus a few seconds for bike change
~ 32:50

 

[Parrulo]

So how good was Costa's performance today?

Inb4 another one touching the human limit

 

[Le breton]

So how good was Costa's performance today?

Inb4 another one touching the human limit

It looks like it was at around 6 W/kg over the climb.
But I would need more info to be more precise.

Well below what we have been seeing in the past.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Too late on the weekend for that

Without putting any thought into it, I think 5.8-5.9 Ferrari, so somewhere 33-34mins.

Yeah, mainly thinking for future climbs, perhaps some predictions.

If I have a detailed elevation profile*, the time and inclination (which varies depending on whether I'm in the mood for a pub chat), I can run through my own model as it carves up the climb into segments which helps when the gradient varies.

If there are known points with course directional changes and a known typical wind, can also apply wind vector for each segment.


* Something like a Map My Ride link for the exact start/finish timing points would help if anyone has such things (and can verify the accuracy of the elevation and distance data).

 

[Taxus4a]

Igor Anton was more than 1 minute faster in the past than Rui Costa and 3 minutes over himseft today.

Pantani much better.

I think as well about 6 w/kg for the best times in half an hour...

Nothing impressive in the past times. To be considered today.

 

[Gregga]

If I have a detailed elevation profile*, the time and inclination (which varies depending on whether I'm in the mood for a pub chat), I can run through my own model as it carves up the climb into segments which helps when the gradient varies.

Maybe this can help http://app.strava.com/activities/60658113 ...don't know if the altitude measurement is barometric or not.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Maybe this can help http://app.strava.com/activities/60658113 ...don't know if the altitude measurement is barometric or not.

Thanks, but not really.

Putting aside how elevation is generated and issues with accuracy, what I need is the data (i.e. distance and elevation along the course with sufficient frequency) and clearly defined start/finish points for timed segments.

 

[Race Radio]

Flumserberg (6.05 km, 9.14 %, [609m→1162m])
1995: Marco Pantani 17:25
2013: Rui Costa 19:55

 

[Gregga]

Flumserberg (6.05 km, 9.14 %, [609m→1162m])
1995: Marco Pantani 17:25
2013: Rui Costa 19:55

So 5.75 W/kg for Rui Costa vs 6.7 for Pantani-60%
Huge difference I thought Rui would be closer to 6.0

 

[jens_attacks]

Flumserberg (6.05 km, 9.14 %, [609m→1162m])
1995: Marco Pantani 17:25
2013: Rui Costa 19:55

pantani: one of the best climbers in history. he used to put from one minute to two minutes on the other contenders when he went at full speed on a climb doesn't matter if you were ullrich,indurain or other.
rui costa: will get dropped by how many in le tour?

pantani: 23 minutes effort at the end of easy stage
rui costa: 52 minutes effort....before the effort on the climb of 33 minutes(actually 32:40 with the bike change) at around what 6 w/kg?....manages to do 19 minutes at more than 52 km/h on the flat

so they really can't be compared

 

[Race Radio]

pantani: one of the MOST DOPED RIDERS in history.

Fixed that for you

 

[jens_attacks]

Fixed that for you

he always prepared himself to the teeth of course.

huge climbing talent well before '92 when he met the beautiful kerosene though. check those stories about a 14 year old pantani dropping the pros who were training in his area. true story.

comparing il pirata to rui costa

 

[Miburo]

Fixed that for you

Doesn't change the fact that you can't compare it besides like jens said, pantani is a hugh climbing talent. Didn't each GT rider dope in the 90's? Still pantani destroyed them.

Or is there proof Pantani doped more, link it then?

 

[gooner]

Doesn't change the fact that you can't compare it besides like jens said, pantani is a hugh climbing talent. Didn't each GT rider dope in the 90's? Still pantani destroyed them.

Or is there proof Pantani doped more, link it then?

Lol.

The level playing field has been debunked I don't know how many times on this forum. Each rider has his different responses to doping.

Comparison with Pantani's times to today's performances is really to see if cycling is showing signs of moving in the right direction and to a cleaner future. Not I can assure you to recognise the achievement of his times. Far from it.

Costa's time is encouraging.

 

[Ferminal]

I'm glad Costa dopes less than Pantani.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Comparison with Pantani's times to today's performances is really to see if cycling is showing signs of moving in the right direction and to a cleaner future. Not I can assure you to recognise the achievement of his times. Far from it.

Costa's time is encouraging.

So, Costa is the cream of the crop in climbing now? He lost two minutes on Belle Filles last year, in what, six kilometres? Indeed, encouraging.

 

[gooner]

So Costa didn't win here last year?

He finished 5th in the hilly Romandie prologue. Did you forget that as well? That was against a higher class field. No surprise to see him win here on the final day on a route like this.

 

[Merckx index]

Lol.

The level playing field has been argued against, mostly without any specific evidence or links, I don't know how many times on this forum. Each rider may have different responses to doping, though other than a naturally low HT there is virtually no evidence at all bearing on which riders might have or have had an advantage in this respect.

Comparison with Pantani's times in a period when HT could be raised without any limit other than death to today's performances is really to encourage those who want to believe that cycling is showing signs of moving in the right direction and to a cleaner future. Not I can assure you to recognise the achievement of his times. Far from it.

Costa's time is encouraging to anyone who was worried that riders were still doping past 50%.

Fixed some stuff.

 

[Miburo]

Lol.

The level playing field has been debunked I don't know how many times on this forum. Each rider has his different responses to doping.

Comparison with Pantani's times to today's performances is really to see if cycling is showing signs of moving in the right direction and to a cleaner future. Not I can assure you to recognise the achievement of his times. Far from it.

Costa's time is encouraging.

I'm not saying it's suspicious but i liked jens's argument. Costa won't finish top 10 in the tour. The guy will be a domestique of 2 riders who are not even top favorites.

He's 2nd tier in climbing.

 

[del1962]

I'm glad Costa dopes less than Pantani.

Apart from Riis was there anyone who doped more?

 

[gooner]

Fixed some stuff.

I think next time you should notice the word "cleaner."

You imply that it's some sort of blind faith by suggesting I want to believe it more than anything else. That's just a strawman where you're adding arms and legs on to my posts.

And the level playing field argument was debated in the Ullrich thread but you dismissed every credible point that RR was making on the topic where he also provided valuable links to. JV has also spoken about this as well. I followed that discussion closely where you were arguing for the sake of it along with a bunch of fanboys even after evidence was pointed out.

 

[Merckx index]

I think next time you should notice the word "cleaner."

You imply that it's some sort of blind faith by suggesting I want to believe it more than anything else. That's just a strawman where you're adding arms and legs on to my posts.

I'm on the record in this forum stating I believe--am not sure, but believe--the peloton is cleaner today. That said, if ever there were a strawman, it's comparing Pantani--during the period when EPO ran wild--to a contemporary rider who has yet to prove he is one of the world's best climbers. What you and RR should be trying to do is prove that the peloton is cleaner than it was 5-7 years ago, not 15-20 years ago, and by comparing riders with comparable accomplishments in each era.

the level playing field argument was debated in the Ullrich thread but you dismissed every credible point that RR was making on the topic where he also provided valuable links to. JV has also spoken about this as well. I followed that discussion closely where you were arguing for the sake of it along with a bunch of fanboys even after evidence was pointed out.

I dismissed most of RR's points because he didn't provide any valuable links. Apart from claiming a vague "dense muscle" theory, which has no support in any known physiology, he provided one post of JV referring to an article that JV himself admitted he couldn't find. No science whatsoever, just endless arguments over how we are to interpret Ullrich's poor performance in some early year races, and in some training camps. I didn't address those arguments, as others were doing so and as I wished to focus on the science, such as it was. RR said several times he had information from doctors of that era that supported his claims, but again, no published studies nor even quotes from these doctors that would back up their assertions.

I'm a little astonished you can describe my posts in that thread as "arguing for the sake of it", when I provided links to detailed studies on the relationship of HT to V02, critical to the discussion, while RR never provided a link to a single published study with any relevance whatsoever to his dense muscle theory. Even the link referred to by JV, which apparently no one can find, is not relevant to that theory.

 

[Lanark]

Comparing to Pantani is pointless. With that logic, we were cleaner when Ullrich won as well, or when Armstrong dominated, or Landis, Rasmussen and Contador. After the 50% rule people maybe weren't climbing as fast as Pantani did, but you still couldn't win a (big) race without doping. The peloton being cleaner is fairly useless in such a case.

Now we're probably not in such a bad situation right now, but comparing the current situation to the absolute worst doping abuse in the sports history makes you learn very little. A more relevant question would be if we're doing much better than in, say, the 2006-2008 period. I have my doubts.

 

[Taxus4a]

I'm not saying it's suspicious but i liked jens's argument. Costa won't finish top 10 in the tour. The guy will be a domestique of 2 riders who are not even top favorites.

He's 2nd tier in climbing.

Reality is than Costa won in a good way the last two TdS...he is going to play another role in the TDF, he was maybe at his top form in TdS, but if he would be the leader focusing in TdF, we dont know about his possibilities.

Was Pantani focusing in that TdS? I dont remember... but difficult.

Mollema has been 4th in the Vuelta just behind Froome and Wiggins, climbing very close to them... it is an error for me undestim ate the level of this TdS, Pinot was a good climber in last TdF, TVG was the leader of a Suisse Team and he was beaten clearly...Dan Martin won Cataluña to the SKY...etc...

The difference with Pantani is enough to assume the era is very different. We see how Pantani was 52 hematocrit at the end of a Giro...that is not speculation...and the difference with the best in a race of an era and another it is not so big.

Froome in that ITT in Suisse could put a minute over Rui Costa in the climb, it is too much, but who knows... but never more...

Rui Costa could have done IMO second in Dauphiné, but it is difficult to know becouse the parcours was different.

I was fan of Pantani as so many people (and of Mayo, and...), but..,

The best example is Anton, he did 3 minutes slower now... and more than one minute than Rui Costa then...

Most of the riders has dropped his perfomance, Anton among them, but a lot of them.. some are retired, or sancioned, or comeback clean.

For others they doped, but maybe now could get better results, with worse perfomance, but bette results...