Well the real problem is that Froome and Wiggins went ahead and messed up all those "clean" thresholds.BroDeal said:I skimmed through the paper. What I got from it is that estimates in little wind can be quite accurate. I did not find the conclusions matched some of what was in the paper. The word "dishonest" was used to refer to people using such estimates. I found this a bit strange. The apparent bad blood between Vayer and the authors make the use seem like an attack on a rival. They also seem to shy away from the obvious, that error could be made very small by using multiple climbs.
The bottom line is whether you want to go through convoluted math to estimate Wattages or not, when a rider is repeatedly doing equivalent times on climbs as the best dopers of the blood vector doping era then something is wrong.
Now there's a load of guys having to readjust everything.
Thank god for tailwinds. That will explain it for this year.
Next year we'll just say this is the new normal.