-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Re:
https://www.windfinder.com/report/loudes_le_puy/2017-07-16
I would have thought x-headwind if the climb heads east since the wind was coming from NE most of the dayNetserk said:
https://www.windfinder.com/report/loudes_le_puy/2017-07-16
Re: Re:
The ones that were on still poles indicated quite a decent strength tailwind. One flag above the rider's heads was on a near horizontal pole and the flag was flapping nearly horizontally with a wind in favour of the riders. Variable of course as there were sections with more shelter from trees and road changes direction.
Just rewatching the climb, especially the section Froome was alone/with Landa and looked for flags that weren't being waved by spectators.Eyeballs Out said:
The ones that were on still poles indicated quite a decent strength tailwind. One flag above the rider's heads was on a near horizontal pole and the flag was flapping nearly horizontally with a wind in favour of the riders. Variable of course as there were sections with more shelter from trees and road changes direction.
An example from earlier in the chase when Froome catches Quintana:
https://youtu.be/E8GIOEW6mXk?t=139
And later on as Froome was still chasing with Landa's support:
https://youtu.be/oAIF6TK_870?t=62
Those are not light winds, rather that's quite strong and is worth the equivalent of approximately 0.3 to 0.5W/kg in no-wind speed terms when riders are with the tailwind. IOW a W/kg estimate not accounting for wind would overestimate by about that much for the sections with a tailwind.
https://youtu.be/E8GIOEW6mXk?t=139
And later on as Froome was still chasing with Landa's support:
https://youtu.be/oAIF6TK_870?t=62
Those are not light winds, rather that's quite strong and is worth the equivalent of approximately 0.3 to 0.5W/kg in no-wind speed terms when riders are with the tailwind. IOW a W/kg estimate not accounting for wind would overestimate by about that much for the sections with a tailwind.
Re:
Hi Ross,
Those numbers of old 6.7 watts/kg, that is fantasy stuff. The reality is that Lance's 6.7 number as measured by Ferrari was for a 4 km climb of 9%, about 11 minutes, not 40 minutes. This is a normal power output for an elite endurance cyclist at his peak of fitness with or without drugs.
The Science of Sport said:
Hi Ross,
Those numbers of old 6.7 watts/kg, that is fantasy stuff. The reality is that Lance's 6.7 number as measured by Ferrari was for a 4 km climb of 9%, about 11 minutes, not 40 minutes. This is a normal power output for an elite endurance cyclist at his peak of fitness with or without drugs.
He didn't mentioned Lance. Those numbers could be closer to Pantani's maybe. That's the highest that I have calculated.
The Tucker post is from 2010, ie early days of more systematic and mass data driven scrutiny of climb times.
The benchmark for "normal" was downgraded many a time along the way when more data became available and more climbs were analysed. As it should in order to converge towards the pre epo standards.
At the beginning, say the days of Contador's ridiculous 20min or so raid on verbier, some people were willing to ponder if 6,2w/kg for 40min was cleans on longer climbs. Sure...
In sum, i think this development was the rwsult of a too generous null hypothesis based on skewed data from 1990-2009 or so.
The benchmark for "normal" was downgraded many a time along the way when more data became available and more climbs were analysed. As it should in order to converge towards the pre epo standards.
At the beginning, say the days of Contador's ridiculous 20min or so raid on verbier, some people were willing to ponder if 6,2w/kg for 40min was cleans on longer climbs. Sure...
In sum, i think this development was the rwsult of a too generous null hypothesis based on skewed data from 1990-2009 or so.
So I did these climbs in Italy. I wondered what my w/kg was:
Muro di Sormano, 1,8 km, 15,5%, 14 min 30 sec.
First 4,4 of Madonna del Ghisallo, 4,4 km, 8,5%, 20 min
Alpe di Cainallo minus the last 2 kilometres, 16 km, 6,5%, 1 hour and 4 min
Muro di Sormano, 1,8 km, 15,5%, 14 min 30 sec.
First 4,4 of Madonna del Ghisallo, 4,4 km, 8,5%, 20 min
Alpe di Cainallo minus the last 2 kilometres, 16 km, 6,5%, 1 hour and 4 min
Re:
3.94 for the second, the 3rd is either 3.7 or 3.16. I can't tell from your post whether the climb was 14km or 16km. Ferrari's formula doesn't apply to gradients over 11 so I can't tell you about the first climb. Hope you enjoyed it!
Valv.Piti said:
3.94 for the second, the 3rd is either 3.7 or 3.16. I can't tell from your post whether the climb was 14km or 16km. Ferrari's formula doesn't apply to gradients over 11 so I can't tell you about the first climb. Hope you enjoyed it!
Re: Re:
16 kilometres so thats 3,7 w/kg. That makes sense since its a considerably longer effort. Thanks!Durden93 said:
Re: Re:
Concerned, sceptical, disappointed? Barguil should not have been making records and doing so well in my opinion given the circumstances of his race. He was being left alone by the team to make tremendous efforts to join breakaways and arguably had less "days off" than any top 10 rider. He was in no way protected. The jury is still out, but I went from being pleased for him to a being concerned with each passing day when he put in a big effort.
Durden93 said:
Concerned, sceptical, disappointed? Barguil should not have been making records and doing so well in my opinion given the circumstances of his race. He was being left alone by the team to make tremendous efforts to join breakaways and arguably had less "days off" than any top 10 rider. He was in no way protected. The jury is still out, but I went from being pleased for him to a being concerned with each passing day when he put in a big effort.
Pan y agua guys! 
That should translate to a FTP around 260, I think. I don't really know If Im best at 5 min efforts, 20 min or 1 hour. I rode it with my brother and it was clear that I was considerably better once fatigue set in (we were equal otherwise, but he weights in at 55 kg or so, im 73 kg), but I think thats primarirly because Im a bit older and have ridden more this year. I dlsike the 15-20 minutes efforts the most tho, they are simply just brutal. On those long and steady climbs you can get into a much better rhythm and and just tap out the pace, I don't suffer as much there, but I really don't know. Its certainly interesting
That should translate to a FTP around 260, I think. I don't really know If Im best at 5 min efforts, 20 min or 1 hour. I rode it with my brother and it was clear that I was considerably better once fatigue set in (we were equal otherwise, but he weights in at 55 kg or so, im 73 kg), but I think thats primarirly because Im a bit older and have ridden more this year. I dlsike the 15-20 minutes efforts the most tho, they are simply just brutal. On those long and steady climbs you can get into a much better rhythm and and just tap out the pace, I don't suffer as much there, but I really don't know. Its certainly interesting
So doc veloclinic thinks the tour was not what he would call cleans. On top of that he speculates that judging by his analysis of climb times no new superfuels or other methods are available or at least on use. Not a very extraordinary paitsi of claims by any means.
In the graphs 2013 is hilarious. So is 2009. Long live Contador & Froome.
In the graphs 2013 is hilarious. So is 2009. Long live Contador & Froome.
To be fair a variation of even 0.2W/kg is rather big on that level..
I would assume that if people went to big with motors, it would become rather obious..
Imagine if a contador from his glory years would use an additional motor that provides 60W (if he isn't using that in his glory years).. I don't think any commentator/sponsor can proceed with the sport...
However imagine a 60W on froome and he would fall in the range of contador in his glory years. Similar to fodder like Riis, they could make their blood like sirop... and they are just edging the competition who are not taking it to such dangerous levels.
Another thing that is hard to proof is fatigue. If you don't need to go full throttle you are less fatigue in the end.
I hear the commentators yell very loud, after the armstrong years, we see less people setting a huge effort!! we see people who made an effort pay the price the next day!! this means the peleton is cleaning up!
Look at today... we see people doing full day efforts and not paying the price at all.. they actually seem to get better.
I would assume that if people went to big with motors, it would become rather obious..
Imagine if a contador from his glory years would use an additional motor that provides 60W (if he isn't using that in his glory years).. I don't think any commentator/sponsor can proceed with the sport...
However imagine a 60W on froome and he would fall in the range of contador in his glory years. Similar to fodder like Riis, they could make their blood like sirop... and they are just edging the competition who are not taking it to such dangerous levels.
Another thing that is hard to proof is fatigue. If you don't need to go full throttle you are less fatigue in the end.
I hear the commentators yell very loud, after the armstrong years, we see less people setting a huge effort!! we see people who made an effort pay the price the next day!! this means the peleton is cleaning up!
Look at today... we see people doing full day efforts and not paying the price at all.. they actually seem to get better.
Re:
This is what he actually says:
meat puppet said:
This is what he actually says:
Not sure how you draw that conclusion from the residuals chart?meat puppet said:
I posted the same link in a different thread but having given it a bit of thought I have a few issues with the analysis as presented. It's not clear at all from what's published how much normalising for length/time/stage number are modifying the basic values. Also if it's only the top 3 on GC then box plots aren't a very clear way of presenting things, and imply more data than is there (ideally I'd find a way to make one performance by one rider one point on the graph, even if the box plot was still underneath). If there are big variations in the top 3 doping vs say the rest of the top 10 then that should be obvious from the graph.
If you include the top 10 (or even top 6 - I think vetooo has W/kg for top 10 for almost everything and top 6 for one other) then you get rid of the random effect of crashes and noise to some extent too - imagine how different the 2014 top 3 W/kg might be with Froome and Contador in the top 3 vs Páraud and Pinot.
Overall even if it's not perfect I still think it's useful. It's funny how 2008 when the French were in charge of antidoping and caught a load of riders, vs 2009 when UCI were in charge, AICAR (allegedly) entered the fray, and Contador went thermonuclear on Verbier, are still the two extremes ten years later.
If you include the top 10 (or even top 6 - I think vetooo has W/kg for top 10 for almost everything and top 6 for one other) then you get rid of the random effect of crashes and noise to some extent too - imagine how different the 2014 top 3 W/kg might be with Froome and Contador in the top 3 vs Páraud and Pinot.
Overall even if it's not perfect I still think it's useful. It's funny how 2008 when the French were in charge of antidoping and caught a load of riders, vs 2009 when UCI were in charge, AICAR (allegedly) entered the fray, and Contador went thermonuclear on Verbier, are still the two extremes ten years later.
Alex: yes, exactly. Illicit march would be escalating doping. If it has stalled, I take it that doping has converged to a temporary equilibrium determined by the institutional framework, testing, availability of new stuff, etc, ie it is not escalating at the moment. Even so, veloclinic would not call this clean or a sign of cleanlines per se. The direct quote says as much. I would agree.
I admit to using actual footage from tdfs 2009 and 2013 as auxiliary material.
Vedrafjord's point about the jump between 2008 and 2009 is a worthy one.
I admit to using actual footage from tdfs 2009 and 2013 as auxiliary material.
Vedrafjord's point about the jump between 2008 and 2009 is a worthy one.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2024 (March 18-24)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
Tour of the Alps 2024 (April 15 - 19)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 225
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram