Power Outputs Contador & Wiggins

[Escarabajo]

I guess that makes Sherwin and Liggett both wrong too

Nothing new. Just because they say it does not have to be set in stone.

 

[blackcat]

right... winning the tour of Poland, that shows unbelieveable time trialing ability. Mark my words Contador will show up as a doper

there have been numerous clips of Liggett and Sherwin in the past saying his time trialing was sub par.... then in 2007 this guy comes out blasting people

have a look at Wiggins' palmares. He never came top 10 in the u23 worlds tt by my reckoning. Have a look at how many are approaching his pursuit time.

Phinney, Thomas, Clancy, Bobridge, Huizenga, Sergent.

Do you know those names?

Contador was always a tter. He won the Spanish u23 tt in his first attempt in his first year as an espoir I believe. Then Saiz signed him.

He always ripped a prologue at PAris Nice.

It was 2003 when he won Poland tt, only 21.

The guy could flat out kick a chrono. Wiggins won a l'Avenir prologue, beat Raisin in the same l'Avenir is a two-up kick in a break. His CA teammate. Then he won a prologue in something like Sarthe or Dunkirk, just a ****ty little race that pro-am teams from France ride.

Wiggins first two tt results of note were 2005 Worlds. And 2007 Tour. Now Contador is ONLY 26. Compare the age progression, with their tt performances, you will find it is Wiggins who is behind Contador's curve, not the other way around.

 

[dienekes88]

I just finished doing the calculations for these two riders on the climb to Verbier.

Input information:

Contador weight: 61 kg
Wiggins Weight: 76 Kg
Sandy Casar: 63 Kg

Drafting: 30% for Contador, 50% for Wiggins (+/-)
Head wind: zero (conservative approach)
Mechanical Efficiency of Bike: 98%

Length: 8.7 km
Gradient: 7.5%

Contador Speed: 15.7 mph
Wiggins Speed: 14.9 mph
Casar Speed: 13.89 mph

Power Outputs:
Contador: 435 W (7.14 W/kg)
Wiggins 477 W (6.28 W/kg)
Casar: 379 W (6.00 W/kg)

Power Outputs from the following links are as follows:
http://www.mne.psu.edu/lamancusa/ProdDiss/Bicycle/bikecalc1.htm
http://swiss2.whosting.ch/mdetting/sports/cycling.html
Contador: 436 W, 435 W
Wiggins: 487 W, 484 W
Casar: 384 W, 381 W

Before you start protesting my numbers I have to say the following comments:

- I know, this is not the same as a power meter, but this is the equation used in physics for aerodynamics and other calculations. It will give you errors of course, but at least it should give you a comparative idea on how the riders are performing. And also helps to see what power ranges to expect.
- Don't be so surprised by the Wiggins numbers because the effort was done in slightly less than 22 minutes so it is easier to maintain this effort than over an hour of climbing distance. Besides the weight makes a big difference.
- I tried to be a little conservative with the assumptions. The reason for this is if I have to make any changes because of recommendations from other forists then it will be up and not down, most likely.
- I submitted the time of Sandy Casar just as reference.

Dr. Ferrari used VAM to estimate W/kg and from that extrapolate power output. For Contador, his estimate was 417W (6.73 w/kg). A little lower, but still pretty close.

I used Ferrari's technique with 72.5kg as an estimate of bodyweight and used a regression model to figure out the power-to-weight/VAM relationship that Ferrari was using and arrived at a power output of 466W for Twiggo. Also pretty close.

 

[Escarabajo]

Dr. Ferrari used VAM to estimate W/kg and from that extrapolate power output. For Contador, his estimate was 417W (6.73 w/kg). A little lower, but still pretty close.

I used Ferrari's technique with 72.5kg as an estimate of bodyweight and used a regression model to figure out the power-to-weight/VAM relationship that Ferrari was using and arrived at a power output of 466W for Twiggo. Also pretty close.

When I used 73 kg for Wiggins I get 462 W. Those Ferrari's VAM numbers are very close.

 

[dienekes88]

When I used 73 kg for Wiggins I get 462 W. Those Ferrari's VAM numbers are very close.

Indeed. Six one way, half a dozen the other!

While he sits under a cloud of suspicion, it's still difficult to challenge Ferrari's experience in the sport.

 

[no_slipstream]

Well said _Frost, you got it spot on. A watt is a watt, whether it is uphill,
downhill or on the flat. The reason it is easier to pull big watts on the flat, than uphill is convective cooling which is proportional to velocity squared, just like air resistance. In other word you slowly cook when climbing.

Phinney, Thomas, Clancy, Bobridge, Huizenga, Sergent. etc. will not beat Wiggins in a 4000m pursuit, for those in the know Wiggo holds the British 10 mile record, he steps down to do a 4 kay ride.

As for the others they have to step up to do a 4kay pirsuit cos they slipstream in a group- it is called crit racing.

2 or 3 seconds may be a mile in track racing, after all 60 kph is 10m/s.

Wiggo has just found the right weight so he can overcome his own inertia, and it could be a matter of a half a kilo which gets you there . See what happens when you drink your watersupply when climbing, you go faster.

 

[blackcat]

Well said _Frost, you got it spot on. A watt is a watt, whether it is uphill,
downhill or on the flat. The reason it is easier to pull big watts on the flat, than uphill is convective cooling which is proportional to velocity squared, just like air resistance. In other word you slowly cook when climbing.

Phinney, Thomas, Clancy, Bobridge, Huizenga, Sergent. etc. will not beat Wiggins in a 4000m pursuit, for those in the know Wiggo holds the British 10 mile record, he steps down to do a 4 kay ride.

As for the others they have to step up to do a 4kay pirsuit cos they slipstream in a group- it is called crit racing.

2 or 3 seconds may be a mile in track racing, after all 60 kph is 10m/s.

Wiggo has just found the right weight so he can overcome his own inertia, and it could be a matter of a half a kilo which gets you there . See what happens when you drink your watersupply when climbing, you go faster.

actually, Huizenga was fastest in Manchester in 2008 Worlds. Check it nuff nuff.


the others are all many seconds ahead of Wiggins times at the same age. Many seconds.

Wiggins breakthrough was in in Edinburgh in 2002 Commonwealths. About 22 and 3 months old, rode a 4'19".

Clancy is about the only one, who is behind him, actually, Clancy and Huizenga, are the only ones, if you plot time to age.

Sergent 4'16" NZ Nats
Bobridge 4'17" Poland Worlds
Phinney only 18 and pulling 4'15" in Denmark UCI Cup and then 4'15" at Worlds in Poland.

Thomas 22 and doing 4'17" in the GB Olympic prep training camp last June.

So, all riders are ahead of Wiggins.

no_slipstream, you are ignorant.

 

[no_slipstream]

15 Bradley WIGGINS GBR 4:15.165 20 Aug 2004 Athens, GRE

Wiggins can only beat those he races against, the above mentioned have not

beaten him in a major race.

Tell me how this crowd is faster.

Sergent 4'16" NZ Nats
Bobridge 4'17" Poland Worlds
Phinney only 18 and pulling 4'15" in Denmark UCI Cup and then 4'15" at Worlds in Poland.

Thomas 22 and doing 4'17" in the GB Olympic prep training camp last June.

learn how to do maths before you start abusing others.

Besides timing equipment can vary and it has to be done at the same venue.

Afterall the fastest Aust. runner for 100m did a 9.93- yeh sure when 1

second was taken away !

 

[blackcat]

15 Bradley WIGGINS GBR 4:15.165 20 Aug 2004 Athens, GRE

Wiggins can only beat those he races against, the above mentioned have not

beaten him in a major race.

Tell me how this crowd is faster.

Sergent 4'16" NZ Nats
Bobridge 4'17" Poland Worlds
Phinney only 18 and pulling 4'15" in Denmark UCI Cup and then 4'15" at Worlds in Poland.

Thomas 22 and doing 4'17" in the GB Olympic prep training camp last June.

learn how to do maths before you start abusing others.

Besides timing equipment can vary and it has to be done at the same venue.

Afterall the fastest Aust. runner for 100m did a 9.93- yeh sure when 1

second was taken away !

Wiggins 24 in Athens
Sergent 20 4'16"
Phinney 18 4'15"
Bobridge 19 4'17"
Juizenga 25 4'16"
Clancy 25 4'17"

those guys will be making the podium of the Tour, and you will be defending them on the back of track endurance. Sure...

 

[_frost]

Wiggins 24 in Athens
Sergent 20 4'16"
Phinney 18 4'15"
Bobridge 19 4'17"
Juizenga 25 4'16"
Clancy 25 4'17"

those guys will be making the podium of the Tour, and you will be defending them on the back of track endurance. Sure...

You say there is no change that Phinney one day is on the Podium?

 

[Mambo95]

actually, Huizenga was fastest in Manchester in 2008 Worlds. Check it nuff nuff.

.

And Wiggins beat him by five seconds in the final. Check it nuff nuff.

Wiggins proably could have done faster times than he did in, but he was never really pushed from 2003. He eased up in most races as he also had to do the team pursuit and/or the madison

 

[blackcat]

You say there is no change that Phinney one day is on the Podium?

no, should not, check Tour des Pays du Savoie, 20 minutes back on each of the HC climbing stages. No natural affinity for climbing.

 

[blackcat]

And Wiggins beat him by five seconds in the final. Check it nuff nuff.

Wiggins proably could have done faster times than he did in, but he was never really pushed from 2003. He eased up in most races as he also had to do the team pursuit and/or the madison

really convenient eh? So, now, he is contending for the Tour. As Boardman says "if it is too good to be true, it probably is". Well, this probably is, don't shoot the messenger.

You are ignoring the fact, Hincapie, Hushovd, Mcgee*, Cancellara, never rode the pursuit, and all would have wiped the floor with him, if they rode the pursuit with the same preparation and focus of Wiggins.

Who was preparing for Athens?

Sergio Escobar? Who? Sergio Escober? Who?

Yeah, a guy from Caisse d'Epargne who has done jack $hit on the road, and never won a thing. What about Bartko? A rider with a palmares similar to Wiggins on the track. Won gold in teams and individual pursuit in Sydney. Lose 8 kgs, bingo, he is a Tour contendor?

Come on, get your hand off it. If Wiggins, substitute for Escobar, you would be crying for the rooftops about a dirty Spaniard.

 

[Mambo95]

Sergio Escobar? Who? Sergio Escober? Who?

Yeah, a guy from Caisse d'Epargne who has done jack $hit on the road, and never won a thing. What about Bartko? A rider with a palmares similar to Wiggins on the track. Won gold in teams and individual pursuit in Sydney. Lose 8 kgs, bingo, he is a Tour contendor?

Come on, get your hand off it. If Wiggins, substitute for Escobar, you would be crying for the rooftops about a dirty Spaniard.

Wiggins: 6 Olympic Medals, three of them Golds, six world championships
Escobar: Two Olympics bronze medals, one world championship

Yeah. They're exactly the same

 

[blackcat]

Wiggins: 6 Olympic Medals, three of them Golds, six world championships
Escobar: Two Olympics bronze medals, one world championship

Yeah. They're exactly the same

where were Hushovd, Cancellara, and Hincapie, plus Mcgee? None focused on the track.

The most glaring weakness in your argument, Wiggins just has made himself a one million euro a year rider.

He would have been on perhaps 150k euro, max.

So, why is Wiggins so stupid, to sacrifice 850k every year, for the last 5 years? And if he is good enough to ride the road, he is good enough, better than Mcgee you would say, to lose the weight, AND win Olympic medals in Athens and Beijing, whilst earning his one million euro on the road.

Ofcourse, all hogwash.

 

[Mambo95]

where were Hushovd, Cancellara, and Hincapie, plus Mcgee? None focused on the track.

The most glaring weakness in your argument, Wiggins just has made himself a one million euro a year rider.

He would have been on perhaps 150k euro, max.

So, why is Wiggins so stupid, to sacrifice 850k every year, for the last 5 years? And if he is good enough to ride the road, he is good enough, better than Mcgee you would say, to lose the weight, AND win Olympic medals in Athens and Beijing, whilst earning his one million euro on the road.

Ofcourse, all hogwash.

I could make a million a year robbing banks - but I don't. Money's not everything to some people.

Let's agree to differ.

You stick to your 'they're all doping' mantra. The same one reeled out by corrupt doctors and DS's to neo-pros. You stick to your entirely evidence free accusations to whoever takes you fancy that day.

I'll stick to my belief that some riders dope and some are clean. And my belief that there are some very talented clean riders who are successful.

 

[blackcat]

I could make a million a year robbing banks - but I don't. Money's not everything to some people.

Let's agree to differ.

You stick to your 'they're all doping' mantra. The same one reeled out by corrupt doctors and DS's to neo-pros. You stick to your entirely evidence free accusations to whoever takes you fancy that day.

I'll stick to my belief that some riders dope and some are clean. And my belief that there are some very talented clean riders who are successful.

actually, have a look at all my posts.

I am not from the BigBoat camp of "they are all charged".

I do know, there are enough drugs that are never gonna show up on a MSGC assay, and that autologous transfusions, are undetectable, that, you can dope with impugnity. There will never be evidence, unless the law authorities bust a ring like Fuentes.

So this means you keep it to one degree of separation, either yourself or a manager, or a doc, and no one else, you do not use a Vienna humanplasma, nor share your sources.

90% of the posters here, who believe BW is charging, expect him to test positive. Read their comments.

I do not expect him to test positive. Just like Armstrong never tested positive. 'cept 99 corticos and heavily asterisked epo x6.

If you dope, your intent is to subvert the regulations, not get caught. You don't take anything that will show up, simple.

So, you are now playing into Wiggins' hands, saying, "dear Bradley you good chap, if you wish to dope, play to your heart's content, with all substances that will not show up in the controls. And by the way chappy, GOOD LUCK!"

If you wish to promote a drug free agenda, you need to look at the indirect indicators.

Wiggins has never ridden Suisse, or Austria, or Germany, any really mountainous stage at the pointy end. He has never been there in these one week stage races, let alone, the Tour.

You need to assess the deterioration in the power outputs and performances of clean riders, over three weeks.

You need to look at Wiggins past history over three weeks.

This is perhaps more suspicious, than Armstrong in 99. Atleast he finished 4th in the 98 Vuelta. Wiggins has not even won Criterium International.

 

[tockit]

Just like Armstrong never tested positive. 'cept 99 corticos and heavily asterisked epo x6.

Can you elaborate on the heavily asterisked epo x6?

I remember the corticos in 99, but I'm not sure I remember what you're talking about with the other one.

 

[Anonymous]

I do know, there are enough drugs that are never gonna show up on a MSGC assay, and that autologous transfusions, are undetectable, that, you can dope with impugnity. There will never be evidence, unless the law authorities bust a ring like Fuentes.

So a question of hematology. A rider is utilizing autologous transfusions. Are they transfusing to what they believe will be a hematocrit of 49.999%? Or are they transfusing a bit higher and then somehow hemodiluting before doping control?

I'm very curious about the logistics of doping. It seems quite hectic.

 

[BroDeal]

Can you elaborate on the heavily asterisked epo x6?

I remember the corticos in 99, but I'm not sure I remember what you're talking about with the other one.

Retrospectively tested urine from the 1999 Tour De France showed six of Armstrong's samples positive for artificial EPO.

There is some really good info about this here: http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

 

[Krebs cycle]

Haven't been through the whole thread but using the figures originally posted (Contador) @ 61kg produced an average power output of 435W equates to a VO2 consumption of around 85-90 ml/kg/min. Considering that it is all but impossible to maintain VO2max for that long at the end of a long stage, you would have to assume that a conservative % might be 95% which gives an actual VO2max of around 90-95ml/kg/min. Not impossible IMO given that i've personally witnessed a VO2max test on a tour de france rider which resulted in a score of 87ml/kg/min.

Retrospectively tested urine from the 1999 Tour De France showed six of Armstrong's samples positive for artificial EPO.

There is some really good info about this here: http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

The anti-doping consortium that Asho is director of is here...

http://siab.org.au/index.php

 

[blackcat]

So a question of hematology. A rider is utilizing autologous transfusions. Are they transfusing to what they believe will be a hematocrit of 49.999%? Or are they transfusing a bit higher and then somehow hemodiluting before doping control?

I'm very curious about the logistics of doping. It seems quite hectic.

hematocrit as a measure, in my opinion, is redundant.

I think those transfusions, take too long, for the body to assimilate excess plasma, so you never get the 'crit shooting up.

But I DO know, the above I am just surmising, but what I do know, Armstrong is quick to state his compelling 'crit of 43 in 2003, yet he surely rode at the same oxygen capacity of 1999, when he was at or close to 49.

So, makes me think, they use part of BigBoat's rationales, plasma expanders and ringers, but they also use other gear, and they may transfuse plasma and red cells.

They can get by the off-score and crit, they have it worked.

 

[blackcat]

Haven't been through the whole thread but using the figures originally posted (Contador) @ 61kg produced an average power output of 435W equates to a VO2 consumption of around 85-90 ml/kg/min. Considering that it is all but impossible to maintain VO2max for that long at the end of a long stage, you would have to assume that a conservative % might be 95% which gives an actual VO2max of around 90-95ml/kg/min. Not impossible IMO given that i've personally witnessed a VO2max test on a tour de france rider which resulted in a score of 87ml/kg/min.



The anti-doping consortium that Asho is director of is here...

http://siab.org.au/index.php

OGrady was 93 too, but what was he at lactate threshold?

 

[_frost]

no, should not, check Tour des Pays du Savoie, 20 minutes back on each of the HC climbing stages. No natural affinity for climbing.

What an earth is this natural affinity for climbing? Can you please analyse and open it a bit? How does it differ/add from power/weight; watts/kg? If you do not have that natural affinity, then how do you improve it by doping? How does that climbing affinity doping differ from doping for TT?

 

[blackcat]

What an earth is this natural affinity for climbing? Can you please analyse and open it a bit? How does it differ/add from power/weight; watts/kg? If you do not have that natural affinity, then how do you improve it by doping? How does that climbing affinity doping differ from doping for TT?

Phinney is a wunderkind, but he climbs like Hincapie did. Prior to the O2 vector drugs/techniques, the GT riders would show themselves very early, they could climb. If you could not climb, you could not win a GT.

Cavendish tests crap in the lab, he just happens to be the fastest in the sport, sometimes, the fastest is the one who does best on the damn road, not in the lab. And you can tell the climbers, they weigh nothing also. The O2 drugs allowed riders like Riis and Armstrong, to either blow away the pure grimpeurs, or defend in the mountains.

If you want a physiologist's assessment, go elsewhere. If you want a pro-US agenda, go to the main forum. If you want a layperson on science, but a reasonably informed opinion on the last decade, I can suffice.

cheers

did BigBoat get banned?