Power Outputs Contador & Wiggins

[Krebs cycle]

whoops I actually made a mistake, I was thinking about 95% HRmax that could be sustained for 20min, not VO2max. LT is usually 80-85% VO2max so if we assume that Contador has a super high threshold of 90% (ie: his threshold VO2 is 85-90 lm/kg/min), then VO2max would be roughly somwhere between 94-100 lm/kg/min. Ok that is getting somewhat ridiculous.

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

hmmm, I remember hearing about that test and there was quite a lot of questioning that went on amongst the Aussie sport science circles. I'm not convinced that there was not some error on that day. Stuart OGrady's brother who was a well trained cyclist aswell had a VO2max of around 75 ml/kg. I find it highly unlikely that such a massive difference would exist between siblings.

 

[Parrot23]

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.

Agree on Wiggins' pedigree.

But there is one slight "detail" conveniently being overlooked, and this is the crux of the argument: Wiggo has dropped many kilograms compared with the past. This is the joker in the pack. On a single mountain stage (non-consecutive days), we have to prove that he has dropped more, or nearly as much, watts as kilos. Highly unlikely.

And there's another "detail". He was dropped yesterday on a second day in the mountains, consistent with the expected behaviour of GT newbie, whatever the absolute size of his engine/kgs on a single day when relatively fresh. Same in Giro, though there he's said to have backed off voluntarily (probably a forced choice!).

There's probably also an element of GT snobbery in the attitude to Wiggo: "GT's are where the 'men' play; we follow GTs and ride on the road; how dare an interloper make any claims here?" Exactly the same thing happens on forums: new posters are typically regarded as newbies to cycling. A logical and empirical fallacy (a non-sequitur) and a common mistake by veteran posters. Some reign with a sort of patronage surveying their props, noticing outsiders coming in, with a strong need to keep all their marbles lined up and to "nose around" putative newbies.

It's the same with Wiggo, an outsider. Wiggo himself talks about the Schlecks having their undies in a knot because he was there on some of the climbs, as in, "Get out of here; we own this". Sorta like Iron men triathlon guys looking down at the shorter distance triathletes.

 

[Bala Verde]

But there is one slight "detail" conveniently being overlooked, and this is the crux of the argument: Wiggo has dropped many kilograms compared with the past. This is the joker in the pack. On a single mountain stage (non-consecutive days), we have to prove that he has dropped more, or nearly as much, watts as kilos. Highly unlikely.

I was thinking about his weight. He was a rather well trained athlete before he shifted his focus to the road, I am assuming based on his results.

Now what is the assumption, that he dropped between 5-7 kgs, is that what is rumoured? He started shedding kilos right after the Olympics (track 15-19 August 2008), so he lost those kilos in what, about 9 months when he started the Giro, and which I assume, was his first test.

On the other hand, someone posted a picture of Wiggins (#38, GAR) in this years P-R, where he looked like he had already achieved the weight loss, that was April 12, 7 months after the Olympics.

What I was wondering was how a well trained athlete loses so much (relatively) weight (7.5-10% of his original weight) in so few months while not losing much of his muscles/power output. Was he that chubby as a track racer, that he could lose 5-7 kgs, being 100% fat? Or did he lose a combination, ie 2.5kg fat and 2.5kg muscles (etc)? And if it's muscles, how would they lose 'torso' muscles over leg muscles. In other words, is it physically possible to target your triceps to reduce in size, while not reducing your glutenus maximus, taken aforementioned time frame into account?

Theo Bos, different category obviously, is now only on the CT team, he lost weight, but still gets dropped on shorter hills, which means he can't even get to show off his sprinting prowess. I think they hope to have him ready to be competitive on the road in 2 years (since he moved to the road). If weight loss alone would be the sole criteria, why would it take so long for him to become competitive at the highest level? Granted, he was never 'part time' active on the road, like Wiggins was. Could that make all the difference?

 

[TRDean]

I was thinking about his weight. He was a rather well trained athlete before he shifted his focus to the road, I am assuming based on his results.

Now what is the assumption, that he dropped between 5-7 kgs, is that what is rumoured? He started shedding kilos right after the Olympics (track 15-19 August 2008), so he lost those kilos in what, about 9 months when he started the Giro, and which I assume, was his first test.

On the other hand, someone posted a picture of Wiggins (#38, GAR) in this years P-R, where he looked like he had already achieved the weight loss, that was April 12, 7 months after the Olympics.

What I was wondering was how a well trained athlete loses so much (relatively) weight (7.5-10% of his original weight) in so few months while not losing much of his muscles/power output. Was he that chubby as a track racer, that he could lose 5-7 kgs, being 100% fat? Or did he lose a combination, ie 2.5kg fat and 2.5kg muscles (etc)? And if it's muscles, how would they lose 'torso' muscles over leg muscles. In other words, is it physically possible to target your triceps to reduce in size, while not reducing your glutenus maximus, taken aforementioned time frame into account?

Theo Bos, different category obviously, is now only on the CT team, he lost weight, but still gets dropped on shorter hills, which means he can't even get to show off his sprinting prowess. I think they hope to have him ready to be competitive on the road in 2 years (since he moved to the road). If weight loss alone would be the sole criteria, why would it take so long for him to become competitive at the highest level? Granted, he was never 'part time' active on the road, like Wiggins was. Could that make all the difference?

Those are great questions Bala!!! I would like to hear responses to them as well. I think the weight loss is very substantial...meaning that it is a heck of a lot of weight to loose in a highly trained athlete!! One other thing that jumps out at me is the immediate success in the big tours. I would be less skeptical if I had seen an improvement over time...but to go from a pursuit guy on the track (world class none the less) to climbing in the grand tours with the best climbers so quickly is rather shocking!! I'm not saying he is doing anything illegal...just that it is very fast.

 

[LugHugger]

I was thinking about his weight. He was a rather well trained athlete before he shifted his focus to the road, I am assuming based on his results.

Now what is the assumption, that he dropped between 5-7 kgs, is that what is rumoured? He started shedding kilos right after the Olympics (track 15-19 August 2008), so he lost those kilos in what, about 9 months when he started the Giro, and which I assume, was his first test.

Actually, the rumoured weight loss of 7kgs was up to the start of the Giro. Apparently, Wiggins has lost another 3kgs since the end of may

On the other hand, someone posted a picture of Wiggins (#38, GAR) in this years P-R, where he looked like he had already achieved the weight loss, that was April 12, 7 months after the Olympics.

Some of the weight loss had been acheived by then, I'm sure, but not all

What I was wondering was how a well trained athlete loses so much (relatively) weight (7.5-10% of his original weight) in so few months while not losing much of his muscles/power output. Was he that chubby as a track racer, that he could lose 5-7 kgs, being 100% fat? Or did he lose a combination, ie 2.5kg fat and 2.5kg muscles (etc)? And if it's muscles, how would they lose 'torso' muscles over leg muscles. In other words, is it physically possible to target your triceps to reduce in size, while not reducing your glutenus maximus, taken aforementioned time frame into account?

Sorry, I haven't a clue!

Theo Bos, different category obviously, is now only on the CT team, he lost weight, but still gets dropped on shorter hills, which means he can't even get to show off his sprinting prowess. I think they hope to have him ready to be competitive on the road in 2 years (since he moved to the road). If weight loss alone would be the sole criteria, why would it take so long for him to become competitive at the highest level? Granted, he was never 'part time' active on the road, like Wiggins was. Could that make all the difference?

I don't think that you can compare Theo Bos with Bradley Wiggins. You can compare Bos with Cavendish if you like

@ Bala, wouldn't you expect to see a significant jump in performance given the comparative weight to power changes as a result of the <kgs?

Now, I'm no expert in physiology admittedly and I'm happy to be put straight but Wiggins is a world class track athlete with no previous, if you catch my drift. I accept that Wiggins may to some people have come out of 'nowhere ' to be an apparent contender but it is worth consideration that his improvements may be genuine.

 

[Escarabajo]

I was thinking about his weight. He was a rather well trained athlete before he shifted his focus to the road, I am assuming based on his results.

Now what is the assumption, that he dropped between 5-7 kgs, is that what is rumoured? He started shedding kilos right after the Olympics (track 15-19 August 2008), so he lost those kilos in what, about 9 months when he started the Giro, and which I assume, was his first test.

On the other hand, someone posted a picture of Wiggins (#38, GAR) in this years P-R, where he looked like he had already achieved the weight loss, that was April 12, 7 months after the Olympics.

What I was wondering was how a well trained athlete loses so much (relatively) weight (7.5-10% of his original weight) in so few months while not losing much of his muscles/power output. Was he that chubby as a track racer, that he could lose 5-7 kgs, being 100% fat? Or did he lose a combination, ie 2.5kg fat and 2.5kg muscles (etc)? And if it's muscles, how would they lose 'torso' muscles over leg muscles. In other words, is it physically possible to target your triceps to reduce in size, while not reducing your glutenus maximus, taken aforementioned time frame into account?

Theo Bos, different category obviously, is now only on the CT team, he lost weight, but still gets dropped on shorter hills, which means he can't even get to show off his sprinting prowess. I think they hope to have him ready to be competitive on the road in 2 years (since he moved to the road). If weight loss alone would be the sole criteria, why would it take so long for him to become competitive at the highest level? Granted, he was never 'part time' active on the road, like Wiggins was. Could that make all the difference?

Nice comments Bala.

Personally, I don't see that Wiggins is that thin in this tour. Not 71 Kg. Again I am saying this just by looking at the TV shots. Don't they get the medical test at the begining where they check the weight? I heard they got rid of the medical, is that so? Why does the Tour de France have him listed at 76 kg? A mean where did they get this weight from?

 

[Krebs cycle]

What I was wondering was how a well trained athlete loses so much (relatively) weight (7.5-10% of his original weight) in so few months while not losing much of his muscles/power output. Was he that chubby as a track racer, that he could lose 5-7 kgs, being 100% fat? Or did he lose a combination, ie 2.5kg fat and 2.5kg muscles (etc)? And if it's muscles, how would they lose 'torso' muscles over leg muscles. In other words, is it physically possible to target your triceps to reduce in size, while not reducing your glutenus maximus, taken aforementioned time frame into account?

It is very difficult to loose a lot of weight and maintain absolute power. Cadel tried this approach mid way through his world cup mtb career and he went from about 66-67kg down to about 62-63kg over a period of at least 6 months (I think it was more like 8 or 9 though). He lost absolute power but managed to slightly increase w/kg.

If Wiggins has lost upwards of 5-7kg in less than 4 or 5 months, then it is nigh on impossible that he has been able to maintain his absolute power at what it would have been during the olympics. He must have lost some muscle mass. You don't become a world class pursuit rider with an excess of 5kgs bodyfat waiting to be lost when you decide to ride a GT!!

 

[Parrot23]

On the other hand, someone posted a picture of Wiggins (#38, GAR) in this years P-R, where he looked like he had already achieved the weight loss, that was April 12, 7 months after the Olympics.

What I was wondering was how a well trained athlete loses so much (relatively) weight (7.5-10% of his original weight) in so few months while not losing much of his muscles/power output.

On the hills, it's the differential that will count. If's he's lost 5% power, he still has +3-5% increase in watts/kg to play. That must be what we're seeing.

...And if it's muscles, how would they lose 'torso' muscles over leg muscles. In other words, is it physically possible to target your triceps to reduce in size, while not reducing your glutenus maximus, taken aforementioned time frame into account?

...Granted, he was never 'part time' active on the road, like Wiggins was. Could that make all the difference?

Good points, Bala. It is odd to lose so much, but I still think plausible.

He had his best classics season ever; was competitive (can't remember the results, but he was there; could see him there always on CyclingTV, etc). So he can't have lost a large chunks of power (Wiggo himself says he's lost some of the top-end power with the weight loss; think the words he used is his power "has come off a little bit", or something like that).

Aldag is not in the least suprised by Wiggo at Tour (hardly the kind of guy to stick his head in the sand):

""I saw the big potential in him, we saw his SRM files," continued Aldag. "It's not a big surprise he's doing so well here. We have his files from the [2008] Giro team time trial and the wattage he posted there, it's incredible. He was incredibly strong. You see that number, you see he's tall and skinny, and he loses six more kilograms… it's just a question of his ambition."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aldag-were-not-here-to-have-fun?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=news_headlines

This sure says something given Pinotti, Grabsch etc. are there at Columbia; also considering the context of a hostile interview, with Aldag pointedly rebutting Wiggo's claim that Columbia was too regimented.

On targeting, as he's still training intensively, the muscle he's going to lose is superfluous muscle first and any latent body fat. The glutes/legs will go last. I don't know the mechanisms, but the other/superfluous muscle will be catabolized first (arms, etc.); otherwise, the "exercise"/training effect principle goes out the window. There's no need for targeting; the body will do it on autopilot, catabolizing latent tissue/muscle first. New York Times interviewer etc. comments on his twig-like arms for a general audience.

I don't follow Theo B., so can't comment on him.

The problem with Wiggo is that he's always been a dilettante (guitar playing, droll sixties, laid back kind of guy, a kind of "inverse Armstrong"): a foot in many pools. In this sense, he is very unlike Boardman too. He even writes that his track success came a little too easy at first, as it were, creating problems for him. He's had his foot in the road pool for a quite a while, just not two feet fully focused (per Aldag comment above on his iffy ambition/focus). Columbia might have seen him as a bit of a slacker; re Wiggo implies they were uptight, etc.

Maybe weight loss shows he must be fully committed to road now. Let's hope! We need some more competition. Think all of us cycling fans will agree on that.

 

[_frost]

Theo Bos, different category obviously, is now only on the CT team, he lost weight, but still gets dropped on shorter hills, which means he can't even get to show off his sprinting prowess. I think they hope to have him ready to be competitive on the road in 2 years (since he moved to the road). If weight loss alone would be the sole criteria, why would it take so long for him to become competitive at the highest level? Granted, he was never 'part time' active on the road, like Wiggins was. Could that make all the difference?

If you are comparing a sprinter (limiting factors leg strength/maximun power/anaerobic capacity) and a pursuiter/track enduro (limiting factors maximum aerobic power and anaerobic capacity and lactate threshold (exactly the same as on the road with a different emphasizes)) it only tells that you have absolutely no glue of the cycling or endurance sports physiology.

 

[TRDean]

If you are comparing a sprinter (limiting factors leg strength/maximun power/anaerobic capacity) and a pursuiter/track enduro (limiting factors maximum aerobic power and anaerobic capacity and lactate threshold (exactly the same as on the road with a different emphasizes)) it only tells that you have absolutely no glue of the cycling or endurance sports physiology.

the aerobic capacity/lactate threshold is not the same buddy!! Get a clue before making idiotic comments!!

 

[LugHugger]

the aerobic capacity/lactate threshold is not the same buddy!! Get a clue before making idiotic comments!!

It's still a flawed comparison though

 

[TRDean]

It's still a flawed comparison though

It is, however, the tone of the guys post sounded like he went to the Cavendish school of communication.

 

[Bala Verde]

Before this turns into a flame fest, I have noticed that I will have to clarify my statemen re Bos:

1) I admitted it was a different case sprinter v. pursuit
2) I admitted that Bos hadn't competed on the road (unless you count his junior years) like Wiggins (FDJ, CA, COF 2002-2007; part time)
3) I never compared Bos to Wiggins in terms of being a potential GC contender/TT specialist/Climber. Nowhere, nada, nothing.

If you read the last paragraph in context of the entire post, you would, hopefully, have been able to infer that I intended to say:

1) Bos is estimated to become competitive as a road sprinter at the highest (ie Cavendish/Freire/Hushovd/Farrar) level in 2 years (which seems a rather fast transition).
2) Bos shed weight, and he gets dropped on minor hills regardless of his weightloss in 'only' a CT field. Therefore the prediction is, if all goes well, that he will only become competitive in 2 years. Conclusion, he needs time to adapt to the higher speeds for a longer amount of time, to just hang with the pack, while I think it also demonstrates that weightloss is not a 'miracle recipe.

My question therefore was wether it is somewhat realistic/possible to expect Wiggins to be a world class GC contender, while coming from the track only 9 months ago and focus solely on the road, while others - Bos - coming from the track are estimated to need at least 2 years to adapt and become competitive at the highest level in his specific type of specialisation (TT/GC/Climbing vs Sprinting).

I also mentioned, and will do it again, that Wiggins has been riding with the pros - part time 5 years - for a longer amount of time than Bos, and I wondered if that is the reason for him being so competitive 'in a mere 9 months' as opposed to going through a full time 2 year training/adaptation phase.

In other words, would those 5 years part time be equivalent to a 2 years full time transition time that are supposed to lay the foundation to ride with the pros at the highest level and demonstrate their specific skills (climbing/TT v sprinting)

I am just curious, that's why I presented a number of questions that would ideally feed a discussion.

In that respect, I am still hoping some will continue the discussion re the themes of 'weight loss/power loss maintenance/time frame' I raised.

 

[LugHugger]

fair enough, bala. i think introducing bos into the discussion threw a few people

it's worth considering that whilst wiggins had spent the last few years with a foot in both camps, he was still in a full competitive track programme over each winter between road seasons. clearly, this would have impacted on his road performances what with the additional muscle mass required for the track. imo, wiggins never attempted to lose this mass during his abbreviated road season in order to maintain his WC/Olympic competitiveness.

he's lost some muscle mass and body mass resulting in improved GC results, so i guess that the answer to your question is, yes, it is seems that you can make the transition relatively quickly. whether there is anything else assisting his progress, i guess we'll have to wait and see....

 

[Parrot23]

Wiggins' splits in TT today seems to indicate he has lost absolute power on flat, as his relative performance on the climbing part (wattts/kg) was better than the flat.

But then again, maybe he just went out way too fast today. Hard to tell.

Edit: Escarabajo/Izoard, I was just going to add that Wiggins may be suffering cumulative GT fatigue more than regular GT riders. Also makes his results more credible.

 

[Escarabajo]

Time Trial Power Outputs

I have some results from the Time Trial:

Wiggins: 416 W (5.86 W/kg) - 5.8% decrease in performance
Contador: 404 W (6.63 W/kg) - 2.6 % decrease in performance

Judging by the W/kg measurements we can see that recuperation has been a big key in this TT. Looks like Contador recuperated better than Wiggins. The reference in performance was taken from an adjusted power values from Verbier. This was done because of wind aid during that Stage. These numbers were 6.8 W/kg for Contador and 6.2 W/kg for Wiggins.

If somebody can give me some information about the wind conditions during the Time Trial, then I can update these values.
Thanks.

 

[Izoard]

Wiggins' splits in TT today seems to indicate he has lost absolute power on flat, as his relative performance on the climbing part (wattts/kg) was better than the flat.

But then again, maybe he just went out way too fast today. Hard to tell.

He may have cracked, but if so, likely influenced from yesterday's fun! IMHO reduced power on the flats, reduced ability to recover, and improved climbing are all plausible as the result of weight loss. In a way, glad to see it, as it makes it believable for me.

 

[Parrot23]

Wiggins packs on the pounds for a try at the heavyweight title....

And Contador considers a Jenny Craig diet:

 

[Bala Verde]

Based on the results in Verbier, Greg Lemond also questions Contador's performance.

Comment expliquer une telle performance?

and

Selon les dernières données publiées par l'ancien entraîneur de Festina et spécialiste reconnu de la performance, Antoine Vayer, dans Libération, le coureur espagnol aurait eu besoin d'une VO2 max (consommation maximale d'oxygène) de 99,5ml / mn / kg pour produire cet effort.

Didn't know if this article had already been discussed...

 

[Escarabajo]

Based on the results in Verbier, Greg Lemond also questions Contador's performance.



and



Didn't know if this article had already been discussed...

No. thanks for the Info.

 

[_frost]

the aerobic capacity/lactate threshold is not the same buddy!! Get a clue before making idiotic comments!!

I didn't say they are the same, I was listing physiological properties required for a sprint vs. pursuit/track endurance "maximum aerobic capacity and lactate threshold".

You are very right about the bad tone though. Apologies to Bala Verde!

 

[Bala Verde]

Apologies to Bala Verde!

apologies accepted

 

[BigBoat]

If you think Wiggins is doping then that blows a massive hole in the Garmin and British Cycling no doping approach. For once, and not just because he's British I'm prepared to believe in a rider transforming himself. Bradley is a pursuiter which is the most flexible type of rider, he's lost significant amounts of weight and this is the first year he has ever concentrated on the road. I bet he will never win the pursuit title again.

Hey Tim,

There's NO WAY IN HELL;; Wiggins has been clean. He is a "stove" in cycling speak. 76-77 kg. Its just "my opinion" that You cannot humanly get better than about 430-440 watts for 20 minutes without dope NO MATTER how much you weigh in at. Many dont accept or understand this and its my opinion. Wiggins did finish below 100th in his previous grand Tours and was hours behind the leading autologous blood doped riders. Its my opinion that he was doped for those Tours to some degree as well with recovery products like HGH and Synacthen depot, insulin, corticoids that most top cyclists have easy access to.

Their all on something when their at the top, its my opinion. Their not all blood doped with their own blood and using special 02 carriers like ER blood substitutes though and that is what allows the top dogs to really motor away and get 30-40 minutes ahead on super hard mountain stages. The difference between being blood doped and not is like the difference between 50-75 places and winning the Tour de France and becoming famous. Its like getting their name drawn in stone in Hollywood. Thats just my opinion from what I've witnessed in cycling and what the general public and media had the opportunity to see in Operation Puerto.

Cheers,

 

[131313]

Hey Tim,

There's NO WAY IN HELL;; Wiggins has been clean. He is a "stove" in cycling speak. 76-77 kg.

I've talked directly to people who've seen him standing on the scale (which he has to do every day). He's about 71 kg.

Its just "my opinion" that You cannot humanly get better than about 430-440 watts for 20 minutes without dope NO MATTER how much you weigh in at. Many dont accept or understand this and its my opinion.

the problem is that your 'opinion' is also an accusation, it's not based on scientific reality (which I've clearly explained and you chose to ignore) and is conflicted by a lot of direct evidence, much of which I've seen with my own two eyes. I have had amateur teammates doing over that wattage for twenty minutes. They're both very large riders.

Wiggins did finish below 100th in his previous grand Tours and was hours behind the leading autologous blood doped riders. Its my opinion that he was doped for those Tours to some degree as well with recovery products like HGH and Synacthen depot, insulin, corticoids that most top cyclists have easy access to.

Again, your 'opinion' is a libelous allegation based on absolutely zero direct information or evidence. His past GC results mean absolutely nothing, since he wasn't racing for the GC. You can't be that ignorant of how bike racing works, right??

Look, I've seen guys shoot up in hotel rooms and deliver prologue performances that boggle the mind, I've had people who post on this very forum steal prize money out of my own f#$%ing pocket, then get busted.

There are some guys out there at the top level of the sport who are competing clean. Some of these guys are current or former teammates of mine, guys you've slandered as being dirty based simply on your own doping experience, and with no direct knowledge. Stop talking out of your a s s.

 

[wiggintona]

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 link to Ashendens interview reveals a couple of things:

1) He did not do the testing and relied on the tester to tell him what he did. He then said he believed him.... so what !! Do you think the tester is going to say that he did something wrong.

2) The timeline when the reporter got the rider codes and names and the testing has not been nailed down so we don't know if it was possible to fix the test.

3) Ashenden claims it would be almost impossible to spike the sample properly so that the results seemed plausible. But he offers no proof of that.

4) Since the half life of the Synth.EPO is 3 to 4 days why did more of the 13 samples not show some evidence of EPO.

Trust no one son, especially axe grinders