• 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 @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Quintana??

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 8, 2009
837
0
0
Visit site
Re:

red_flanders said:
It's beating many top times from the supposedly "most doped" pre 50% limit era. Leblanc, Rominger, Indurain, Tonkov, Zülle, etc. Right in with Riis, Guerini, Sastre.

Back of the envelope, 13.8km @ 8% = 1104m, VAM = 1683m/h, P [DrF] = 6.01W/kg (gradient factor 2.8)

5.9 W/kg on PSM to 6W/kg on AdH - red flag?

Disclaimer: calculation may be psuedoscience
 
people forget that quintana is a natural climber while froome is not

QUINTANA IS A PRODUCT OF DARWIN
THE CLIMBERS MADE IT OVER THE BIG MOUNTAINS AND THEREFORE ARE GENETIC GODS
WHILE THE OTHERS DIED
 
Apr 7, 2015
656
0
0
Visit site
Re:

FroomehasneverdopedX said:
people forget that quintana is a natural climber while froome is not

QUINTANA IS A PRODUCT OF DARWIN
THE CLIMBERS MADE IT OVER THE BIG MOUNTAINS AND THEREFORE ARE GENETIC GODS
WHILE THE OTHERS DIED
Froome crossed a dessert in sand shoes...
 
With DrF's formula:

Froome on PSM: 40'54'' @ 6.09 W/kg (59'' and 1'04'' to the next two riders)

Quintana on AdH: 39'22'' @ 6.07 W/kg (1'20'' to the next two riders)

Given the context of the performances, Quintana's was more impressive (if the numbers are correct)
 
Re: Re:

Rackham said:
carton said:
Benotti69 said:
New generation...........where????????????
Oh, can it. Whatever they're doing now is clearly less than the were doing ten years ago. On a short stage,one guy went faster than 40:30.

In 2003's first mountain stage, Iban Mayo won the Alpe D'Huez stage with a climb of 39:08, Armstrong was 02:12 behind, i.e. his ascent time was over 41:00. Both were on the juice.

There's no visible difference now, IMO.

This. All day long.
 
Apr 5, 2015
165
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Netserk said:
With DrF's formula:

Froome on PSM: 40'54'' @ 6.09 W/kg (59'' and 1'04'' to the next two riders)

Quintana on AdH: 39'22'' @ 6.07 W/kg (1'20'' to the next two riders)

Given the context of the performances, Quintana's was more impressive (if the numbers are correct)

Also, Quintana was stage 20 as opposed to 10, with no mouintain stages prior to Froome's PSM climb.
6,07w/kg is clearly a borderline performace.
 
Jul 7, 2014
149
0
0
Visit site
Gung Ho Gun said:
difdauf said:
Armstrong was hiding most of the race. Lot of his ascent times are irrelevant.
Hiding? He won quite a lot of stages :confused:

Yeah taking 30 seconds on the last 3 kilometers, just what he needed. Most of mountain stages in Armstrong era are Armstrong following the second in GC without effort. In Alpes d'Huez 2003, he just followed Beloki until Beloki stopped to try. Even Vinokourov climbed faster than Armstrong that day, nice joke.
 
Re:

SeriousSam said:
It's a bit quicker than Sastre in 08 and to find someone better, you have to go back to 2006.

The great natural climber Andres Klöden was almost a minute quicker then.

And we all know no-one doped in 2008 ;) That said, I think Sastre's win was one of the more believable ones in recent memory, so when Quintana is 8 seconds faster, it doesn't immediately scream doping to me.

I'm not foolish, the chance that Quintana dopes is very real, and probably (much) bigger than 50%. It should be known though that he comes from the team of Saldarriaga (https://twitter.com/Saldatraining), who might be the the most outspoken anti-doping guy in the peloton. He's currently starting up this team: http://manzanapostobonteam.com.

Quintana himself said he was tested 5 times in the run-up to the Tour in Colombia. Of course, there's no way to check that.

Speaking for myself, I care less about possible doping when someone looks to be in his natural habitat. That's a completely subjective point of view and most likely wrong, but hey, we all have a reason to watch sports and cycling despite all the lying and cheating.
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
3
0
Visit site
I think the Alpe MTT showed us that Armstrong was extraordinarily strong. Right there with the EPO era greats.

If you look at his record, no one has consistently dominated both climbs and time trials like Armstrong. It's an absurd record. He was top 3 in every ITT for 7 straight years. He won most of them. He won countless MTFs.
 
difdauf said:
Gung Ho Gun said:
difdauf said:
Armstrong was hiding most of the race. Lot of his ascent times are irrelevant.
Hiding? He won quite a lot of stages :confused:

Yeah taking 30 seconds on the last 3 kilometers, just what he needed. Most of mountain stages in Armstrong era are Armstrong following the second in GC without effort. In Alpes d'Huez 2003, he just followed Beloki until Beloki stopped to try. Even Vinokourov climbed faster than Armstrong that day, nice joke.

2003 was by far Armstrong's weakest year, it's not really comparable to 2000 or 2004 for example.
 
Re:

FroomehasneverdopedX said:
people forget that quintana is a natural climber while froome is not

QUINTANA IS A PRODUCT OF DARWIN
THE CLIMBERS MADE IT OVER THE BIG MOUNTAINS AND THEREFORE ARE GENETIC GODS
WHILE THE OTHERS DIED

Yes Quintana's ancestors are a product of natural selection over thousands of years. Their ability to cycle over mountains meant they could successfully breed more often.

Meanwhile back in the real world the bicycle was invented roughly 200 years ago.
 
Arnout said:
difdauf said:
Gung Ho Gun said:
difdauf said:
Armstrong was hiding most of the race. Lot of his ascent times are irrelevant.
Hiding? He won quite a lot of stages :confused:

Yeah taking 30 seconds on the last 3 kilometers, just what he needed. Most of mountain stages in Armstrong era are Armstrong following the second in GC without effort. In Alpes d'Huez 2003, he just followed Beloki until Beloki stopped to try. Even Vinokourov climbed faster than Armstrong that day, nice joke.

2003 was by far Armstrong's weakest year, it's not really comparable to 2000 or 2004 for example.

In 2001, when he attacked completely and destroyed a fully doped peloton, when he was on the full Ferrari program, he took 17 seconds out of Quintana's time today. 17 seconds. Quintana beats everyone else's time on that day by a significant margin. All those guys, great climbers and big champions every one of them, on full programs.

Sure. He's clean. Come on, people, get some perspective and enjoy the race for what it is. Stop trying to find a way to make it clean. It's not.
 
Re:

roundabout said:
More like 1 minute 17 seconds.

Of course you're right, my bad. Still takes second that day against a doped peloton.

2001 results:

1. Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal Service 6.23.47 (32.67 km/h)
2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) Telekom 1.59
3 Joseba Beloki (Spa) ONCE-Eroski 2.09
4 Christophe Moreau (Fra) Festina 2.30
5 Oscar Sevilla (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 2.54
6 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) iBanesto.com 4.01
7 Laurent Roux (Fra) Jean Delatour 4.03
8 Igor Gonzalez De Galdeano (Spa) ONCE-Eroski
9 Roberto Laiseka (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi
10 Leonardo Piepoli (Ita) iBanesto.com 4.07
11 Michael Boogerd (Ned) Rabobank 4.37
12 Andrei Kivilev (Kaz) Cofidis 4.39
13 Santiago Botero (Col) Kelme-Costa Blanca 5.07
14 Sven Montgomery (Swi) Française Des Jeux 5.09
15 Didier Rous (Fra) Bonjour 6.18
16 Axel Merckx (Bel) Domo-Farm Frites
17 Marcos Serrano (Spa) ONCE-Eroski
18 Wladimir Belli (Ita) Fassa Bortolo
19 Guennadi Mikhailov (Rus) Lotto-Adecco 7.05
20 Stefano Garzelli (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step 7.54

Not trying to compare the day's tactics, but also not how much later in the race today's stage was than this one.
 
Jul 7, 2014
149
0
0
Visit site
red_flanders said:
Arnout said:
difdauf said:
Gung Ho Gun said:
difdauf said:
Armstrong was hiding most of the race. Lot of his ascent times are irrelevant.
Hiding? He won quite a lot of stages :confused:

Yeah taking 30 seconds on the last 3 kilometers, just what he needed. Most of mountain stages in Armstrong era are Armstrong following the second in GC without effort. In Alpes d'Huez 2003, he just followed Beloki until Beloki stopped to try. Even Vinokourov climbed faster than Armstrong that day, nice joke.

2003 was by far Armstrong's weakest year, it's not really comparable to 2000 or 2004 for example.

In 2001, when he attacked completely and destroyed a fully doped peloton, when he was on the full Ferrari program, he took 17 seconds out of Quintana's time today. 17 seconds. Quintana beats everyone else's time on that day by a significant margin. All those guys, great climbers and big champions every one of them, on full programs.

Sure. He's clean. Come on, people, get some perspective and enjoy the race for what it is. Stop trying to find a way to make it clean. It's not.

I don't say quintana is clean. You just can't take Armstrong times as an example of what is humanly impossible when he is not even trying.
 
difdauf said:
I don't say quintana is clean. You just can't take Armstrong times as an example of what is humanly impossible when he is not even trying.

Did someone do that? If so I missed it. What I did was post the top 100 times up that mountain. I struggle to find one person who wasn't on a full program in that list. Maybe a case could be made for 1-3 of the times. Out of 100. Maybe in the wildest dreams of clean there 5. That's 95% doped times on the list. Also note that as someone mentioned, many of those are fully doped TT times (2004).

That's all. Draw your own conclusions, but to me that's amazing.

Everyone in the yellow jersey group and faster today comes in nearer the top of that list than the bottom...on the second to last day of the Tour. After 3 weeks. And we're supposed to believe, according to some, that this is normal human evolution. Sorry, I don't buy it, not even remotely.

I think the whole "humanly possible" line of discussion is a huge joke, and the list of riders/times up the Alpe is a perfect example of why. Almost every one of the top 100 times, and quite likely every single one was posted by a doped rider, a doped top-level, champion rider on EPO, blood bags on who knows what else. And some of them aren't within shouting distance of "what's humanly possible", but we know for a fact those are doped times. As such, it puts how ridiculous the bar of "what's humanly possible" is for determining if someone is doped. It's as close to meaningless as can be.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
roundabout said:
In 2001 he went pretty much straight from the bottom. I would say that he was trying.

On stage 10, IIRC the first day in the mountains. Today was stage 20, the last day in the mountains.
Yeah, but they had almost 6 hours of racing in their legs when they started the climb and Telekom went hard on Madeleine and Glandon.

And we often see as strong if not stronger performances in the third week as we see in the first, so it doesn't really mean all that much.
 
red_flanders said:
In 2001, when he attacked completely and destroyed a fully doped peloton, when he was on the full Ferrari program, he took 17 seconds out of Quintana's time today. 17 seconds. Quintana beats everyone else's time on that day by a significant margin. All those guys, great climbers and big champions every one of them, on full programs.

Sure. He's clean. Come on, people, get some perspective and enjoy the race for what it is. Stop trying to find a way to make it clean. It's not.
I don't know if he's clean or not. I was not handed out the gift of omniscience that god has so graciously bestowed unto you. As was said while I was typing I don't see anyone defending him as clean. All I see some people saying is that the times do look cleaner.

As was also just said, Armstrong actually took 1:17 out of Quintana's time (39:22-38:05, you may have your omniscience but I have my 'rithmetic). That was the famous "bluff" stage, were a ridiculously hard tempo was set all day. That day was also 209km and included the Madelaine as well as CdF, and started with a Cat 3 700vm drag up to Col du Frene. Armstrong attacked at the base of the climb with Rubiera, and was by his lonesome 2km in. Honest question: do you think boy wonder really needed less help doing that than Nairo did for his performance today?
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
roundabout said:
In 2001 he went pretty much straight from the bottom. I would say that he was trying.

On stage 10, IIRC the first day in the mountains. Today was stage 20, the last day in the mountains.

Yeah that was the first big mountain stage in 2001.

I was merely replying to a suggestion that Armstrong rarely went all out.

Of the ascents in the BP era only Sastre and Rodriguez have climbed within 1 minute of Quintana's time from today even if circumstances were different for all 4 climbs.