The Chris Squared Thread

[thehog]

These are the Vetooo (more or less) relevant Angliru tweets I could find:

https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/378935758792310784
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/379246454377701376
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/379247719790804993
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/379296222088945664
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/380100557496520704
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/380106281186373635
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/382227809466212352
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/382240842347343872

Is it correct that Horner never published his Angliru SRM?

Thanks.

I don't see anything revised by VeeToo. I'm not seeing 6.2 but maybe I'm missing something? Where did this figure come from?

Should note that the Ventoux stage was 220km lead in and Anrugila was 100km.

That's an extra 100km for Froome before be went a little crazy on the mountain.

Which puts Horner's climb into perspective vs. Froome on Ventoux.

I'm just not seeing Horner beating Froome on Tour vs Vuelta form, no matter how crude a comparison it is.

 

[Race Radio]

How about VAM?

Froome: Ax-3-Domaines 1,715

Horner: Peña Cabarga 2,034 (I have also seen 1,972)

Horner wins again

 

[thehog]

How about VAM?

Froome: Ax-3-Domaines 1,715

Horner: Peña Cabarga 2,034 (I have also seen 1,972)

Horner wins again

Reminds me a little or Coyle/Armstrong or Wall St 'seasonally adjusted figures' right about before the crash.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

How about VAM?

Froome: Ax-3-Domaines 1,715

Horner: Peña Cabarga 2,034 (I have also seen 1,972)

Horner wins again

I realise you're not actually trying to convince anyone, but picking "data" like this and posting it as "evidence" seems incredibly short sighted.

Date?
Race?
Stage in race?
Climb length?
Climb %?
Rider's role in race?

are major (imo) factors in determining equivalence between 2 different climbs for 2 climbers.

What you've posted is close enough to junk.

 

[Race Radio]

How about a link to the revised Horner analysis re: weight / 6.2?

Reminds me a little or Coyle/Armstrong or Wall St 'seasonally adjusted figures' right about before the crash.

I will ask Vetoo. He sent me a DM a couple days ago saying he posted it September 18th, but I don't see it.

What do you think Horner's weight is?

 

[Race Radio]

I realise you're not actually trying to convince anyone, but picking "data" like this and posting it as "evidence" seems incredibly short sighted.

Date?
Race?
Stage in race?
Climb length?
Climb %?
Rider's role in race?

are major (imo) factors in determining equivalence between 2 different climbs for 2 climbers.

What you've posted is close enough to junk.

what measurements do you prefer? What do calculation to you not qualify as junk?

I am not a huge fan of VAM, it is just another of many data points....but what do you feel is not junk?

Horner climbing 30 seconds faster on a 17 minute climb?
Horner climbing 1:40 faster on a 43 minute climb?
Various w/kg formulas that show Horner put out more w/g?

Share with us your calculations. I am sure they will be a more valid examples then a bunch of videos

 

[Race Radio]

I also think such a comparison is difficult since he probably have better access to recovery in Spain than in France.

That and the different routes make it hard to compare numbers from the two GTs IMO.

Access to recovery? what does that mean?

 

[thehog]

Here is a nice video

http://youtu.be/LIRIAinJo0E

Froome attacking everyone. Drops Cobo, Wiggins, Menchov. He set a new record on the climb (17:15) Extraterrestrial. As the commentator says "Wow, wow, wow, wow!"

Videos indeed.

Good for the goose.

what measurements do you prefer? What do calculation to you not qualify as junk?

I am sure they will be a more valid examples then a bunch of videos

Horner's weight revised is junk. Not real, nor actual or precise.

 

[zlev11]

if it's fair to compare times that Froome set in 2011 to times that Horner set in 2013 why isn't it fair compare Froome's 2013 times to Armstrongs 1999-2005 times?

Froome in 2011, while definitely not normal, was more normal than 2013 Froome. not to mention, his objective until halfway up Angliru was to work for Wiggins.

that said, let's compare anyway: if 2013 Horner was in the 2011 Vuelta, he still wouldn't have won, because he'd have lost around 3 minutes to Froome in the TT.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

It's not that hard:

Problem here is also, is Pinot really 64 kilo? At the end of a GT? Muchos impressive.

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily 15 september
///Recalculated/// #LaVuelta, Angliru (steepest 6.52 km, 13.35 %). Chris Horner ("63.5 kg"): 28:06, 13.92 Kph, VAM 1860 m/h, 6.15 W/kg [CPL]

AND:

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily 14 september
#LaVuelta, Angliru (12.80 km, 9.64 %, 1234 m). Chris Horner ("63.5 kg"): 43:07, 17.81 Kph, VAM 1717 m/h, 5.88 W/kg [CPL / "full drafting"].

 

[Ferminal]

The point being made RR is that the same rigour and revision is not being applied to Dawg vis a vis weight and comparisons with others SRMs, perhaps because the quoted figure of 5.88W/kg for Dawg during the final 15km of Mont Venteux is palpably incorrect.

Something is seriously amiss with this figure, and many are struggling to understand why you don't question it more.

It's because the 5.88 comes from Ferrari, so half a chance it's +/- 5%. A far greater uncertainty than the uncertain wind (let's not compound errors). Until Froome releases his SRM files it is pointless comparing estimations of his power to "actual" power from those who do release theirs. At least if you are comparing estimations of everyone using the same method the uncertainty is implicit.

 

[thehog]

It's not that hard:

Problem here is also, is Pinot really 64 kilo? At the end of a GT? Muchos impressive.

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily 15 september
///Recalculated/// #LaVuelta, Angliru (steepest 6.52 km, 13.35 %). Chris Horner ("63.5 kg"): 28:06, 13.92 Kph, VAM 1860 m/h, 6.15 W/kg [CPL]

AND:

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily 14 september
#LaVuelta, Angliru (12.80 km, 9.64 %, 1234 m). Chris Horner ("63.5 kg"): 43:07, 17.81 Kph, VAM 1717 m/h, 5.88 W/kg [CPL / "full drafting"].

The top figure is only for the steepest section not the entire climb - 28:06s for 6.52km.

It's not 6.15 W/kg for the entire climb.

The bottom figure (full drafting) is 5.88 W/kg for the entire climb, 12.80km.

Perhaps that's where RR made his error? Not sure.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

what measurements do you prefer? What do calculation to you not qualify as junk?

I am not a huge fan of VAM, it is just another of many data points....but what do you feel is not junk?

Horner climbing 30 seconds faster on a 17 minute climb?
Horner climbing 1:40 faster on a 43 minute climb?
Various w/kg formulas that show Horner put out more w/g?

Share with us your calculations. I am sure they will be a more valid examples then a bunch of videos

I don't mind VAM. But saying one rider did one VAM that is higher than another rider's VAM is not an apples to apples comparison.

Again in this post, you have time comparisons between 2 riders. But we know one is lighter than the other - they tend to go quicker uphill. We do not have relevant information about the race or stage the climb was conducted under though.

To compare apples to apples, all the relevant information for the data being compared needs to be known, otherwise it's more like a witchhunt.

 

[MartinGT]

Some Sky Fan Boi wrote into Cycling News saying he found Horners Vuelta win sceptical and then went on to bum Sky.

Thats my sub cancelled.

 

[the sceptic]

It's not that hard:

Problem here is also, is Pinot really 64 kilo? At the end of a GT? Muchos impressive.

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily 15 september
///Recalculated/// #LaVuelta, Angliru (steepest 6.52 km, 13.35 %). Chris Horner ("63.5 kg"): 28:06, 13.92 Kph, VAM 1860 m/h, 6.15 W/kg [CPL]

AND:

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily 14 september
#LaVuelta, Angliru (12.80 km, 9.64 %, 1234 m). Chris Horner ("63.5 kg"): 43:07, 17.81 Kph, VAM 1717 m/h, 5.88 W/kg [CPL / "full drafting"].

So Pinot did 6.0w/kg at Angliru at the end of a GT? Im calling bs on that. Where has he ever done close to something like that before?

 

[Race Radio]

Again in this post, you have time comparisons between 2 riders. But we know one is lighter than the other - they tend to go quicker uphill.

And that is my only point, that Horner at his peak is the faster climber. This is not a witch hunt, I just think the data supports that Horner at his peak is faster. He has several climbs where his times are significantly faster then Froome's and multiple formulas support it.

 

[thehog]

So Pinot did 6.0w/kg at Angliru at the end of a GT? Im calling bs on that. Where has he ever done close to something like that before?

It’s a fascinating discussion. And the forum is better for it.

And yes Pinot’s SRM brings Horner’s numbers into context. New-clean era of cycling? Hmmmm….

However; I tend to agree with Vaughters on this front.

Throwing single number datapoints out without context and or any support evidence/documentation or even a link tends to apportion a black mark on riders unfairly.

Now in saying that I believe both Horner and Froome are doping.

The 6.2 has not been validated (link?) and the 5.88 on Angliru was with full drafting whereas Froome on Ax3 went alone from around 5km and was into the wind all on his own. That is a very important point.

Horner rode smart, had the right gearing and drafted until the last 1.5km to the steepest section where drafting is not as beneficial.

Froome was able to ride away from a speeding front group all on his own.

This data and context is very important.

Throwing out a VAM number and saying “Horner wins” is valuable to no one and not a true reflection of event. Its faulty science to be honest. A six sigma blackbelt would throw their arms up in disgust at such analysis.

Further inspection if you look at someone like Porte on Ax3 his numbers would be well above Horner.

And with context that he was able to lead the front group (non-drafting) from 7/8km out, then shed the front group bar Froome and then attack again and finish 2nd shows that if one is looking for an overtly suspect performance then Porte more so than Horner deserves the finger pointed in his direction.

Massive red flag on Porte.

Similar to Froome on Angliru. He had to lead Wiggins up the entire climb whereas Horner did not.

These datapoints matter. Drafting is critical to analysis. If Horner saved himself 10-20% in drafting than say Froome and Porte that’s key.

Finally what I found most interesting across the board is that climbing times are well up in both the Vuelta and the Tour.

To me the cries of “clean cycling’ is really one of just perception and marketing. Rui Costa for example is climbing significantly faster than previous generations and he not even factoring in the GC.

Whilst only an opinion but my belief is that after Sky 2012, doping has come back to the peloton across the board. Its more sophisticated and subtle than previous generations. But there certainly has been a shift back to full scale systematic doping. No questions.

If Cookson is really going to create independent doping organization then he might be in for a shock. I’m sure he’s viewed the blood parameters levels from the passport and in my view independent doping organization is going nowhere. WADA is not the body to manage such a program, they can’t. So interested to see where it goes, if anywhere.

 

[Race Radio]

Horner's weight revised is junk. Not real, nor actual or precise.

I asked Vetoo how he came to his calculation, this is what he sent me

Angliru 12.86 km, 44 min 41 sec. Thibaut Pinot's SRM: 384.4 W / 65 kg = 5.91 W/kg.

Pinot was 1'23" slower compared to Horner.

SRM: 384.4 W. My estimation of Pinot's power output (w/o descent): 378.9 W (-1.43% compared to SRM)

My estimation of Horner's power output (w/o descent): 375.6 W | 375.6 x 1.0143 = 380.97 W | 380.97 W / 61 kg = 6.25 W/kg.

Hardly junk. I know that Pinot was not the only rider where he had SRM and weight for.

Regardless, I doubt this will change anything. It will be labeled as junk, called a witch hunt, then someone will talk about TT's

 

[Race Radio]

Angliru was with full drafting whereas Froome on Ax3 went alone from around 5km and was into the wind all on his own. That is a very important point.

To use your words, comparing a 43 minute climb with a 21 minute climb

is valuable to no one and not a true reflection of event. Its faulty science to be honest. A six sigma blackbelt would throw their arms up in disgust at such analysis.

This

Horner saved himself 10-20% in drafting than say Froome and Porte that’s key.

Is junk. Manipulated data at it's best.

As for this

if one is looking for an overtly suspect performance

As I have made clear over and over I am not making a claim on who is the bigger doper, nicer guy......just who can climb faster at peak form. The numbers I see support Horner being the faster climber. I have no idea who is the bigger doper


It is comical that so many posters here like to compare Froome's climbing times, W/kg, and VAM with Armstrong to support a case but the instant these calculations are compared with Horner they are dismissed these numbers as manipulated junk science.

 

[meat puppet]

in addtion to DW's post... where's airstream pointing out repeatedly that the tour is raced the hardest and this affects the numbers when the comment actually adds something.

IIRC vetooo posted the aggregated w/kg numbers of 2013 GT winners and TDF was 5,9 whereas the two others 5,8 or so. do correct me if I misremember, please.

if so I think it is plausible to assume that froome, quintana and probably Jrod too would have smoked the cowboy in the TDF climbs had he been there with the vuelta form

 

[thehog]

I asked Vetoo how he came to his calculation, this is what he sent me



Hardly junk. I know that Pinot was not the only rider where he had SRM and weight for.

Regardless, I doubt this will change anything. It will be labeled as junk, called a witch hunt, then someone will talk about TT's

Thanks.

It wasn't released publicly? Not fit for public consumption? That's ok - then it’s just an opinion. And in VeeToo's words - "estimation" based on 61kg.

That’s not Horner's "real" or "actual" weight.

Dradting is also a very important factor and VeeToo did add the words “FULL DRAFTING”.

No one is trygnig twist your words – or create nonsense. Just validate the numbers. That’s all.

I appreciate the data from Veetoo but all he has provided is an “estimation” on 61kg - privately – there’s no statement that this is “real” or a “recalculation”.

That’s important in the analysis.

 

[thehog]

To use your words, comparing a 43 minute climb with a 21 minute climb

This

Is junk. Manipulated data at it's best.

Sure. I don't disagree with you.

But I'm not trying to present categorically that Foome was faster than Horner and state “Horner wins”.

I've consistently stated Prati di Tivo is the best example as it was 1 on 1, same race, same day albeit early season.

Froome won.

Question remains:

Are you trying to win an argument or look at all the data and make an objective analysis?

 

[the sceptic]

I asked Vetoo how he came to his calculation, this is what he sent me



Hardly junk. I know that Pinot was not the only rider where he had SRM and weight for.

Regardless, I doubt this will change anything. It will be labeled as junk, called a witch hunt, then someone will talk about TT's

Do you really think its possible for Pinot to put out numbers like that at the end of a grand tour? Im not trying to start a vortex or anything, genuinely curious.

Isnt that very borderline what is humanly possible? He is young, french, has never climbed at human limits before. I would like to believe he is clean and that there is something wrong somewhere. What do you think?

 

[Race Radio]

Do you really think its possible for Pinot to put out numbers like that at the end of a grand tour? Im not trying to start a vortex or anything, genuinely curious.

Isnt that very borderline what is humanly possible? He is young, french, has never climbed at human limits before. I would like to believe he is clean and that there is something wrong somewhere. What do you think?

It is borderline. Pinot is certainly a very talented climber. He was very motivated to go full gas to maintain, or even improve, his GC postion. There was a tight group of 5-6 riders within 2 minutes on GC, he could not take it easy.

 

[sniper]

. I have no idea who is the bigger doper.

Lets agree the data is ambiguous at best, and lets assume for a second, they are equally big dopers.
that would be interesting considering how guys like walsh and vaughters had no problem calling out horner, but are all over the place defending froome.

why you think is that?