When did the arms race stop?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
When did the arms race stop?
when did it start?


Oppenheimer
lot to answer fo

brinkman
ship

capt'n
ahab

thats a big jay peg


 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
On Kerrison. The comes from outside the sport.

They can confuse the 0.0005% gain, as the aggregation of said gain, not appreciating that they are conflating the trees for the forest.

The Australian track team got sidelined by Braislford and Keen MO. Taking their team pursuit into a wind tunnel to determine the order.

Now, I am a track neophyte, I have zero appreciation with the on the boards TP strategy, and their order. I do know that circa 2000, Bannan et al, thought Graeme de Bruijn was the best starter in the world.

My point is, for the potential 0.0001% from the aero coefficient by changing their order, they are now susceptible and sacrificing their optimum strategy in their order. And they can't perfectly model the aero coefficient when there could be another 4 100 metres in front and there is a lead rider swinging off with his unique technique singing up the bank every half or whole, or 1.5 lap.

This aggregation of marginal gains is bunkum. Its is forest from the trees stuff.

I think D-Queued made a cycling aphorism of acuity, that (words to effect of) "marginal gains aint the rounding error relative to a comprehensive doping program of Ferrari proportion".

These, "marginal gains" are too marginal. Best to get the major inputs dialled to 100%. Doping foremost.

Heck, even a custom frame in Reynolds Columbus or Dedaccai tubing on the ideal geometry would be an improvement over the stock Specialized carbon models out of a Tapei tech engineering workshop. That would be a gain. but few teams have ever had the money to be able to afford that opportunity cost eh. USPS? Sky? Mapei?

NB. The Aus Olympic cycling managers would have done better putting the money into getting Bobridge and Hepburn some alcohol education
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Yeah, but that improvement was exactly like 2012's revolutionary performances.

I postulate they have their own Motoman that gets the GT guys so skinny with ultra-super-duper never-seen-before power output. Remember that the classics riders do not have access to the same incredible power at super, super low weights. Why? I have no idea.
i just luv the appellation motoman
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Ferminal said:
by groups of individuals at arms length from the "team".
the term is "plausible deniability".

A John Turned and Locked himself in.

think, George Michael popped in Hyde Park for soliciting a rent boy by Murdoch's Daily Mail.

There has to be a plauisible deniabilty.

Since 98 and Festina, it has always been about the plausible deniability. Game Theory would deduce this as the new default systemised doping.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
sniper said:
But the question here is not whether sky dope.
The question is, if sky dope on a team-level, would kerrison be the right man to supervise it or even introduce new methods? I think so.
No, I think a more salient question is, "whether the peloton is still doping?" And what power improvement does it add on the final ascent of the Queen stage on the HC climb?

And if you say, it is about 15% rule of thumb, and the peloton is still doping at the pointy end, can a dominant team possibly use an aggregation of marginal gains to offset/mollify/neutralise this?

the ANSWER is, "ofcourse not".

In the words of the great D-Queued
"marginal gains aint the rounding error on a comprehensive doping program"
or, my addition, "a mosquito fly bite on the **** of a domestique camel".
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
sniper said:
fair and interesting point.
i didn't know about this.
still, many (including wiggins himself, i think) see kerrison as the mastermind behind wiggins' 2012 tdf.
(e.g here: http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/apr/27/bradley-wiggins-giro-tim-kerrison)
would be interesting to know what kerrison's role consisted of if it wasn't about juicing up wiggins.
they will only send off an appropriate swimmer to the appropriate doctor if they have all the attributes. No use sending a donkey off to the doctor to qualify for the olympics. Risk outweighs this reward. There is simply a small catchment of swimmers in the UK, probably one tenth the size of the catchment of Australia, and one 30th of America. It IS not WORTH it.

And like a cluster, you need a threshold of talent to create a competition that is self-fulfilling. The UK dont meet this threshold atm. Doping will not help much in this instance
 
blackcat said:
...
My point is, for the potential 0.0001% from the aero coefficient by changing their order, they are now susceptible and sacrificing their optimum strategy in their order. And they can't perfectly model the aero coefficient when there could be another 4 100 metres in front and there is a lead rider swinging off with his unique technique singing up the bank every half or whole, or 1.5 lap.
It is bunkum, but you are missing the point. They are researchers who DO research and got a budget for it.

Doping and living like monks is really responsible for most success. But, not much funding for that conclusion!

blackcat said:
Heck, even a custom frame in Reynolds Columbus or Dedaccai tubing on the ideal geometry would be an improvement over the stock Specialized carbon models out of a Tapei tech engineering workshop.
Taiwanese and Mainland Chinese product is good work. Especially the stuff that is CEN tested/certified. As Giant has proven again and again, as long as it mostly fits, the rest can be fixed with seat posts and stems.
 
The original post looks even more stupid now that it has emerged that David Walsh knows absolutely nothing about doping.


del1962 said:
I here a lot about a certain team started the arms race in doping, despite respected journalist David Walsh saying there is no organised doping on that team, anyway for those who hang their hat on that team started the arms race (apparently again), could they tell me when the arms race stopped.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
It is bunkum, but you are missing the point. They are researchers who DO research and got a budget for it.

Doping and living like monks is really responsible for most success. But, not much funding for that conclusion!
great point
Taiwanese and Mainland Chinese product is good work. Especially the stuff that is CEN tested/certified. As Giant has proven again and again, as long as it mostly fits, the rest can be fixed with seat posts and stems.
i am not knocking the frames in taiwan or mainland china.

just think a tailored geometry, would be a legit gain. Albeit, quite minimal.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
Team Sky are a complete fraud, but other teams are catching up.
looks like the arms race will be entering the full genius phase this year. Hopefully saxo can join in on the fun as well.
 
May 12, 2010
1,998
0
0
the sceptic said:
looks like the arms race will be entering the full genius phase this year. Hopefully saxo can join in on the fun as well.
Well, Majka and Kreuziger were pretty preposterous last year, or Roche for that matter. It seems that Contador was more worried about not getting caught a second time than really trying to win races. I don't think he will change much in that regard this year.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS