Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[the big ring]

So effing what?

You just don't get it do you. To be world class in one or the other requires similar physiological characteristics. However, training for track endurance and road are NOT identical. To be world class in both at the same time is either nigh on impossible or impossible. You cannot expect to compete (as a GC contender) in major road stage races whilst you are preparing for the World Champs, Commonwealth and Olympic games.

Nope, and I never said that either. So you are disagreeing with something I have not said. A waste of time.

Doing well in one stage (NOT GC attempt) of a multi-stage race, or one long TT (NOT GC attempt) of a multi-stage race, given how elite you are, would be natural / normal.

Even better, winning any individual one day race or long TT would be expected.

Training for pursuit and madison are not identical either, and yet Brad managed to win both.... hmmm...

You keep banging on about Brad's superior aeorbic engine but we see none of it on the road, even though he trains, and races on the road, for 8 years. In professional teams.

 

[Krebs cycle]

I have trained with national champions and Tour de France winners, that's all the hero worship I needed

Yeah Cadel does those charity rides with the public so everyone has. Just sayin

I have posted my thoughts on IP training. Perhaps you missed them.

Please show one post of mine in this thread where i got it wrong.

You do not post literature, you post links to studies. Please post a link to the Neil Craig study of 20 years ago that you mentioned previously.

Please explain how one person can produce more power from aerobic sources than another.

Thank you.

This is just too funny. For starters the scientific literature is made up of the studies that I have posted to. Studies = scientific literature (my god this is like talking to a 5yr old)

Secondly, if you need me to explain how it is possible for one person to produce more power from aerobic sources than another then you clearly have no clue, which I repeat, is the main source of your problem..... massive ego getting in the way of the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.

I'll give you a list of things that would enable one person to produce more power from aerobic sources than another....

small airways diameter and patency
pulmomary diffusing capacity
ventilation/perfusion matching
blood volume
total hemoglobin mass
ventricular compliance
preload
afterload
mitochondrial density
percent type 1 muscle fibres
capillarisation
mitochondrial protein isoforms

 

[Krebs cycle]

You keep banging on about Brad's superior aeorbic engine but we see none of it on the road, even though he trains, and races on the road, for 8 years. In professional teams.

You keep banging on about this as if he was training and competing to win road races. Its just another one of your massive assumptions regarding something you actually know nothing about.

I can't be arsed with this. Good bye. I'll return in 3yrs and laugh at you still starting your crackpot theory threads about Sky and Wiggins and Kerrison.

 

[the big ring]

This is just too funny. For starters the scientific literature is made up of the studies that I have posted to. Studies = scientific literature (my god this is like talking to a 5yr old)

I notice you didn't post the link to Neil Craig's study. Please do.

Secondly, if you need me to explain how it is possible for one person to produce more power from aerobic sources than another then you clearly have no clue, which I repeat, is the main source of your problem..... massive ego getting in the way of the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.

This is in stark contrast to what acoggan said:

The question was in the context of what determines pursuit performance, correct? I recall reading it, but since the best answer I could provide in a forum such as this one was "it's complicated", decided that it wasn't really worth perpetuating that branch of this thread.

I'll give you a list of things that would enable one person to produce more power from aerobic sources than another....

small airways diameter and patency
pulmomary diffusing capacity
ventilation/perfusion matching
blood volume
total hemoglobin mass
ventricular compliance
preload
afterload
mitochondrial density
percent type 1 muscle fibres
capillarisation
mitochondrial protein isoforms

The contribution of anaerobic metabolism is readily quantifiable, but what that translates into in terms of "potential" is not (even though it is clearly true).
...
Applied to some one like Wiggins, if they derived 90% of their power during a 4 km pursuit from aerobic sources, then I'd say that they'd probably be a pretty good TTer/stage racer (vs., say, someone for the classics, or more of an all-rounder).

What does it come back to, physically? Is it mitochondrial density? Muscle fibre types? Something else? Combinations of the above?

So I didn't have the full list, but I already listed 2 of the items from your list, and none of my items were wrong. Huh. Not bad for someone self-taught who doesn't have a PhD.

So you have provided a list of "things" - not dissimilar to my list of "things", just longer.

Big, sciency sounding words.

If I grabbed a book on physiology and wrote down a list of words or concepts from that book, what would I be explaining? Nothing. All your list does, is provide words used when describing physiology.

It does not explain why one person derives more of their pursuit power from aerobic sources than average.

It is not an explanation.

You can't explain it, can you? Or you would have, like your incredibly scientific sounding TT vs hill-climbing expose. Something you have not done in this or the Sky thread once. Do you remember that post you did? Where you explained something to "_frost"? I linked to it earlier.

 

[sittingbison]

...To be world class in one or the other requires similar physiological characteristics. However, training for track endurance and road are NOT identical. To be world class in both at the same time is either nigh on impossible or impossible. You cannot expect to compete (as a GC contender) in major road stage races whilst you are preparing for the World Champs, Commonwealth and Olympic games. In the modern, highly professional era, you must dedicate yourself 100% one way or the other if you hope to win...

Krebs, this is actually the exact opposite that many here including yourself are claiming, in that his track record is reason for his TdF performance. One of the examples used to show his road potential for this year has been his 2009 TdF performance. Yet this came less than a year after his track performance at Beijing.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Krebs, this is actually the exact opposite that many here including yourself are claiming, in that his track record is reason for his TdF performance. One of the examples used to show his road potential for this year has been his 2009 TdF performance. Yet this came less than a year after his track performance at Beijing.

The most oft repeat argument that Wiggins could not possibly win the TdF clean is that he did "nothing on the road". This argument has been debunked time and again though because it totally ignores the fact that the dedication and training required to win major road stage races is not identical to that required to win pursuit.

Wiggins did nothing on the road prior to the 2008 Olympics. So what? he was training for the track. After the 2008 olympics he alters his training and focuses it on the road. It was still a 11-12 month conversion and it is entirely consistent with the results of the Neil Craig study from 1993. The big ring spends hours upon hours trawling through my posting history and hours upon hrs looking for dirt on Kerrison, yet he is too lazy to spend 5 seconds checking this abstract....

Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1993;67(2):150-8.
Aerobic and anaerobic indices contributing to track endurance cycling performance.
Craig NP, Norton KI, Bourdon PC, Woolford SM, Stanef T, Squires B, Olds TS, Conyers RA, Walsh CB.
Source
South Australian Sports Institute, Adelaide.
Abstract
A group of 18 male high performance track endurance and sprint cyclists were assessed to provide a descriptive training season specific physiological profile, to examine the relationship between selected physiological and anthropometric variables and cycling performance in a 4000-m individual pursuit (IP4000) and to propose a functional model for predicting success in the IP4000. Anthropometric characteristics, absolute and relative measurements of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max), blood lactate transition thresholds (Thla- and Th(an),i), VO2 kinetics, cycling economy and maximal accumulated oxygen deficit (MAOD) were assessed, with cyclists also performing a IP4000 under competition conditions. Peak post-competition blood lactate concentrations and acid-base values were measured. Although all corresponding indices of Thla- and Th(an),i occurred at significantly different intensities there were high intercorrelations between them (0.51-0.85). There was no significant difference in MAOD when assessed using a 2 or 5 min protocol (61.4 vs 60.2 ml.kg-1, respectively). The highest significant correlations were found among IP4000 and the following: VO2max (ml.kg-2/3.min-1; r = -0.79), power output at lactate threshold (Wthla) (W; r = -0.86), half time of VO2 response whilst cycling at 115% VO2max (s; r = 0.48) and MAOD when assessed using the 5 min protocol (ml.kg-1; r = -0.50). A stepwise multiple regression yielded the following equation, which had an r of 0.86 and a standard error of estimate of 5.7 s: IP4000 (s) = 462.9 - 0.366 x (Wthla) - 0.306 x (MAOD) - 0.438 x (VO2max) where Wthla is in W, MAOD is in ml.kg-1 and VO2max is in ml.kg-1 x min-1.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8223521

Notice how much stronger the correlations are for the aerobic indices than the anaerobic indices?

And one last time. I repeat, this alone does not explain how Wiggins won the Tdf. All it does it lay the foundation. That is all I ever claimed, but so many of you refuse to accept it.

 

[the big ring]

And for about the 10th time now I repeat.... Neil Craig proved it nearly 20yrs ago that elite track endurance cyclists have very similar physiological characteristics as pro road cyclists.

This study says nothing about road cyclists.

Are you seriously going to tell us that "someone with a high VO2 max can do good in track and / or road" is the foundation of why Brad's able to win the TdF clean?

Coz he has a high VO2 max, as evidenced by his good IP times?

 

[sittingbison]

Krebs its the less than eleven months conversion from track specific training to road specific training that is the largest pill to swallow. To go from broom wagon to 4th behind Contador, Schleck and Armstrong. Some have even suggested that as two of them are dopers, and Schlecks brother is a doper, Wiggo is in all likelihood the winner of that 2009 race.

So, a massive change in weight (10%) from August 2008 to July 2009 with less than 11 months road specific training (which is shorter than 11 months due to the post Olympic partying wiggo mentioned), with new found climbing abilities never before shown, wins you both the gold medal and the TdF. Sound familiar?

Sorry, I'm not swallowing that pill.

 

[blackcat]

Sorry, I'm not swallowing that pill.

what if the pill makes you TDF champ and ten million greenbacks?

Or is it a Fuentes pill to stop you getting preggas

 

[sittingbison]

either would be a bitter pill to swallow

 

[blackcat]

A brief interlude: a claim has been made about my ego, and I want to clarify why I continue here. Another physiologist has written something that resonated with me profoundly, and I will post what he said here as it explains where I am coming from to a T.

http://www.scienceofrunning.com/2009/12/can-we-get-some-common-sense-somewhere.html

You want the secret to success in the training world? Use big words, preferably big combination of words. And if you really want to be a master of training, use a big combination of scientific sounding words.

It AMAZES me of some of the crap i'm reading and the claims being made. Basically, as long as you use big scientific words, you can make any claim you want, even if it makes no sense practically or scientifically. No one will know the difference.

And finally, the key- Learn just enough of biomechanics, physiology, motor control to be dangerous. Don't try and understand them, just learn enough to be dangerous. Once this is done, then you can throw together cool phrases like "optimal motor program patterning" and "enhanced proprioceptive control." Even if it makes no sense, don't worry, it sounds fancy, no one will know.

Lastly, ignore this thing called common sense.

http://www.scienceofrunning.com/2009/03/old-school-approach-to-runningtraining.html

And finally on that topic, using big complex language is a good way to make it seem like you know what you are talking about. You almost try and talk above people. And if other people can’t understand what you are preaching about, then they can’t really question you and they just ASSUME that you know what you are talking about, which isn’t always the case.

ie if you can link to studies, but cannot explain them here, I believe the study link is pointless.

Which leaves you with... nothing for Brad other than an easy hilly stage win and never winning a longer TT on the road.

weasel words
Bertspeak
Newspeak
Corporate speak

 

[blackcat]

either would be a bitter pill to swallow

Irvine Welsh says choose life. So does George Michael.

 

[sittingbison]

either would be a bitter pill to swallow

Irvine Welsh says choose life. So does George Michael.

 

[the big ring]

In 2009, CVV was the team leader for Garmin at the Tour: http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2009/start-list

51 Christian Vande Velde (USA)
52 Julian Dean (NZl)
53 Tyler Farrar (USA)
54 Ryder Hesjedal (Can)
55 Martijn Maaskant (Ned)
56 David Millar (GBr)
57 Danny Pate (USA)
58 Bradley Wiggins (GBr)
59 David Zabriskie (USA)

 

[the big ring]

Stage 15 is one stage where Wiggins put time into Vande Velde. Here's the report as it pertains to Wiggins' performance:

Perhaps the biggest surprise is the guy 11 seconds behind the Texan on the overall classification, Bradley Wiggins of Garmin-Slipstream. From Olympic glory in the individual and team pursuit at the Beijing Olympics 10 months ago - heavily specialised disciplines lasting just four kilometres - to a change in focus, mentality and physical prowess in order to take on the world's most arduous bike race, this year 3,459.5 kilometres long, the 29-year-old Brit sporting a pair of lamb-chop sideburns has undergone a brilliant transformation. Whether he can continue in this bold way, unafraid to attack his more established Grand Tour peers - or perhaps improve further still - we'll need another few mountains to find out.

 

[sittingbison]

OK, I am convinced now. The lambchops are the answer.

 

[the big ring]

While I admire Brad as an athlete, I can tell you he was a nightmare to work with and certainly did not listen to much advice I gave him...beyond "wow, brad, most of your power produced in a 4 minute pursuit is via aerobic metabolism...that's unique...You could be a stage racer"

And that's where Brad and I stopped.

I am curious where Brad was training, and with whom, for the 2009 Tour de France. JV lists some testing from that time, including a 10-mile TT, so Brad was clearly in the UK about a week before the Tour. Various posters here have said he did no altitude training. Yet he came 4th, 6 minutes and 4 places ahead of the "team leader", so where did he train and how? JV seems to be saying Brad did his own thing, and JV had no say in it.

If you read the transcripts from the Trent Lowe case, you read JV allegedly doesn't return emails from his riders, for days to weeks to months at a time. Is his approach really so hands off?

The other thing I don't understand, is how JV was able to say "wow, brad, most of your power produced in a 4 minute pursuit is via aerobic metabolism...that's unique...You could be a stage racer". JV didn't do the test. At best Krebs assures us British Cycling may have done such a the test. Did Brad know the result and tell JV? What would be the motivation for that? Did BC tell JV? If Brad knew, why would JV be telling him? My poor, 5th grade brain can't handle all the complexity.

Garmin held a pre-Tour training camp in Girona, Spain, but there were only 3 riders: Millar, Pate and Martin.

June 25, 2009

 

[the big ring]

OK, I am convinced now. The lambchops are the answer.

Holy crap.

Can you inject EPO, etc into your face and hide the scars with beard?

 

[the big ring]

For posterity:

2009? Wiggo did not dope. You can say I'm wrong, but I'll stick with my statement on this, that I've made over and over...

 

[Gregga]

Holy crap.

Can you inject EPO, etc into your face and hide the scars with beard?

More seriously : what about Wiggins black socks ?

- many suppose transfusions are done in ankle veins to avoid visible scars
- like Hamilton in Madrid, the big needles used for blood injection/withdraw may cause bleeding due to a longer coagulation time
- blood is very hard to hide on white socks... but invisible on black socks

 

[the big ring]

More seriously : what about Wiggins black socks ?

- many suppose transfusions are done in ankle veins to avoid visible scars
- like Hamilton in Madrid, the big needles used for blood injection/withdraw may cause bleeding due to a longer coagulation time
- blood is very hard to hide on white socks... but invisible on black socks

Which was part of a classic Armstrong attire. How about mandating white socks along with zipped jerseys and level saddles?

 

[armchairclimber]

Big Ring...I'm going to take you at your word here and respond as though I believe that you want to learn and understand. I like Steve Magness' writing and I do have some sympathy when it comes to the "big words" issue.

This isn't to do with cycling but it has a lot to do with training the body's aerobic system. I recommend that you immerse yourself in Lydiard. Probably the best book to look at would be Healthy Intelligent Training (Livingstone), which steers clear of big words and deals with the matter in a common sense manner.

Wiggins is clearly a very lucky individual who gets a lot of forward motion from the oxygen his lungs take in.

 

[the big ring]

Big Ring...I'm going to take you at your word here and respond as though I believe that you want to learn and understand. I like Steve Magness' writing and I do have some sympathy when it comes to the "big words" issue.

This isn't to do with cycling but it has a lot to do with training the body's aerobic system. I recommend that you immerse yourself in Lydiard. Probably the best book to look at would be Healthy Intelligent Training (Livingstone), which steers clear of big words and deals with the matter in a common sense manner.

I first downloaded and read this (PDF) in November of 2008. You, Krebs and his puppet _frost treat me like an idiot and take joy in belittling me but you are sadly mistaken if you think I am as unintelligent, inexperienced or unknowledgeable as you imagine. Lydiard's training method certainly doesn't explain how someone who has trained and raced (using a Lydiard-like method) on the road with little success beyond 4km IP races can turn around in 10 months and come 4th in a GT.

Feel free to bring the "big words" in any semblance of an explanation.

Hint: a list of words is not an explanation. Nowhere near.

 

[davidmam]

Lydiard's training method certainly doesn't explain how someone who has trained and raced (using a Lydiard-like method) on the road with little success beyond 4km IP races can turn around in 10 months and come 4th in a GT.

It might help to look at the details. When Wiggins was track focussed he was always fairly handy pack fodder. Not stunning in the mountains by any stretch of the imagination.
He won the combativity prize for his solo break in the 2007(?) TdF (prior to being binned thanks to Moreni's positive) which demonstrates that he does have a big engine that can run over a long day.
We then look at the mountains. The clear example is the Giro in 2009. Since leaving the track after Beijing 2008 he lost a *lot* of weight. Weight is not so critical on the track or flat, but is key to climbing. In the first half of the Giro he was climbing with the front group. Not unremarkable when you lose that much weight. (try it yourself, go ride with the guys you normally can just hang with on a climb and add 5kg to your bike). He then deliberately rode piano for the second half, staying in the Autobus. At that point comes the realisation that he might do quite well in the Tour.

As a free agent and essentially unmarked he got opportunities he wouldn't get as a marked team leader and did well.
The move to Sky is well documented, and his attitude and issues there.

We then move to Tenerife. Why go to Tenerife? Because of the roads giving him the opportunity to train according to plan. Why Tim Kerrison? Because he is one of the best sports scientists in the business. His role is very specific, to tailor training to improving specific aspects of physiology and to working out what those specific demands are for the TdF.

By taking the core group out of 'traditional' training and racing they can focus on specific training that will allow them to do the 'mountain Team TT' for which they are now regarded with suspicion by some. They identify specific weakensses - sustained climbs at altitude. How do you improve? not by long rides in the UK countryside with cafe stops but by a prolonged altitude training camp where there are climbs of the approriate sort. To be able to do this, to focus on the Tour and structure everything around it for a season requires a lot of resources and commitment. Sky has that. There are probably about three other teams who could do that to that level. Even so they can only afford that for a limited core of riders.

One of the interesting things from reading Hamilton's book is how essentially unstructured most of their training is. Putting the misuse of pharmaceuticals aside, Ferrari is a very talented trainer who understands the physiology and how to get the best out of individuals. Even without doping he would be raking it in from pro's until their teams decide to move into the 21st century.

Give it two years and Sky's training methods and tactics will seem old hat. It is like formula 1, a technical advance that is within the rules gives a team dominance for a few seasons before the others catch up.

 

[armchairclimber]

The Big Ring, glad you are hip to Lydiard...reading and understanding are two different things though.

Your problem appears to be understanding. There's nothing in Wiggins' progression that is in any way problematic. The specificity (not a very big word) of the training just needed to change.