Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[the big ring]

I don't know who _frost might be, but just because they say they are new to cycling in no way implies that they don't understand exercise physiology. In fact, their very first post (asking Parrot23 to explain the difference between climbing ability and TTing ability on flat roads) appears to be rhetorical in nature, not an actual request to be educated.

except they also say they are new to cycling AND naive. is that a rhetorical confession?

and they asked about threshold power on the flat, not tting.

are you ***-u-ming things? tsk tsk.

first post, introduction as a newb and straight into rhetorical questions.

 

[acoggan]

Your confusion of "conflict of interest" is apparent.

No confusion here, as my employer has specific rules that govern me - can you say the same?

http://wustl.edu/policies/conflictmedical.html

 

[the big ring]

No confusion here, as my employer has specific rules that govern me - can you say the same?

http://wustl.edu/policies/conflictmedical.html

you are confused. you said you got a meal but no $$$, indicating the limit of your understanding of CoI.

 

[acoggan]

except they also say they are new to cycling AND naive. is that a rhetorical confession?

Yes, new to cycling - in what way does that imply that they lack insight into the physiological demands of endurance sports??

(If your argument is that they were baiting people a bit to get them to defend their assertions, then I agree with you...but I'm not sure what your argument is, because once again you have failed to express your thoughts clearly.)

 

[acoggan]

you are confused. you said you got a meal but no $$$, indicating the limit of your understanding of CoI.

Once again you're lost the plot: I never said that my visit to Lemond Fitness didn't represent a potential conflict of interest. (It didn't/doesn't, at least with respect to what I do for a living, but that's beside the point.)

 

[acoggan]

so trainingpeaks are lying when they say you are working on the new version of wko+?

No, they are telling the truth.

 

[acoggan]

NB: "The contribution of anaerobic metabolism is readily quantifiable" via the MAOD test. "derived 90% of their power during a 4 km pursuit from aerobic sources" is determined via the MAOD test.

Yes, it is in the context of pursuit performance. Because that is the argument - the ONLY defensible argument - Krebs Cycle can come up with to defend Brad winning the Tour de France naturally.

Neither you nor the exercise phsyiology lecturer Krebs Cycle will explain the foundation for the only argument you make to explain Brad winning the Tour "naturally".

More sophistry: the question that you asked that I didn't think I could adequately address in a forum such as this one was why one person or another has a high or low MAOD. Knowing the answer to that question isn't necessary to appreciate the fact that being more aerobically-inclined as a pursuiter means that you'd be more likely to be successful on the road than if you weren't. It is this latter question that you falsely claimed that I declined to answer.

 

[oldcrank]

I understand that this thread is about a former
pursuit champ winning the Tour de France but I'd
like to pose this question: Could a track sprinter,
say a World Champion track sprinter, ever win
the Green Jersey at the Tour de France? Is it
crazy to even pose such a preposterous query?

 

[thehog]

I understand that this thread is about a former
pursuit champ winning the Tour de France but I'd
like to pose this question: Could a track sprinter,
say a World Champion track sprinter, ever win
the Green Jersey at the Tour de France? Is it
crazy to even pose such a preposterous query?

Probably make that the Madison and points race. You might want to check the distances on those events when you get a chance.

 

[oldcrank]

Probably make that the Madison and points race. You might want to check the distances on those events when you get a chance.

No, son, I'm not referencing Cavendish who won two
UCI World Madison Championships.
I said track sprinter, ie match sprint, could a World
Champ track sprinter win a Green Jersey? Or is that
just crazy talk?

 

[The Cobra]

No, son, I'm not referencing Cavendish who won two
UCI World Madison Championships.
I said track sprinter, ie match sprint, could a World
Champ track sprinter win a Green Jersey? Or is that
just crazy talk?

Well Theo Bos is trying to make the switch from successful track sprinter to successful road sprinter. So far without much sign of that happening. Two very different events.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Cav was also a team pursuiter.

I think its nonsensical to say Wiggins is doping because a cyclist can't go from the track to the road and win things. At the end of the day its the engine: BMXers can ride track, MTBers can ride road etc etc

Just because Wiggins is the first to do it in the modern era isn't evidence of doping

 

[Parker]

I understand that this thread is about a former
pursuit champ winning the Tour de France but I'd
like to pose this question: Could a track sprinter,
say a World Champion track sprinter, ever win
the Green Jersey at the Tour de France? Is it
crazy to even pose such a preposterous query?

It's unlikely these days as cyclists are far more specialised, but it is possible. Patrick Sercu is the man that showed a rider could win both in the 60s/70s.

 

[The Cobra]

Reading through the last half dozen pages the message I am getting is that Wiggins is a pursuiter and there is no way a pursuiter can win the Tour. I have to disagree that Individual Pursuit Olympic champion and Tour de France winner are mutually exclusive. If we take Lemond for example, you cannot seriously suggest that if he had taken a year out of his career to prepare specifically for the individual pursuit he wouldn't have an Olympic gold medal right now. Winning a pursuit does definitely not guarantee Tour success but neither does it rule it out completely.

Wiggins career path to me is simple. Lets just imagine for one moment though that Wiggins is clean and always has been. So early in his career Lance Armstrong was winning Tours left right and centre, the sport is dope crazy. What opportunities is there for a young clean rider like Wiggins in that environment? Virtually none.

However on the track, where the money and the prestige is much less, there is much less drugs floating around. Here there is a chance for success. He wins the Olympics in 2004. The road scene shows no signs of changing. Wiggins continues to focus on the track. His job on the road is something he has to do to pay the bills but he is fully aware as a clean rider there is nothing for him there.

In the 2008 Olympics he wins Gold again. What else is there to achieve on the track? A month before he had seen Van de Velde get fourth in the Tour riding for Garmin which Vaughters claims to put clean riding before results. The Bio Passport is being rolled out. Wiggins sees his chance to give the road a shot and maybe the culture is changing.

2009 Tour and Wiggins does the ride of his life. All of Astana was doped up to the eyeballs that year. Was Andy Schleck too? Its perfectly reasonable to assume that Wiggins was the first clean rider that year. If you watch videos of him climbing from that race its incredible, right at the front mixing it with the best. Arguably he was even more impressive in 2009 than 2012. Was Wiggins doped up in the 2009 Tour. Vaughters says he was clean. If we are to now assume Vaughters is lying and is actually willingly turning a blind eye to his riders doping then there really is no hope for cycling. We may as well close the clinic down and admit everyone dopes.

2010 he joins SKY with massive hype. Wiggins is caught up in it all, has **** preperation and bombs big time. 2011 he begins to turn it around and turn himself into a serious road rider. 2012 was the completion of that transformation and the full realisation of his talent.

Long story short, the fact that Wiggins showed nothing on the road before 2009 means jack to me. It was a different sport then. You can argue about Leinders all you want though. I dont know the truth but I'm not writing him off just yet.

 

[Pantani_lives]

Could a track sprinter,
say a World Champion track sprinter, ever win
the Green Jersey at the Tour de France?

Patrick Sercu in 1974!

 

[JimmyFingers]

Geraint Thomas and Ben Swift are also handy road cyclists who come from the track. Most of the Britain's talent gets funnelled through the track, and then move to the road.

Same on the women's side

 

[oldcrank]

It's unlikely these days as cyclists are far more specialised, but it is possible. Patrick Sercu is the man that showed a rider could win both in the 60s/70s.

Parker, you spoiled the fun before any of the Clinic regulars,
except the Hog, weighed in with their vast knowledge of all
things cycling, physiological and statistical. But I'm not
going to hold that against you , mate.

 

[oldcrank]

Patrick Sercu in 1974!

See above!!

 

[JimmyFingers]

surely its about different training regimes/weight training to build the different muscle mass that suit the various disciplines

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

If we take Lemond for example, you cannot seriously suggest that if he had taken a year out of his career to prepare specifically for the individual pursuit he wouldn't have an Olympic gold medal right now.

I like your post, but a relevant pedantic point is that Lemond would have had to delay his pro career to ride the pursuit in the Olympics though, as pros weren't allowed in the OGs until 1996. This is a much overlooked point, I feel. Olympic trackies in the amateur era were either East Europeans or plucky Western amateurs who, had they been of genuine world class, would have turned to the 6 day events on the track or a traditional road career to pay the bills. There was no scope for a mature athlete such as Wiggo to race on the track in the OGs in this era whilst still being able to earn a living elsewhere in cycling, so such an athlete wouldn't pursue the pursuit.

Nowadays, a top class trackie can earn a tidy living on the road based on their profile as an Olympic champion, so it's worth top riders focusing on the track for a few years.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

No, son, I'm not referencing Cavendish who won two
UCI World Madison Championships.
I said track sprinter, ie match sprint, could a World
Champ track sprinter win a Green Jersey? Or is that
just crazy talk?

Ironic that Cav's partner from the 2008 Madison duo has just won the Yellow Jersey, so winning the Madison is a good predictor of being able to win at both ends of the spectrum on the road, though it would help to see which of the pair does the sprints and which aims to "take a lap" before predicting which end!

 

[Krebs cycle]

i realised my error, as indicated, and deleted it before you had finished your reply. given it was a mathematical error, obvious once I saw it, and that I am teaching myself things you had the esteemable Ed Coyle to help you with, I personally think I am doing a damn fine job.

pick one we can all read and laugh at.

this is what this whole thing is about to you isn't it? You WISH you were Tim Kerrison working with an elite athlete somewhere and you just can't handle it that there are some people on this board that actually have worked with elite athletes and are properly qualified. You have such a massive ego complex that you can't handle it when you get schooled by more knowledgeable people than yourself. acoggan is right, to you this entire debate is not about a search for understanding, it is about trying to win some stupid ****ing contest on the internet, trying to prove that you're smarter than properly qualified professionals in the field. get a life and grow up.

If you refuse to read the literature that we link you to which very clearly explains why track endurance riders can potentially make a successful transition to road cycling according to known human physiology, but then go on and on like a broken down record claiming that we haven't explained anything, then that is your problem.

I asked you to explain your thoughts on training for IP vs a GT and the best you could do was link to a blog site that is written in laymans terms for people with little to no understanding of cycling performance. What a joke.

 

[the big ring]

this is what this whole thing is about to you isn't it? You WISH you were Tim Kerrison working with an elite athlete somewhere and you just can't handle it that there are some people on this board that actually have worked with elite athletes and are properly qualified. You have such a massive ego complex that you can't handle it when you get schooled by more knowledgeable people than yourself. acoggan is right, to you this entire debate is not about a search for understanding, it is about trying to win some stupid ****ing contest on the internet, trying to prove that you're smarter than properly qualified professionals in the field. get a life and grow up.

If you refuse to read the literature that we link you to which very clearly explains why track endurance riders can potentially make a successful transition to road cycling according to known human physiology, but then go on and on like a broken down record claiming that we haven't explained anything, then that is your problem.

I asked you to explain your thoughts on training for IP vs a GT and the best you could do was link to a blog site that is written in laymans terms for people with little to no understanding of cycling performance. What a joke.

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

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.

 

[the big ring]

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.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Magically disappearing posts.

The discussion: is Brad Wiggins' TdF win believable.

For: he won the 4km IP heaps and heaps.

Against: so effing what. He did nothing on the road.

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. In the modern, highly professional era, you must dedicate yourself 100% one way or the other if you hope to win. You seem to ignore this very important fact or (more likely) since you have no experience working with athletes, you just don't have a clue. You pretend as if you know more than the knowledge and experience of elite track and road cycling coaches and people who understand the dynamics of human bioenergetics in far far greater detail than you, but your massive ego blinds you from the truth which is that you're just not very well informed about all this stuff.

For: But track endurance rider physiology is similar to pro road physiology!!

Against: so name one rider who excelled on the track before winning the tour.

This is a strawman argument and proves absolutely nothing. It most certainly does not disprove the importance of the underlying physiological characteristics.

Besides, name one track rider that excelled as highly as Brad Wiggins who tried to win the tour?