Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[Ste1510]

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.

Previous to 2009 Tour Brad rode (and won) The Beamount Trophy on 14th June, a Premier Calender Race in Northumberland. It's a "hilly" course featuring the Ryals which are sharp but short and certainly no long climbs on it. He put 1:40 into Russ Downing on the day who finished 2nd.

 

[the big ring]

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

Previous to 2009 Tour Brad rode (and won) The Beamount Trophy on 14th June, a Premier Calender Race in Northumberland. It's a "hilly" course featuring the Ryals which are sharp but short and certainly no long climbs on it. He put 1:40 into Russ Downing on the day who finished 2nd.

There was a guy a few years older than me that started riding at the same time. He got a ride in the SunTour a couple of years later - Alistair Rau is his name. In 1991 he attacked on one stage - from Warrnambool to Apollo Bay. 222km solo attack. He stayed away and won the stage. Udo Bolts was racing that year, and had won overall in 1990.

So you'd be inclined to say Alistair had a pretty handy aerobic engine too yeah? I mean, I'm not equating Tour de France with Sun Tour by any stretch. In 1994 Udo was 9th at the Tour de France, so he wasn't a hack, and Alistair was a local rider, not a pro by any stretch. But similar stories right?

Alistair won the combatitive prize that day too.

Dubious comparisons aside, here is my point: half way through the stage, Udo Bolts turns to Ross Bush (RIP) who was on Udo's team, and asks, "Do we need to crank it up and catch this guy?". Alistair was on a different team, and Ross knew Alistair well (they were training buddies), but replied, "Nah, he can't climb." So Udo did nothing out of the ordinary, they waited too long for the catch and Alistair won the stage. Word is Udo was a tad miffed at Ross, but Aussies are known to stick together.

One isolated incident of good riding does not prove a good aerobic engine. Particularly when you consider the myriad variables inherent in any race's outcome.

Krebs Cycle had an even better example than yours from Tour de l'Avenir, where Wiggins stayed away in a small break. You can read my response here.

Suntour info link: http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2009/10/14/111531_news_pf.html

Bottom line: if he had have consistently won stages on the flats, or consistently stayed with the group on the climbs, his performances from 2009 onwards would be far more believable. As it is, he was pack fodder, and the transformation in 10 months to 4th place at TdF is not believable to me.

 

[Mr.38%]

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.

Whose training?

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.

If this year's TDF is a prototype for future stage racing, it's time to move to indoor halma.

 

[the big ring]

If this year's TDF is a prototype for future stage racing, it's time to move to indoor halma.

Extreme knitting?

 

[the big ring]

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.

For all our enlightenment, please briefly outline the training Brad did for the Olympic IP in 2008.

Thank you.

 

[davidmam]

Bottom line: if he had have consistently won stages on the flats, or consistently stayed with the group on the climbs, his performances from 2009 onwards would be far more believable.

Like Cavendish then? Wins loads on the flat, can't climb for toffee (for a top class pro that is). The point was that he could manage a race pace day out on his own.

It seems that you have decided that Wiggins is doping and will use anything and everything in confirmation bias. What was Wiggins dramatic change in power that lead to his 2009 success? (Don't just look at the overall but at his placings in stages all through the season, what his roles were in those races etc. These are far more informative than speculation on a single number that has many confounding variables)

How much of the improvement in climbing ability is due to weight loss? The answer lies there, not in some far fetched conspiracy theory where you cherry pick anecdotes, ignore raw data in terms of emergent phenomena which are dependent on a multiplicity of variables.

Dropping 5kg in weight will move you from comfortably sitting in the autobus to a contenders group.

You also look at average times on climbs, ignoring the way the races are carried out. Sky set a constant high work rate. This makes it very hard to attack. Look to the Vuelta this year and we see the opposite - an attack/recover mode of climbing which is slower overall. And hence will look like a higher W/kg than are pushed out by an attacking climber (who will be struggling to maintain power after an attack).

So instead of posting innuendo and post-hoc rationalisations, try posting real data and showing why that is not credible, rather than half baked allegations. We know that Wiggins could produce a certain power output. It is not unreasonable to expect an increase with the best training that can be bought. We know that W/kg can be increased by either increasing W or decreasing kg. There is nothing 'not normal' in the development of Wiggins from a scientific perspective at the base data level, it is just that the emergent phenomenon of race placings makes some don their tinfoil hats and seek conspiracy theories.

(FWIW I am a professional scientist, just so you can accuse me of having a conflict of interest. Oh, and British too)

 

[Benotti69]

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.

nope sorry. not fooling anyone with half a brain on that.

Ashenden has said their are doping elements in new ages teams. The TdF squad on Sky are what he is getting at. No question. The success they had was remarkable this year.

Leinders was brought in for the TdF squad. Tenerfie is chosen because its remote location lets them know in adavance when the OOC testers are arriving and the cost to send a tester to an island on a regular basis is not within the budget.

 

[the big ring]

Dropping 5kg in weight will move you from comfortably sitting in the autobus to a contenders group.

I completely disagree. If Cavendish lost 5 kg he'd be staying right where he was.

And how come noone told Cancellara he could be winning next year if he just lost 5kg? You know, the guy that smashed Wiggins over a 23km TT when they were 17/18 respectively?

So a steady diet of 16km TTs, all year. World class (silver medallist) track team pursuiter over 4km. Has to do a 23.5km TT. Goes 1:46 slower than Cancellara. To go the same speed as Cancellara, assuming the difference is down to aerodynamics, he would have to increase his power ~19%.

Let me know if you need help with understanding this "data".

It seems that you have decided that Wiggins is doping and will use anything and everything in confirmation bias

It seems you have decided that Wiggins is clean, and will use anything and everything including anecdotal "combatitivity awards from 2007!" in an attempt to prove your point. This is not data.

The only difference is I did not respond by putting you down.

So instead of posting innuendo and post-hoc rationalisations, try posting real data and showing why that is not credible, rather than half baked allegations. We know that Wiggins could produce a certain power output. It is not unreasonable to expect an increase with the best training that can be bought. We know that W/kg can be increased by either increasing W or decreasing kg. There is nothing 'not normal' in the development of Wiggins from a scientific perspective at the base data level, it is just that the emergent phenomenon of race placings makes some don their tinfoil hats and seek conspiracy theories.

Oh good. You have elevated the tone of the discussion from my alleged "innuendo and post-hoc rationalisations" to "tinfoil hats" and "conspiracy theories". I have posted plenty of data, and dismantled your scientist mate's "careful research" anecdotes as well, but I don't think you've read every post here or you'd know that.

I'll have you know my allegations are fully baked, and have a liberal dash of icing on them to boot.

You know, your posting style reminds me of someone... hmmm.... why is that. Trying to sound like an expert, putting people down that disagree with you... such consistent behaviour.

It is not unreasonable to expect an increase with the best training that can be bought.

Agreed. But it's also a known fact that only Michele Ferrari provides the best training that can be bought. Fuentes makes too many mistakes. Eesh.

(FWIW I am a professional scientist, just so you can accuse me of having a conflict of interest. Oh, and British too)

Please rationalise this away. It's from another scientist, albeit one who knows what he's talking about, Michael Ashenden: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/opinion-michael-ashenden-on-omerta-101

Despite the self-serving data bending and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers even within ‘new age’ cycling teams. Personally, I don’t accept that the ‘dark era’ has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise.

 

[the big ring]

I think this is another way of putting it.

 

[davidmam]

I completely disagree. If Cavendish lost 5 kg he'd be staying right where he was.

When you move from the track to the road and are carrying excess weight..

Cav has lost a fair bit of weight over the last few years and has improved his performance on the hillier rides.

And how come noone told Cancellara he could be winning next year if he just lost 5kg? You know, the guy that smashed Wiggins over a 23km TT when they were 17/18 respectively?

So Wiggins is doping now because Cancellara beat him 15 years ago? That is stretching the argument somewhat. You also miss completely the point htat it is removal of excess weight - look at G this year, 3-4 kilos heavier than last year because he has spent the time training on/for the track. This renders him far less competitive on the road. He'll lose that weight, be back to road fitness and then it must of course being on the doping program thatcauses the improvement in his road performance.

Let me know if you need help with understanding this "data".

Again you cherry pick results rather than looking at physiological parameters.

It seems you have decided that Wiggins is clean, and will use anything and everything including anecdotal "combatitivity awards from 2007!" in an attempt to prove your point. This is not data.

Oh what elegant sophistry. Data? Nope, thought not. Just suspicion and innuendo. Are the results explainable within physiological understanding without doping? If not, why not and what are the numbers that you base this on?

I have posted plenty of data, and dismantled your scientist mate's "careful research" anecdotes as well, but I don't think you've read every post here or you'd know that.

No, you have posted anecdote and innuendo, some half baked analysis and are joining random dots to make the picture you want to see. You preach to a willing choir and rather eloquently too. But when it comes to real substance it is missing

Agreed. But it's also a known fact that only Michele Ferrari provides the best training that can be bought. Fuentes makes too many mistakes. Eesh.

Absolutely wrong, but Michele Ferrari is a bit of a physiology geek who has pioneered that kind of analytical approach to physology which, surprisingly enough is being replicated by coaches/sports scientists worldwide. And I am not talking about the drugs side. There are many now who can provide that sort of analysis (and I am not talking doping here) but employing them obviously costs salaries.

Please rationalise this away. It's from another scientist, albeit one who knows what he's talking about, Michael Ashenden: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/opinion-michael-ashenden-on-omerta-101

If he had data he would name names. He has suspicions which he voices. He is at liberty to do that. You read into his words what you want to read. I don't read it as systematic team doping, more of certain individuals within teams.

Numbers based on performance/blood passports whatever. 'time up X climb' in a race from year to year is not really sound data. Suspicions because a team chooses a certain area to train in as it matches the terrain they need with weather that suits is hardly conclusive.

 

[acoggan]

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

Just an FYI: in track cycling, the pecking order goes Olympics > World Championships (especially in an Olympic year) >> regional competitions (e.g., Commonwealth Games, PanAm Games) > World Cups.

So, while Wiggins did win the Madison at the 2008 Worlds, he never won the event at the "big show" (and in fact the 9th that he and Cavendish placed at the 2008 Olympics could very well be blamed on his focus on the IP and TP, i.e., too much specialized speed training, not enough roadie-like strength).

 

[acoggan]

I think this is another way of putting it.

I don't think anyone really understands it well enough, at least not well enough to explain it in terms you would understand (and for me to try would be to give away some ideas I'd rather not publicly share).

 

[acoggan]

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?

What if he were laying down that 570 W entirely based on aerobic metabolism? Then indeed it would most certainly be a big , especially if he really did reduce his body mass by 10+ kg.

 

[sittingbison]

FFS here we go again, another scientist starting the entire cycle again, ignoring completely the 5000 posts in Sky thread, the thousands in the various Wiggo and Froome threads and the TdF thread. Starting with weight loss.

Do you have any idea what weight loss we are talking about? Care to make a guess? Or post the figures that have been discussed as nauseum?

FYI are you aware that the weight loss itself is evtremely concerning, due to the rapid losses and gains without change in power output. Yup, total power.

And it's funny you mention Cav struggling with weight and a track program, seeing as Krebs just contradicted himself just a few posts above with the opposite view point.

I just love how you say oh it's easily explained and totally within THEORETICAL physiological limits that Wiggo can within 10 months move from track to road, shed 10% weight, climb and ITT with Contador Schleck and Armstrong. No problem, happens all the time. Not Cav though, or Canc. or Martin. Or ANYONE

Seeing as you are a scientist, please explain how wiggos understanding of Kerrisons theory on cadence made him unbeatable in this years ITTs. Did he peddle faster or slower than usual, and what effect would it have had.

 

[sittingbison]

haha acoggan, fancy suggesting Wiggos Beijing performance indicated MORE track specific and LESS road training.

You have just contradicted Krebs and this other bloke who like to think it was a piece of cake wiggo moving from track to road training, I have a whole ten months, no problem plenty of time I'll even go on a bender for a month and put on 3kg, I can easily shed it all plus another 7-10kg without suffering any weakness.

In fact while I'm on the booze, I'll just have a few ciggies coz I've got such a great VO2max, plenty to spare.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Just an FYI: in track cycling, the pecking order goes Olympics > World Championships (especially in an Olympic year) >> regional competitions (e.g., Commonwealth Games, PanAm Games) > World Cups.

So, while Wiggins did win the Madison at the 2008 Worlds, he never won the event at the "big show" (and in fact the 9th that he and Cavendish placed at the 2008 Olympics could very well be blamed on his focus on the IP and TP, i.e., too much specialized speed training, not enough roadie-like strength).

I thought one of the major factors re Wiggo and Cav not replicating their 2008 World Champ performance in the OGs was that Wiggo had an extra round of both the IP and TP to get through, so that by the time of the Madison, he was pretty much done for. I recall that Cav's face was quite a picture from the early stages as he realised that he'd sacrificed winning on the Champs Elysee to ride with a man who could barely turn the pedals, though Wiggo's underperformance might simply have been due to everyone else upping their game so that his lack of roadie-like strength became apparent.

 

[davidmam]

FFS here we go again, another scientist starting the entire cycle again, ignoring completely the 5000 posts in Sky thread, the thousands in the various Wiggo and Froome threads and the TdF thread. Starting with weight loss.

Yes a scientist. That means someone trained to understand theory, models, data, analysis and rigour in proofs. Rather than idle tittle tattle and speculation. 'Oh he is winning, he must be doping!'.

FYI are you aware that the weight loss itself is evtremely concerning, due to the rapid losses and gains without change in power output. Yup, total power.

In a well managed training scenario? Not sure it should be particularly concerning unless he was already at minimum weight.

And it's funny you mention Cav struggling with weight and a track program, seeing as Krebs just contradicted himself just a few posts above with the opposite view point.

Try reading. I said G was complaining about the impact on his weight of a track-focussed program. Not Cav. Cav is close to ideal weight. Compare how he was in 2007 at his first win to how he is now.

I just love how you say oh it's easily explained and totally within THEORETICAL physiological limits that Wiggo can within 10 months move from track to road, shed 10% weight, climb and ITT with Contador Schleck and Armstrong. No problem, happens all the time. Not Cav though, or Canc. or Martin. Or ANYONE

How old is Martin? Who won the worlds TT last year, and this year? (and ITT with Schleck doesn't seem so hard You seem keen to throw allegations and say that his peformance isn't explainable by normal physiology. Try justifying that.

Seeing as you are a scientist, please explain how wiggos understanding of Kerrisons theory on cadence made him unbeatable in this years ITTs. Did he peddle faster or slower than usual, and what effect would it have had.

I'm not sure what you are selling (or peddling) here. Wiggins doesn't need to understand Kerrisons theories. What he does need to do is to trust him and the training programme outlined. Something he had traditionally not done before (training on feel for the road). Part of that analysis was to look at cadence and the relative trade offs that have to be made there.

As a comparison, Armstrong made a big change to his pedalling style, in part based on Ferrari's analysis of his physiology. Undoubtably assisted by illegal oxygen vectors, he pushed it into the high cadence end of the spectrum.
In contrast, Wiggins has had to slow down to get the best out of his strength and aerobic ability. There is also stuff on core and upper body training to improve posture and condition on the bike (another marginal gain, mostly for the climbing).

I'd reckon that physiologically they have got close to pretty much the optimum Wiggins performance now. No surprise he is now knackered, both mentally and physically. Expect to see similar next year and probably the year after, for as long as he can stand the training regime.

 

[2008885]

Leinders was brought in for the TdF squad. Tenerfie is chosen because its remote location lets them know in adavance when the OOC testers are arriving and the cost to send a tester to an island on a regular basis is not within the budget.

Tenerife is not remote, hundreds of thousands of people go there every year. Please look at what's known technically as a "map".

 

[davidmam]

Leinders wasn't at the TdF. His particular medical expertise in dealing with athletes after extreme exertion etc (team doctors do far more than administer dope) was something Sky lacked.

 

[sittingbison]

Hmmm...seeing as this is the 4th or 5th time weight has been discussed, but you obviously have not read a single post, I'll ask: was Wiggo a fat pig at Beijing? If not, as he won gold in IP, precisely where did he lose the weight for 2009 TdF? And remembering he also rode the Giro where he demonstrated new found climbing ability, can you please give me the details of the carefully monitored weight loss regimen of 10kg in six months, training hard for the road not track, without getting weak in fact maintaining total power?

Now, back to cadence as this is a thread about Wiggos cadence comment. How much did Wiggo reduce his cadence from last years ITTs to this years? And the marginal gains in posture, can you demonstrate these in photographic evidence? And can you explain the power differential between last years ITTs in Worlds and Veulta where he was roundly beaten by Martin and Froome, to this year where he put minutes into both?

 

[sittingbison]

Leinders wasn't at the TdF. His particular medical expertise in dealing with athletes after extreme exertion etc (team doctors do far more than administer dope) was something Sky lacked.

God I've heard it all now, this has gone beyond a farce.

Now let's see, what did Brailsford say when sprung? Geert being a tropical disease expert who diagnosed Bilharzia in Vroome? No, it was a bacterial specialist after the unfortunate demise of the Spanish soigneur, and team wide malaise.

 

[Franklin]

Tenerife is not remote, hundreds of thousands of people go there every year. Please look at what's known technically as a "map".

You are a bit confused... Tenerife isn't deserted, but it's remote indeed:

Remote, Definition: Removed to a distance; not near; far away; distant; said in respect to time or to place; as, remote ages; remote lands.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

You have just contradicted Krebs and this other bloke who like to think it was a piece of cake wiggo moving from track to road training, I have a whole ten months, no problem plenty of time I'll even go on a bender for a month and put on 3kg, I can easily shed it all plus another 7-10kg without suffering any weakness.

In fact while I'm on the booze, I'll just have a few ciggies coz I've got such a great VO2max, plenty to spare.

I'm not sure you're doing yourself too many favours here. No-one has said what Wiggo has done is a piece of cake, only that it's not impossible, so long as you've got the right physiology to start with. Whatever else one might think about Wiggo, he will have trained ****ing hard for his performances in 2008,2009, 2011 and 2012 etc.

 

[thehog]

I thought Froome and Wiggins rode well at the WCs. Both looked to be at their natural levels.

 

[davidmam]

Hmmm...seeing as this is the 4th or 5th time weight has been discussed, but you obviously have not read a single post, I'll ask: was Wiggo a fat pig at Beijing? If not, as he won gold in IP, precisely where did he lose the weight for 2009 TdF? And remembering he also rode the Giro where he demonstrated new found climbing ability, can you please give me the details of the carefully monitored weight loss regimen of 10kg in six months, training hard for the road not track, without getting weak in fact maintaining total power?

You have evidence to the contrary?

[/quote]
Now, back to cadence as this is a thread about Wiggos cadence comment. How much did Wiggo reduce his cadence from last years ITTs to this years?
[/quote]
I think it was about 10%. From a cadence of around 103 to something nearer 90 but I could be wrong.

And the marginal gains in posture, can you demonstrate these in photographic evidence?

You are having a giraffe aren't you?

And can you explain the power differential between last years ITTs in Worlds and Veulta where he was roundly beaten by Martin and Froome, to this year where he put minutes into both?

Off day. We all have them. He doesn't beat everyone all the time. Martin had an off day in the Vuelta. Froome was going better at the end of a 3 week tour having not just come back from breaking his collar bone.
It doesn't take much to find perfectly reasonable explainations for his performances, unless you want to read everything as doping. I'd be more surprised if he didn't have off days. (allegedly he did have a 'stomach ache' at the Tour of Britain, induced by Saccharomyces cerevisiae carlsberg following some late night 'rehydration' with another team member. Team management were not amused.)