Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[acoggan]

69 kg according to the Sky site, 72 kg when he was at his limit at Garmin in 2009, 77 kg according to the London 2012 site.

Vs. 82 kg as an IP/TP/Madison rider in 2008.

EDIT: 570/82 = 6.95 W/kg for 4 min 15 s.

 

[the big ring]

Vs. 82 kg as an IP/TP/Madison rider in 2008.

EDIT: 570/82 = 6.95 W/kg for 4 min 15 s.

460W/69kg = 6.67 W/kg for 50 minutes.

ie 95.9%

A bit more than Boardman's 84%, even if it is 10 minutes less than an hour...

 

[131313]

Which version?

I'll admit I may be off the back on that one!

If you want to make the argument that he's gotten faster, vs. more powerful, I'm not going to argue with you, simply because I don't follow professional cycling enough to really care/be able to mount a cogent counterargument. Based on the power he is purported to be producing, though, I don't see any major improvements.

good use of the word purported.

Seriously, I don't have any strong desire to be right. I'm not racing against Wiggins or in any grand tours, so I don't actually care all that much. I mainly became annoyed because when I actually took a hard look at Wiggin's TT performances over the last 4 years I came to the conclusion that he's made a massive improvement. And yet, I keep reading articles about a Chinese swimmer being "incredibly suspicious" based on performance alone. Based on performance alone I think Wiggins increase in performance is equally suspicious, if not more so since he's not a 16 yr old girl.

Unlike some, I don't discount that little things make a difference. I know they do, and that they're additive. But when I look at his performance in timed events between 09/10 and the end of 11/today, the difference is IMO startling.

 

[Cloxxki]

Vs. 82 kg as an IP/TP/Madison rider in 2008.

EDIT: 570/82 = 6.95 W/kg for 4 min 15 s.

That sounds pretty doable to me.
As a small time MTB'er (never won anything outside my region) in my offseason (extra lazy) I would have managed a bit over 500W over 4m15, based on a max test of 506W I did, weighting 82kg (a bit chubby). It worked up to the 520W stage over 21 minutes, so the last 4 ins were already 480+. Platform pedals, 170mm cranks, 39.17" inseam.
I would expect a Olympian gold winner to be good for 600+ over 4km at my weight. Unless you're even more gifted aerodynamically than aerobically (which I certainly am not, real slow still at 450W efforts), then you might get away with less. Stubby legs, narrow shouders, 1:1 hips to waist.

 

[acoggan]

460W/69kg = 6.67 W/kg for 50 minutes.

ie 95.9%

A bit more than Boardman's 84%, even if it is 10 minutes less than an hour...

You're mixing apples-and-oranges, i.e., unlike Boardman Wiggins did not weigh the same during the two races. Ergo, you have to rely on absolute watts to define his "stamina".

(Another way of looking at it is this: if plotting W/kg, then what you've calculated is not the slope of one line, but the slope as you move from one line to another.)

EDIT: Of course, another reason that Wiggins apparently sustains a LOWER percentage of his pursuit power than Boardman did is because he has lost weight, and with it, lean body mass. IOW, even though his power:mass may be higher now than when he was pursuiting, his absolute power may be compromised.

 

[acoggan]

I keep reading articles about a Chinese swimmer being "incredibly suspicious" based on performance alone. Based on performance alone I think Wiggins increase in performance is equally suspicious, if not more so since he's not a 16 yr old girl.

So where do you stand on Michael Phelps, whose path leading up to and including his 1st Olympics was very similar to that of Ye Shiwen this go 'round?

 

[the big ring]

You're mixing apples-and-oranges, i.e., unlike Boardman Wiggins did not weigh the same during the two races. Ergo, you have to rely on absolute watts to define his "stamina".

Boardman's weight remain unchanged, so his W/kg for the hour is also comes out at 84% of his W/kg IP power.

I am now comparing apples and apples, yes?

 

[131313]

So where do you stand on Michael Phelps, whose path leading up to and including his 1st Olympics was very similar to that of Ye Shiwen this go 'round?

1) that swimming is stupid, and

2) if he were Chinese, his performances would be viewed very differently by the American public.

So, I think his progression is similar to that of Ye Shiwen, just as you stated. That said, I honestly don't have a strong opinion about either of them doping or not doping.

 

[jilbiker]

So where do you stand on Michael Phelps, whose path leading up to and including his 1st Olympics was very similar to that of Ye Shiwen this go 'round?

Or the 17yr old American female swimmer who is baffling everyone with the performance. Interesting that it is NOT called suspicious by American media, I took one look at her and was convinced juiced. The square jaw, tautness of the face, build definition etc. listen spend some time with bodybuilders and you will understand the big difference between the natural and the artificial. It takes years, years for the body to natural develop into the great performance machines that you see. You shorten that time to market (TTM) via juice.

But i find it interesting in cycling that in the last 2 years we have had "old" men winning, a 34year old and a 32 yr old are suddenly firing in prime time. Some may argue that well that is consistent with what you have talked about, years to naturally develop. Yes...but not in your thirties...i don't buy it. I could write an article on sports science, called "Buildup, Rest and Recovery and the age Factor"......32 is maybe okay, except Wiggins had such a short TTM that I have a huge question mark.

 

[Winterfold]

His claimed weight is 69 kg.

No, it isn't. It is 69kg plus 'I've put a bit of weight on'.

But keep trying. It's nice watching a pseud getting intellectually owned by a proper scientist.

 

[Franklin]

No, it isn't. It is 69kg plus 'I've put a bit of weight on'.

 

[the big ring]

No, it isn't. It is 69kg plus 'I've put a bit of weight on'.

Did you mean "77kg and I've managed to lose only fat and then only upper body muscle while maintaining the same power output"?

http://www.teamsky.com/profile_news/0,27292,17578,00.html : 69kg

 

[131313]

No, it isn't. It is 69kg plus 'I've put a bit of weight on'.

But keep trying. It's nice watching a pseud getting intellectually owned by a proper scientist.

you're right. It makes total sense that he put on some weight in preparation for the TDF. Plus, he clearly looks like he's gained weight. My apologies...

 

[No_Balls]

But i find it interesting in cycling that in the last 2 years we have had "old" men winning, a 34year old and a 32 yr old are suddenly firing in prime time. Some may argue that well that is consistent with what you have talked about, years to naturally develop. Yes...but not in your thirties...i don't buy it. I could write an article on sports science, called "Buildup, Rest and Recovery and the age Factor"......32 is maybe okay, except Wiggins had such a short TTM that I have a huge question mark.

As i said yesterday that even during the EPO heydays still those old guys like Indurain (even mr 60% Riis finding his prime in 32) begun to falter naturally during their thirties while it is the other way around nowadays. In these days the new programs keep you alive and kicking probably to your fourties and then we actually dont know when Wiggins is going down. Sean Yates said actually that, despite him being more successful then Merckx during a season, we have not seen the best of Wiggins. And if this is not his best then i dont wanna know how his best looks like.

In the future we might look at the 90´ies with a much brighter perspective.

 

[D-Queued]

.... Sean Yates said actually that, despite him being more successful then Merckx during a season, we have not seen the best of Wiggins. And if this is not his best then i dont wanna know how his best looks like.

In the future we might look at the 90´ies with a much brighter perspective.

8 wins in a row, the final achieved at age 40...

Top that!

Dave.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

JV on Wiggo's threshold power:

Ok, so answer the 20 min effort vs 40+ minute effort question, I only have limited information from elite athletes, so this isn't a University study....

That said: CVV can produce about 5.9 watts per kg in peak form for 40+ minute climbs, Wiggo is a bit more at 6.1 w/kg for this length of effort.
From the pre-Tour tests both riders have done up Rocacorba (a 33 minute climb) I know that Wiggo was at 6.1w/kg and CVV was 5.7 w/kg (He was off form a bit in June). However, Wiggo did a local 10 mile TT in GB about 2 weeks before the Tour, or 5 days before the Rocacorba test. He posted a time of 18mins flat (and was disqualified for using a 1080 wheel...funny rules over there). Anyhow, his power was 482 watts, so using his Tour weight of 72 kgs, so 6.7 w/kg. So, anecdotally, there's about a 9% decrease in power when going from a 20 min effort to a 40+ min effort. At 6.7 w/kg you certainly can climb at a VAM of 1750, but at 6.1 you wont even hit 1700 (again, anecdotal based on experience).
The last TT in the Tour Wiggo averaged 434 watts, consistent with his previous tests of 40+ minutes and just about 6.1 w/kg. I dont have any data for Wiggo up climbs in the Tour, as he didnt use a PowerTap.

JV

 

[131313]

JV on Wiggo's threshold power:

In looking at that, I then don't think my calculations are "way off". I underestimated his power by roughly 20W, which is about what I would have guessed being that I modeled it on a point-to-point course. This is assuming that 2009 Wiggins is about 2:00 slower than 2012 Wiggins. Personally, I think there are enough historical results to support this position. He was 40 seconds slower than Cancellara, and even with LLSanchez in 2009. He was significantly faster than both in the final TDF TT. He had never actually won a major TT prior to 2011. Bottom line, he's significantly faster relative to the competition in timed events. I don't really see how this can be in dispute?

As for reasons, the possibilities are that he's decreased the energy demands, he's increase power or the competition is going slower. To the first point, I don't see it, unless a magical 2 rpm difference changes the paradigm completely. To the last point, other power outputs that are in the public domain don't seem to support that power levels have dropped between 09/10 to today. So, that leaves a significant increase in power.

If anyone seems any clear flaws in this logic then please let me know. But it's going to take more than a study detailing the difference between pedaling at 60rpm vs. 110 rpm, because Wiggins didn't alter his cadence by 50rpms.

 

[jilbiker]

As i said yesterday that even during the EPO heydays still those old guys like Indurain (even mr 60% Riis finding his prime in 32) begun to falter naturally during their thirties while it is the other way around nowadays. In these days the new programs keep you alive and kicking probably to your fourties and then we actually dont know when Wiggins is going down. Sean Yates said actually that, despite him being more successful then Merckx during a season, we have not seen the best of Wiggins. And if this is not his best then i dont wanna know how his best looks like.

In the future we might look at the 90´ies with a much brighter perspective.

Yes, it has baffled me, the juice has certainly changed. Baseball players going on till 40's and breaking records, cyclist peak years starting at 32 and continuing till 40? It is the juicing style and mixture, right now it is no longer take just EPO, but it is carefully constructed blend of juice10% or this 5% of this 30%of this, its absolutely phenomenal, the Balco scandal was a glimpse into what has happening since the days of Ben Johnson who was blasting down one single chemical. Now the blended is so constructed that the restructuring of the body is sort of gentle almost blending in with natural processes. if you look at the days of Pantani notice the number of people who lost their hair and notice we have almost zero balding or hair loss these days. The juice is much neater and it will get better.

Yes, there are better results to come...in a shorter TTM.

 

[acoggan]

He had never actually won a major TT prior to 2011.

Perhaps not, but he's been so successful since then that people are even crediting him for World Records in which he had absolutely no part :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Wiggins

(See the 3rd entry under WR, which lists today's time by the GB team pursuit squad of Edward Clancy, Geraint Thomas, Steven Burke and Peter Kennaugh, with Andrew Tennant the alternate.)

 

[131313]

Perhaps not, but he's been so successful since then that people are even crediting him for World Records in which he had absolutely no part :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Wiggins

(See the 3rd entry under WR, which lists today's time by the GB team pursuit squad of Edward Clancy, Geraint Thomas, Steven Burke and Peter Kennaugh, with Andrew Tennant the alternate.)

that's awesome! If I were a wiki editor, I think I'd toss on the 2012 World TT championships, and maybe an Olympic MTB gold medal, just for good measure.

 

[sittingbison]

...I think Wiggins increase in performance is equally suspicious, if not more so since he's not a 16 yr old girl..

131313, I have cunningly spotted the only inconsistency in all your well reasoned debate.

“I say they’re just f*****g w*****s. I cannot be doing with people like that. It justifies their own bone-idleness because they can’t ever imagine applying themselves to do anything in their lives. It’s easy for them to sit under a pseudonym on Twitter and write that sort of s**t....c***s!!"

Sure sounds like a 16 yr old girl to me

 

[biker jk]

No, it isn't. It is 69kg plus 'I've put a bit of weight on'.

But keep trying. It's nice watching a pseud getting intellectually owned by a proper scientist.

You must be watching the wrong game. The game on here certainly doesn't have anyone being "intellectually owned by a proper scientist".

 

[rata de sentina]

It's nice watching a pseud getting intellectually owned by a proper scientist.

To be fair most sport scientists are not "proper" scientists.

 

[Cavalier]

To be fair most sport scientists are not "proper" scientists.

What?
Possibly the most bafflingly wrong post I've seen here in weeks.

 

[The Real GFY]

JV on Wiggo's threshold power:

And now he's between 6.8 and 7.0 w/kg.

Ouch