Windy Mountain

[Netserk]

Not sure of the 2 Armstrong record times. Do you mean full EPO 2000 Armstrond vs Pantani and the stage Virenque won?

I meant 2002 and 2013. Sorry for the imprecision. I said record times, 'cause those are the two fastest time for the last 16.65(?)km in this century.

PS: thanks for the answer.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'll do my best.

As stated before, I rewatched the whole climb, from Bedoin on, for me that false flat is not part of the actual climb, but hey, lets include it, for the sake of the argument.

The false flat from Bedoin till about 15.5K had crosswind, looking at the flags quite substancial crosswinds. First from the right, a very few times from the left, I noticed one little part with a cross/tailwind. Is that favourable? Well, compared to no wind not with my experience on the bike, I hate crosswinds, when you cant change lanes you in fact are having headwind.

The forest is done and dusted, there is no wind problem/advantage there, no less power needed there due to a howling tailwind. Sorry, couldnt resist

The section above the treeline was cross/tail/head, at best it evens out, but that is my interpretation on what I saw. The Irizar SRM could suggests otherwise though, but how reliable is his SRM when he was back in the field how much minutes? The top contenders should release their powerfiles so a pattern can be established, but hey, we know the answer to that question.

So, to go back at the question: a part crosswind, a part tail/crosswind, a part headwind. I am not totally sure, I think it evens out in the end.

Not sure of the 2 Armstrong record times. Do you mean full EPO 2000 Armstrond vs Pantani and the stage Virenque won?

Well, the 2000 stage had big headwinds above the treeline, on the other hand we know due to the Hamilton book they went gungho from the forest if I remember correctly.

The Virenque win stage was quite simular to this years stage, with a favourable wind the last K's.

So, an equal time in kinda simular conditions to the best known blooddoper since mankind. Yep, I would defend that too.

Not only that, when u compare the climbing conditions with 1994 it is not a surprise those guys had a real tailwind back then.

The highlighted is merely your opinion - not being smart, but I am only interested in what the conditions were. Not if you think it gives a benefit.
If its tailwind, its tailwind - if its crosswind its crosswind.

Here you go:

And for the first 6K false flat:

I appreciate that you have gone to some effort on this - but it does not work properly for me.
It shows the same 50+ minutes video from the start.
It may be my player, but I have tried it on 2 separate devices and had the same result.

Does it work or not for others?

 

[Netserk]

I appreciate that you have gone to some effort on this - but it does not work properly for me.
It shows the same 50+ minutes video from the start.
It may be my player, but I have tried it on 2 separate devices and had the same result.

Does it work or not for others?

It works for me.

 

[The Hitch]

Sure, right here



This thread is about wind direction. Ross made a very accurate observation that the climb had a tail wind.

You dismissed the BBC as biased etc......how does whatever your personal issues with the BBC change Ross' observation? What does the BBC's "Bias" have to do with Ross' expert opinion?

I was commenting on how biased the article is. It says that froome was a lot slower than the record neglecting to mention the record was a tt. It also uses grappes observations that his power outputs have remained steady for 2 years as an argument in support of froome being clean even though everyone who doubts froome believes he has been doping since 2 years ago anyway.

it concludes that sky and froome are merely the victims of Armstrong and place weight on him passing a bunch of tests as if it meant something.

That may not have much to do with wind, but threads do deviate from their title quite often. Not everything in the thread will be 100% about wind. To interpret my post as me saying they got tucker to lie is quite a significant jump.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It works for me.

Does it go straight to the beginning of the video? Or does it open at the time?

Mine opens at the start - that is on a Macbook & an iPad - my work PC is different so I will try it from that.

 

[Netserk]

Does it go straight to the beginning of the video? Or does it open at the time?

Mine opens at the start - that is on a Macbook & an iPad - my work PC is different so I will try it from that.

It opens at the time chosen by FGL. (Well actually it opens where I last was in the video, but after 0.1 s it goes to the correct time...)

 

[thehog]

This thread couldn't die without comment from Froome.

I think he thinks there may have been a tailwind. I think.

He's doesn't sound entirely convinced.

Just a little help.

Maybe Contador didn't get a little help? Or anyone else?

 

[the sceptic]

Walsh shouldve just gone with the "never tested positive" defense. It would have been more convincing that this vortexing he is doing with the tailwind.

2009 being in the clean era might be the biggest horse**** he has come up with so far. Does that mean Contador climbing fast no longer proves he is doping?

 

[roundabout]

Note the ' '

Poor Wiggins

 

[thehog]

Note the ' '

Poor Wiggins

I know. Like he wasn't even there.

Even poor old Mayo had a help of tailwind.

Maybe his ITT wasn't so great? And he was only fast as Froome in his ITT compared to Dawg's road race?

 

[the sceptic]

oh right. hard to keep track of all the winds and who is doping or not.

strange that Wiggins isnt more outraged that he was robbed of his first clean tour.

 

[thehog]

oh right. hard to keep track of all the winds and who is doping or not.

strange that Wiggins isnt more outraged that he was robbed of his first clean tour.

In 2012 it was "No Contador", "speeds are down", "5.9".

In 2013 it was "Ax3 was early on", "tailwind", "much slower than Mayo".

2014? He's going to have to slowdown. After seeing the Vuelta everyone has caught on me speeding up.

2014 will full on grosse molte retardo.

 

[sniper]

This thread couldn't die without comment from Froome.

I think he thinks there may have been a tailwind. I think.

He's doesn't sound entirely convinced.

Just a little help.

Maybe Contador didn't get a little help? Or anyone else?

baffling how walsh helps froome there to find the correct answer.

dawg: "well, i had some cross- and headwinds here and there, perhaps a tailwind in the forest, but negligible"
walsh: "So basically what you're saying is you had some massive tailwinds all the way to the top..."
dawg: "That's it. That's it. 100%"

 

[thehog]

Walsh likes to compare Froome to Mayo who now runs a very successful electric installations company and hasn't ridden his bike in a long time.

Nevertheless.

Some statistics for consumption.

My take if the mathematics are correct is Froome would have been about 30 seconds behind Mayo for the final 6.1km on Ventoux. Froome would have been even closer to Hamilton and Armstrong.

ITTs have the advantage of specific gear selection and being able to go balls out rather than having to adapt to the ebbs and flow of a race stage.

That's fairly impressive from clean Froome considering the headwind he had at 2km to go and by that point had raced 232km.

--

Mt Ventoux, last 7.1 km 7.53% :

2000 Armstrong 21'32
2002 Armstrong 20'22
2009 Contador 20'31
2013 Froome 20'04 - 2m.50s per km.

2004 Stage 4 - June 10: Bédoin - Le Mont Ventoux ITT, 21.6 km

http://ftp.cyclingnews.com/road/2004/jun04/dauphinelibere04/?id=results/livestage4


16:12 CEST
Lance Armstrong has passed the 15.5 km mark in 40'02 in the fourth best time behind Mercado (39'37), Sevilla (39'39) and....Tyler Hamilton in 39'21

16:14 CEST
But Hamilton is not quick enough for Iban Mayo, who flies past the 15.5 km mark in 39'04! Jonathan Vaughters predictions are starting to look quite good at the moment.

6.1km (remaining from 15.5km checkpoint)

Mayo: 55.51 - 39.04 = 16.47
Hamilton: 56.26 - 39.21 = 17.05
Armstrong: 57.09 - 40.02 = 17.07

Froome @ 2.50s per km = 17.20


Provisional
1 Iban Mayo (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 55.51
2 Tyler Hamilton (USA) Phonak Hearing Systems 0.35
3 Oscar Sevilla (Spa) Phonak Hearing Systems 1.03
4 Juan Miguel Mercado (Spa) Quick.Step-Davitamon 1.48
5 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal presented by Berry Floor 1.58
6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Rabobank 3.21
7 Michael Rasmussen (Den) Rabobank 3.33
8 Stéphane Goubert (Fra) Ag2R Prevoyance 3.36
9 David Moncoutie (Fra) Cofidis, le credit par Telephone 3.59
10 Floyd Landis (USA) US Postal presented by Berry Floor 4.09

 

[red_flanders]

That's fairly impressive from clean Froome considering the headwind he had at 2km to go and by that point had raced 232km.

Even more impressive after reading reports that the first 232 km were raced at an average of 50 kph and riders were reporting being blown before hitting Ventoux.

 

[The Hitch]

Even more impressive after reading reports that the first 232 km were raced at an average of 50 kph and former Tour de France winners were reporting being blown before hitting Ventoux.

Made a slight adjustment

 

[the sceptic]

Mayo had a tailwind too right?

Pure speculation of course, but I dont think there are many who could beat Dawgzilla in a grand tour. Armstrong yes, but who else? Everyone else that can climb as fast as Dawg would lose 5 minutes in the ITTs.

 

[veganrob]

It was a gentle 232k at a gentle 50kph.
I think Andy Schleck commented that he felt his pony had wings. Riding through fields of lilac and lavender. My favorite.
That is very gentle.

 

[Le breton]

I know. Like he wasn't even there.

Even poor old Mayo had a help of tailwind.

Maybe his ITT wasn't so great? And he was only fast as Froome in his ITT compared to Dawg's road race?

Jonathan Vaughters disagrees as can be read on the thread to his name on the 3rd of february 2013

I didn't have an SRM on for Ventoux, but I would say 6.6 would be about right, perhaps a bit low, as Ventoux tends to be windy and the cx might be a bit higher than on other climbs. Also, I had been testing on 15-20 min climbs in more the 6.8 region, prior to race. Mayo was on a newly paved road and an oddly zero wind day. I know, as I was there for OLN to interview Mayo (Phil and Paul don't speak Spanish, oddly enough)..

That's not to say Mayo wouldn't have beaten me, but maybe by a bit less!

But 6.35 vs 6.7 leaves us with a .35 difference or around 5-6%... Which would make sense as my natural hct at this time of year would be 48%. For Ventoux it was doped to 52%. So, an 8% gain in hb mass. This would lead to a 4-6% increase in power at FTP, considering the high density of the blood already (as to say 38% to 42% would lead to a slightly more linear relationship gain, as O2 delivery efficiency is greater, per red cell, in a less crowded blood stream)

 

[sniper]

I dont think there are many who could beat Dawgzilla in a grand tour. Armstrong yes, but who else?

The reason Froome's fans are so angry with Horner is that they know he would have dropped Froome and Quintana.....spanked them

..............

 

[red_flanders]

Made a slight adjustment

Much better!

 

[thehog]

Jonathan Vaughters disagrees as can be read on the thread to his name on the 3rd of february 2013

I didn't have an SRM on for Ventoux, but I would say 6.6 would be about right, perhaps a bit low, as Ventoux tends to be windy and the cx might be a bit higher than on other climbs. Also, I had been testing on 15-20 min climbs in more the 6.8 region, prior to race. Mayo was on a newly paved road and an oddly zero wind day. I know, as I was there for OLN to interview Mayo (Phil and Paul don't speak Spanish, oddly enough)..

That's not to say Mayo wouldn't have beaten me, but maybe by a bit less!

But 6.35 vs 6.7 leaves us with a .35 difference or around 5-6%... Which would make sense as my natural hct at this time of year would be 48%. For Ventoux it was doped to 52%. So, an 8% gain in hb mass. This would lead to a 4-6% increase in power at FTP, considering the high density of the blood already (as to say 38% to 42% would lead to a slightly more linear relationship gain, as O2 delivery efficiency is greater, per red cell, in a less crowded blood stream)

I'm taking into consideration the last 6km. Froome had a headwind for at least the last 2km.

Mayo's ride it has spoken of a gentle side tail to no wind at all. It was stinking hot the day when he rode. Mayo has the advantage of gearing and zero crowd on the mountain that day.

I've seen footage or the climb. The mechanics used steel crankset because they knew he was going to go on one. There's a story that by he end he mechanics held up the bike and one of the crank arms has loosened from the bottom bracket due to the force of Mayo's power!

This what makes Froome's ride just so impressive. Beyond words in fact.

 

[thehog]

Edit: Mayo also used a aluminium bike. Especially constructed for the day. Marginal gains.

There was a small interview with Mayo here from earlier this year.

http://ibanmayoblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/iban-mayo-ive-never-gone-back-to-alpe.html

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I'm taking into consideration the last 6km. Froome had a headwind for at least the last 2km.

Mayo's ride it has spoken of a gentle side tail to no wind at all. It was stinking hot the day when he rode. Mayo has the advantage of gearing and zero crowd on the mountain that day.

I've seen footage or the climb. The mechanics used steel crankset because they knew he was going to go on one. There's a story that by he end he mechanics held up the bike and one of the crank arms has loosened from the bottom bracket due to the force of Mayo's power!

This what makes Froome's ride just so impressive. Beyond words in fact.

I knew an American sprinter in the 80s who said that he crashed once, and was going so fast that the sparks from his bike actually lit the paint and the tires on fire...

Mayo's steel cranks are in the same category of story...

 

[Taxus4a]

I wrote this some months ago in an spanish forum, I am not goint to translate,..

http://www.spanishforum.com

Feel free to efit the post

Cheers
Bison