• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Windy Mountain

Page 18 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Netserk said:
Well I do think you are (mostly) trolling in this thread, but I don't think I am, nor do I think that RR thinks so.
Im not the one that invented a tailwind.

I dont think RR is trolling either, he just really wants there to be a tailwind for some reason.
 
Aug 16, 2011
9,595
0
0
Let's get back on topic instead of trolling each and accusing each other of trolling. Stick to making your own points and logically countering others points.

If you can't agree and end up calling each other trolls then maybe it would be best to just agree to disagree.
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
RownhamHill said:
Yeah it's a very fair point, and I didn't articulate myself well in that last post.

I was interested in reading the discussion/topic in general terms. It's just it appeared to me to degenerating into a tomato/tomayto type discussion, which doesn't do anyone any favours. What I meant is I have no interest in making a judgement on whether the wind was coming from the West or the North, but it's pretty clear what Sceptic and Race Radio's views are, and they don't need to go on arguing the toss about it.

Anyway, I'm now probably just as guilty of another tedious discussion so I'll bow out at this point.
Good post.

Race Radio said:
Do you really think the various folks who intentionally twisted what I wrote were not intending to troll? Really? :eek::confused:

My point was clear. Froome's accelerations were insane, but due to the variables of the climb it was difficult to use the normal formulas to calculate output. This view is shared by multiple people who are considered experts. Pretty simple

The response to trying to add context to the discuss was a handful of dedicated trolls worked hard to twist my position, pretend I was defending Froome. Nonsense

A couple months from now someone will post a link showing a tailwind and claim it shows a headwind....hoping they can continue the nonsense. Zzzzzz
Bad post from someone who is not able to say he was wrong on that particular day.

But hey, let's not disagree with a forum 'hero'.


Afrank said:
Let's get back on topic instead of trolling each and accusing each other of trolling. Stick to making your own points and logically countering others points.

If you can't agree and end up calling each other trolls then maybe it would be best to just agree to disagree.
To the bold: Armstrong had a real tailwind, so did Pantani in 1994.

But hey, who likes facts?

And I agree, Fermi was trolling when opening this topic :D
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
Race Radio said:
Hey, thanks for proving my point. Twist, twist, twist

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1356336&postcount=1351
Twist, twist, twist? I am no Chubby Checker my friend.

At least you dont point me out as a troll, thats positive.

I am and was never about to start a cockfight with you but I found it dissapointing a man of your statute wasnt able to admit a mistake.

Let me explain.

First there was the story of your tweet saying the dawg's time was several minutes down to Mayo's.

Then there came the comparison to Armstrong's time.

Subsequently there was the claim of a tailwind by you.

Why?

Do you really think a tailwind is needed to equal a time set by Armstrong?
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
Race Radio said:
Hey, thanks for proving my point. Twist, twist, twist

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1356336&postcount=1351
Twist, twist, twist? I am no Chubby Checker my friend.

At least you dont point me out as a troll, thats positive.

I am and was never about to start a cockfight with you but I found it dissapointing a man of your statute wasnt able to admit a mistake.

Let me explain.

First there was the story of your tweet saying the dawg's time was several minutes down to Mayo's.

Then there came the comparison to Armstrong's time.

Subsequently there was the claim of a tailwind by you.

Why?

Do you really think a tailwind is needed to equal a time set by Armstrong?

Why have you never responded to my claims of a clear tailwind in 1994 and Armstrongs Ventoux climbs?

Why were you not interested in that?
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Twist, twist, twist
Have you read the link I just gave? Did you read anything I have posted on this thread? Clearly not or you would not have written that post

I suggest you read what I actually write instead of another poster's deliberate distortion of what I have written
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
Race Radio said:
Have you read the link I just gave? Did you read anything I have posted on this thread? Clearly not or you would not have written that post

I suggest you read what I actually write instead of another poster's deliberate distortion of what I have written
My friend, I dont need a lesson in reading comprehension, nor a lesson in reading, per se.

But thank you for the lesson in humility :confused:,

Race, who suggested a tailwind? You or me?

And, really, please, some peeps are really able to think for themselves, this instead of 'the angry Armstrong mobbers'... :eek:

[Oooops, that was a troll on my part ;)]
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
My friend, I dont need a lesson in reading comprehension, nor a lesson in reading, per se.
]
You clearly do.

I already covered what I actually wrote on the day here http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1356336&postcount=1351

Regarding the wind

*The video of the day clearly shows a side/head wind in the last 5km. Anyone who can read a map can see that would mean a tailwind for the majority of the climb

*The group was larger then normal for much of the climb due to the tailwind and the slow early pace

*Ross Tucker from the Sport Scientist said they had looked at SRM files and saw they were reading lower then the calculations due to the tailwind

It was based on these data points that I wrote that Ventoux was likely not the best stage to make calculations from. Semnoz was better as it did not have the variables.

I wrote several times that, while the variables made it hard to do calculations, Froomes attacks that day were insane. His attacks showed he could out climb Quintana. If he was not on an off day (Alp d'Huez) or had already sewed up the Tour (Semnoz) then his output on those climbs would be even more insane then they already were.

The response to me trying to add context to the discussion? Months of deliberate distortion by a handful of posters. Babble about defending Froome and 12%. Intentional distortion.
 
May 10, 2009
3,654
0
0
Race Radio said:
You clearly do.

I already covered what I actually wrote on the day here http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1356336&postcount=1351

Regarding the wind

*The video of the day clearly shows a side/head wind in the last 5km. Anyone who can read a map can see that would mean a tailwind for the majority of the climb

*The group was larger then normal for much of the climb due to the tailwind and the slow early pace

*Ross Tucker from the Sport Scientist said they had looked at SRM files and saw they were reading lower then the calculations due to the tailwind

It was based on these data points that I wrote that Ventoux was likely not the best stage to make calculations from. Semnoz was better as it did not have the variables.

I wrote several times that, while the variables made it hard to do calculations, Froomes attacks that day were insane[/B]. His attacks showed he could out climb Quintana. If he was not on an off day (Alp d'Huez) or had already sewed up the Tour (Semnoz) then his output on those climbs would be even more insane then they already were.

The response to me trying to add context to the discussion? Months of deliberate distortion by a handful of posters. Babble about defending Froome and 12%. Intentional distortion.


why say it was encouraging then
 
Race Radio said:
*The group was larger then normal for much of the climb due to the tailwind and the slow early pace
Would you mind to explain that to me? I thought a tailwind would make a climb more selective as drafting would account for less, compared to a headwind where it would be easier for a worse climber to sit on the wheel of a better climber.
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
Race Radio said:
Regarding the wind

*The video of the day clearly shows a side/head wind in the last 5km. Anyone who can read a map can see that would mean a tailwind for the majority of the climb

The response to me trying to add context to the discussion? Months of deliberate distortion by a handful of posters. Babble about defending Froome and 12%. Intentional distortion.
You do know why this mountain is called Ventoux?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbO_te8cv7c

Where is that wind in the forest? I don't see it, sorry. I do see a lot of tailwind sections in that Ventoux climb of 2000 though.
 
May 10, 2009
3,654
0
0
the sceptic said:
the logic here seems to be that no matter where the wind comes from it always results in a 80% tailwind.
My main issue is why RR didn't feel the need to tweet about these insane attacks that night...instead he went down another route.

Now again I am not hugely bothered by tailwinds or calculations gone awry - the latter was a genuine error - but the insane attacks, as he says himself, were there for all to see in realtime, so that aspect is odd.
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
Digger said:
My main issue is why RR didn't feel the need to tweet about these insane attacks that night...instead he went down another route.

Now again I am not hugely bothered by tailwinds or calculations gone awry - the latter was a genuine error - but the insane attacks, as he says himself, were there for all to see in realtime, so that aspect is odd.
Please excuse me if I did not rant for days on it as I was busy riding my bike. Perhaps because I, unlike some, do not have an unhinged obsession?

As you know I expressed shock at the attacks when they occurred. Wrote "Oh My" on twitter as soon as he launched them. Pointing out that the last 15km was the "2nd fastest ever" I then went and took a shower, as I had climbed Madeleine and the Telegraph that day, and headed out to grab a beer and dinner with some friends. So sorry if I did not ditch my buddies for you.:rolleyes: In my absence I pointed my followers to several experts who would analysis the day better then I.

Since then I have pointed out several times the absurdity of his attacks.....but of course you know this.

Thank you for your post as it shows yet again the reason for this thread. Not to discuss the direction of the wind and its effect on the day but to provoke conflict by twisting what is written.
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Race Radio said:
Please excuse me if I did not rant for days on it as I was busy riding my bike. Perhaps because I, unlike some, do not have an unhinged obsession?

As you know I expressed shock at the attacks when they occurred. Wrote "Oh My" on twitter as soon as he launched them. Pointing out that the last 15km was the "2nd fastest ever" I then went and took a shower, as I had climbed Madeleine and the Telegraph that day, and headed out to grab a beer and dinner with some friends. So sorry if I did not ditch my buddies for you.:rolleyes: In my absence I pointed my followers to several experts who would analysis the day better then I.

Since then I have pointed out several times the absurdity of his attacks.....but of course you know this.

Thank you for your post as it shows yet again the reason for this thread. Not to discuss the direction of the wind and its effect on the day but to provoke conflict by twisting what is written.
Well, if we are talking about the wind, you still havent explained how it can come from two directions at the same time.
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
the sceptic said:
Well, if we are talking about the wind, you still havent explained how it can come from two directions at the same time.
We get it, reading maps is not your thing. Most can see that a side/head wind in the last 5km means a tailwind for the majority of the climb



But of course you knew this as you have already posted a link that says exactly the same thing I have been writing. The video of the day also clearly shows a strong side wind for much of the last 5km
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eiN2vfGKhk

Anyways, twist on, I gotta go for a ride
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
Race Radio said:
We get it, reading maps is not your thing. Most can see that a side/head wind in the last 5km means a tailwind for the majority of the climb



But of course you knew this as you have already posted a link that says exactly the same thing I have been writing. The video of the day also clearly shows a strong side wind for much of the last 5km
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eiN2vfGKhk

Anyways, twist on, I gotta go for a ride
Perhaps all the fuss is because it looks like you have been trying to explain Froome did what he did due to this tailwind in the forest? This while my video here above clearly shows there was hardly any windinfluence in the forest? At the time I downloaded the whole climb and on the low parts, just after Bedoin, there was a major side wind, in the forest subsequently there was none, or neglectible.

And please note the bolded part there; it looks like, perhaps looked like.

Have a nice ride, that reminds me, gotta fix mine soooooon!
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Race Radio said:
We get it, reading maps is not your thing. Most can see that a side/head wind in the last 5km means a tailwind for the majority of the climb



But of course you knew this as you have already posted a link that says exactly the same thing I have been writing.

Anyways, twist on, I gotta go for a ride
Thanks for the encouraging words and for the map. So with head/cross after Chalet that means the wind came from the north-north west.

Of course earlier in the thread you wrote

Race Radio said:
the prevailing wisdom of the forum is the wind was from the SE, resulting in Crosswinds for the last 3-4 km.

If that is the case what is the prevailing wind for the first 16km of the 21km climb?

Pretty simple, it was a tail wind for the vast majority of the climb.
so according to you, there is always a tailwind no matter where the wind comes from? or am I missing something?
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Perhaps all the fuss is because it looks like you have been trying to explain Froome did
If you read what I wrote, and not what some guy banned for trolling wrote, it is clear that is not the case
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS