Netserk said:I'm sure your PM was the deciding factor
Seems we are drifting off topic again.
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Netserk said:I'm sure your PM was the deciding factor
Netserk said:I think it's the last 6.15km that are the most exposed.
Hugh Januss said:Where it was mostly cross to head wind.
Cycle Chic said:yeh why doesn't someone ask a few of the riders on twitter
The Hitch said:Yeah cos 20 years of Omerta has taught us that riders journos and commentators will always tell the truth when they get asked questions about whether there is doping in cycling
The Hitch said:It is far more unbelievable to see someone dominating both mountains and time trials than it is to see them just dominate mountains.
.
The Hitch said:The Champs Elysee stage one year had Hinault and Zoetelmelk finish minutes ahead of the rest.
Yet in recent years, even in the most doped tours like 2009 where everyone was doping apart from saint wiggins, its been a sprint where everyone finishes together.
Point is, You cant compare racing from recent years to racing from the 80's and back. Didn't Merckx once win a Pau stage by minutes whereas Hushovd finished with the pack in 2010.
sniper said:hate to break it to you, but RR didn't acknowledge the lack of wind in the forest that winterfold speaks of. RR claims a tailwind (tail-wind) in the forest part. And headwind only for the final 2 km. So no, RR has not acknowledged any of that.
and now an eyecheck.
just look at the trees here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOC4ahW9rP0
hardly any wind at all (regardless of the direction).
RR has claimed considerable tailwind.
fair points, but while i could see flags flying with tailwind, i also saw flags without any wind, and some with headwind, i think.Von Mises said:I havent seen that RR has claimed considerable tailwind, but tailwind there was albeit weak.
Btw, even weak wind makes a difference. For instance 5 km/h wind is very weak. Beaufort scale defines it as "light air" and describes "leaves and flags do not move, smoke drifts", you practically do not feel this kind of wind on your skin.
(In video what you posted you can see drifting smoke for instance 30:37 or 31.37 minutes.)
But 5 km/h, though you cannot feel it and leaves do not move, makes considerable. difference. Assuming 400w constant output, all else equal,over 10 km distance 5 km/h tailwind wins you roughly 1 minute compared with 0 km/ h and 2 minutes compared with 5 km/h headwind.
Stronger wind, like 10 km/h - still weak actually (light breexe defined by Beaufort), but leaves move and flags start to move, makes obviously even more difference.
In video what you posted there are many-many different spots in trees where you can see flags moving in tailwind.
My point: there was tailwind in forest, weak, but still tailwind.
Von Mises said:Coppi, Gaul, Merckx, Hinault, LeMond, Fignon and actually many more - they all won ITT-s and MTF-s.
Von Mises said:I havent seen that RR has claimed considerable tailwind, but tailwind there was albeit weak.
...
My point: there was tailwind in forest, weak, but still tailwind.
Race Radio said:Drawing lines on a photo does not change the video. It is clear that for 15 km prior to Chalet Reynard to several km after there is a tailwind, or a crosswind sheltered by RV's. The last 3km or so has a head, side, and tailwind as it is much more expose. Even the lines you draw on your picture support this as the climb from Bedoin would have solid tailwind.
It is pretty clear that 16 km of the climb had a tailwind, 2 km had a head wind, and 3-4km had a crosswind
sniper said:fair points, but while i could see flags flying with tailwind, i also saw flags without any wind, and some with headwind, i think.
point being:
While i,d readily admit tailwind may have been predominant in the forest, i also think RR is (grossly) exaggerating with his "80 percent obvious tailwind", especially if we take the final 5 or 6 km into account, where some riders have reported (strong) headwind. And since the evidence really isn,t clearcut either way, one is still left wondering how RR could be so convinced of his case.
As I think you know, the underlying issue is: can we reliably compare the 2013 edition of the Ventoux to earlier editions, i.e. was it a reliable yardstick for measuring Froome's performance vis-a-vis Armstrong's?Dr. Maserati said:So, again - you don't appear to have an opinion on the wind, just on RRs estimation. There is a word for that.
I said Ten Dam and I said relevant links have been provided in upthread.Good to see that you are finally clearing up what you perceive the wind to be. If (as you say) some unnamed riders (who? Where?) said they had a 5-6km a strong headwind how is RR "(grossly) exaggerating" by saying 80%?
And what is your estimation?
sniper said:As I think you know, the underlying issue is: can we reliably compare the 2013 edition of the Ventoux to earlier editions, i.e. was it a reliable yardstick for measuring Froome's performance vis-a-vis Armstrong's?
Trolling is the word.sniper said:RR is convinced it wasn't.
I'm not flat out challenging him, but am doubting the 80%, and i do indeed wonder where RR's conviction comes from if we have so many conflicting info.
And with reports of (strong) headwinds in the final parts, I, for now, don't see why we shouldn't take Froome's time and poweroutput at face value, i.e. as mutant.
What's the word for that?
I am not interested in what you 'say' - link it so I can read it myself.sniper said:I said Ten Dam and I said relevant links have been provided in upthread.
The Hitch said:Neither matched Armstrong's times up mountains. And i don't know how many of them ttd as fast as froome. Merckx on track. Lemond over 30k.
Your post totally misses the point, as most sky fan posts do.
Netserk said:I think the most telling thing so far is the SRM compared to CPL.
How does that make sense if there was more tailwind than headwind?
yap, this interests me as well, and it's complicated, but as far as I can tell, Netserk seems right.thehog said:Can you explain this? I'm a bit of amateur with this stuff.
Why does this data suggest not a tailwind?
Fearless Greg Lemond said:Lets just assume your 3.36% is correct, you dont know the windconditions Irizar was riding in, but you assume it is due to tailwind. Well, you are bad in physics as well then. How does someone use more power than expected/guestimated in a tailwind situation? When riding with a tailwind one needs less power to produce a certain speed, that is what people learn in sixth grade.
proffate said:I don't understand this statement. My interpretation of this tweet is that most of the models underestimated his power output. That would suggest a slight headwind.
I think you have it backwards, if the SRM is higher than CPL then there was a headwind that CPL didn't account for.
Netserk said:https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/360095234505445376
SRM: 324.1W
CPL: 313.2W
And your conclusion is that there was a tailwind?
This. It would be very helpful to have several SRMs, or some from the riders who did very well on the climb.Ferminal said:Careful, the relationship for someone falling back through the field from a breakaway might not necessarily hold for those attacking out of the bunch who were 20% better. Not to mention the error that is already inherent in estimations. So it's not exactly proof that there was no assistance from behind, but it is definitely not proof that there was, which is what some posts earlier tried to suggest.
Edit: At least this is my position, no doubt people will only embrace it if it supports their view though.
The Hitch said:Neither matched Armstrong's times up mountains. And i don't know how many of them ttd as fast as froome. Merckx on track. Lemond over 30k.
Your post totally misses the point, as most sky fan posts do.
The particular post you replied to was not making the case against froome but explaining to someone who considers performance a barometer for doping why froomes performance was significantly superior to quintanas.
Therefore reminding us that riders in the past were good in both tts and mountains is a bit of a non-sequiter
sniper said:fair points, but while i could see flags flying with tailwind, i also saw flags without any wind, and some with headwind, i think.
point being:
While i,d readily admit tailwind may have been predominant in the forest, i also think RR is (grossly) exaggerating with his "80 percent obvious tailwind", especially if we take the final 5 or 6 km into account, where some riders have reported (strong) headwind. And since the evidence really isn,t clearcut either way, one is still left wondering how RR could be so convinced of his case.