Windy Mountain

[Dr. Maserati]

Sorry, didn't understand that.

Let's be clear, the lack of answers on why it matters has been on all sides of the argument. At least to me.

RR made it clear why it doesn't matter- I believe I made it clear, many others commented on the conditions - Science of Sport/Poupou made excellent comments.

Also. There should not be "all sides to an argument". The thread is (meant to be) about the wind conditions.

 

[sniper]

Why does it matter to me? Easy......for over a week various posters have insulted, trolled, baited, and twisted what I have written. You should ask them what motivates them to do this.

let's not kid ourselves (and you know this of course), a deeper and perhaps more essential issue is whether or not, and if so to what extent, you are compromised when discussing Froome/Sky.

There had been several indications to that extent, and your attempt (righteous or not) to draw attention away from Froome's Ventoux effort seemed to fit into a pattern.
For instance previously you had already downplayed the significance of Sky's Leinders-move.

For obvious reasons I think some posters here (including me) had hoped you to be a tad more vocal on Sky/Froome.
And that's meant as a compliment.

 

[Race Radio]

let's not kid ourselves (and you know this of course), a deeper and perhaps more essential issue is whether or not, and if so to what extent, you are compromised when discussing Froome/Sky.

There had been several indications to that extent, and your attempt (righteous or not) to draw attention away from Froome's Ventoux effort seemed to fit into a pattern.
For instance previously you had already downplayed the significance of Sky's Leinders-move.

For obvious reasons I think some posters here (including me) had hoped you to be a tad more vocal on Sky/Froome.
And that's meant as a compliment.

This is absurd.......and it has nothing to do with the wind direction.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

let's not kid ourselves (and you know this of course), a deeper and perhaps more essential issue is whether or not, and if so to what extent, you are compromised when discussing Froome/Sky.

There had been several indications to that extent, and your attempt (righteous or not) to draw attention away from Froome's Ventoux effort seemed to fit into a pattern.
For instance previously you had already downplayed the significance of Sky's Leinders-move.

For obvious reasons I think some posters here (including me) had hoped you to be a tad more vocal on Sky/Froome.
And that's meant as a compliment.

So that is the only reason you posted 30+ times on this thread?

Even if what you suggest was in any way correct (It isn't when you actually read what RR wrote) - you should still be able to show where he has been mistaken regarding the wind ie the subject of the thread. The fact that you haven't is your own fault.

 

[red_flanders]

RR made it clear why it doesn't matter- I believe I made it clear, many others commented on the conditions - Science of Sport/Poupou made excellent comments.

Also. There should not be "all sides to an argument". The thread is (meant to be) about the wind conditions.

I guess it was clear and satisfactory to you, but obviously others including myself do not share that view.

There is an argument and people are taking sides. Those are facts. I strongly agree it is a tremendous shame that there are sides to a discussion which is so easily and factually verified. More's the pity.

 

[thehog]

IMO there are two main questions about the wind:

1) Was the wind on the day an advantage or a disadvantage compared to a (totally unrealistic) dead calm day with no wind? (This question is related to estimated power)

2) Were the circumstances similar for the two record times from Armstrong and Froome? (Can we compare the two performances)

They are two very good questions.

No I don't think the wind was any different than Armstrong's record from 2002.

Froome had a headwind for the last 6km. Mayo skipped the first 220km and finished just ahead of Froome.

That is totally scary.

Throw in the accelerations on Contador and into the headwind on Quintana and it isn't the wind we should be discussing.

It's how much drugs was he on?

 

[Race Radio]

And we have responded to all reported posts one way or another. Please take comments about the moderation to the appropriate thread. Thanks.

why, it does not change anything

 

[red_flanders]

Okay, some posts attacking the poster not the post (and the responses) have been removed. As well as a post from me which was starting to veer off-topic.

This has been a difficult thread for us to moderate. There are reasons for this and a lot of background feelings on the forum which are fueling the hard-feelings and rancor. As such this thread has been closed once and I'm considering (hard) doing it again. There really is no way to discuss why there is so much rancor on this thread without folks getting way afield and personal. As such we won't do it here or elsewhere. This is the elephant in the room and the reason we've had some bans and a lot of difficulty with this thread.

If we can't have a natural end to this discourse, which has gone round and round, or have completely factual discussions, I'll be closing the thread. I'll allow for honest, earnest discourse on the ride up Ventoux on that now ill-fated day.

Hope you all understand and if you have a constructive beef with this, please take it to PM and I'll do my level best to address your concerns as time allows. Thanks.

 

[sniper]

Why don't we let the man himself speak:

Le coureur britannique dit avoir été passablement choqué par les images. « Cela reste franchement totalement surréaliste », a-t-il commenté sur la séquence où il accélère et lâche Alberto Contador « C’est quand même très très étonnant, je ne me lève même pas de la selle lors de l’accélération », a-t-il raconté en présentant des extraits vidéo aux journalistes pour souligner sa démonstration. « J’avais un fort vent de face et de côté, c’est quand même peu probable que j’arrive à lâcher tout le peloton de la sorte, tout en m’arrêtant par moment pour signer des autographes sur le bord de la route », souligne-t-il.

http://www.legorafi.fr/2013/07/15/a...met-a-son-tour-des-doutes-sur-sa-performance/

 

[thehog]

Why don't we let the man himself speak:


http://www.legorafi.fr/2013/07/15/a...met-a-son-tour-des-doutes-sur-sa-performance/

Translato?

 

[thehog]

They are two very good questions.

No I don't think the wind was any different than Armstrong's record from 2002.

Froome had a headwind for the last 6km. Mayo skipped the first 220km and finished just ahead of Froome.

That is totally scary.

Throw in the accelerations on Contador and into the headwind on Quintana and it isn't the wind we should be discussing.

It's how much drugs was he on?

Froome actually rode faster than Armstrong's 2004 ITT Dauphine time.

That is very scary.

 

[Berzin]

After 27 pages of the same speculation, it should be obvious that wind conditions don't matter on Mont Ventoux or anywhere else when you're either doped, riding a mechanical bull or both.

 

[sniper]

Translato?

that piece makes a complete mockery of froome's performance on the ventoux.

he's quoted as saying he had a strong head- and crosswind yet still had time to sign autographs alongside the road whilst dropping the entire peloton.

He also says he'll do his best to make it all look a bit more credible next year.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

After 27 pages of the same speculation, it should be obvious that wind conditions don't matter on Mont Ventoux or anywhere else when you're either doped, riding a mechanical bull or both.

Then close the thread.

There is absolutely no point in discussing wind, its velocity or direction since it makes no difference to the overall point, which is obviously not up for discussion.

 

[red_flanders]

In case people are wondering, the elephant in the room is not speculation on Froome doping, that is legit clinic material. The issue is why some posters on the thread can't keep it from getting personal. That is what will close the thread. Thanks.

 

[thehog]

that piece makes a complete mockery of froome's performance on the ventoux.

he's quoted as saying he had a strong head- and crosswind yet still had time to sign autographs alongside the road whilst dropping the entire peloton.

He also says he'll do his best to make it all look a bit more credible next year.

Doesn't surprise me. The English speaking press hasn't gone near it. But I'm sure there was plenty of s******s in the press room.

It's a pity Walsh doesn't at least sit on the fence.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

In case people are wondering, the elephant in the room is not speculation on Froome doping, that is legit clinic material. The issue is why some posters on the thread can't keep it from getting personal. That is what will close the thread. Thanks.

That is not the issue - you should not concern yourself with that, that is their problem. The Elephant in the room is why are they allowed to do it.

Froome is certainly Clinic material - maybe a thread should be opened on him somewhere if there is any space so people can discuss him in that thread?

 

[Race Radio]

he's quoted as saying he had a strong head- and crosswind yet still had time to sign autographs alongside the road whilst dropping the entire peloton.

Not exactly. He says that after his final attack he has a strong head/sidewind. That makes sense. It is pretty clear the last 5km had mostly a crosswind as the course make a sharp turn about 1km after VR

 

[thehog]

Froomeborg.

 

[thehog]

Unless you have a weather station with the proper meteorological equipment. Then it's dead simple. Such weather stations surrounding Ventoux (i.e., Malaucene, Bedoin, Sault) all reported N-NW winds at 20 km/hr at the time of the race.

Effects of the mountain slopes would have - at best - put the winds coming from the west. Look at a map and you will see that this makes a tailwind coming into Bedoin, a cross-wind in the forest, and a headwind past Chalet Reynaud.

This is actual data from real, live instruments. No eyeballing it from a video. Not sure why there's any debate.

John Swanson

I would agree. Makes sense to use weather stations to measure weather.

Not a Michelin map off the Internet and a Greg Henderson comedy tweet.

 

[Ferminal]

Unless you have a weather station with the proper meteorological equipment. Then it's dead simple. Such weather stations surrounding Ventoux (i.e., Malaucene, Bedoin, Sault) all reported N-NW winds at 20 km/hr at the time of the race.

Effects of the mountain slopes would have - at best - put the winds coming from the west. Look at a map and you will see that this makes a tailwind coming into Bedoin, a cross-wind in the forest, and a headwind past Chalet Reynaud.

Interesting that they were historically very slow on the Bedoin to Saint-Esteve segment which lines up with a tailwind ~W-WNW. Slowest ever I think and at least 30 seconds slower than 2009. Which is also the segment where the wind effect would be most significant due to combination of low gradient/open terrain, but on the other hand you have the goslow pack riding. So even if there was a tailwind there, they definitely did not take advantage of it (which is of course why proper analysis should only consider the climb from Saint-Esteve).

 

[Mr.38%]

Interesting that they were historically very slow on the Bedoin to Saint-Esteve segment which lines up with a tailwind ~W-WNW. Slowest ever I think and at least 30 seconds slower than 2009. Which is also the segment where the wind effect would be most significant due to combination of low gradient/open terrain, but on the other hand you have the goslow pack riding. So even if there was a tailwind there, they definitely did not take advantage of it (which is of course why proper analysis should only consider the climb from Saint-Esteve).

Correct.

I've ridden Ventoux only three times. The last time, 7 or 8 years ago, conditions were very much like this year's stage. I was flying to Bedoin, I felt the wind pushing until the hair pin and then nothing during the woods. The storm made me push almost 5 w/kg during the slopes after Reynard which felt like I was creeping and crawling. I was freezing even it was a really hot day.

 

[simoni]

I was on the roadside apprx 1km above Chalet Renard. The wind on that section was negligible - for much of the afternoon it was a virtual calm.

If the winds were coming from the N-NW as above then its hardly surprising that the wind was so light on the southern face of the mountain.

EDIT - and having ridden the climb from Bedoin at least three times, the shelter you get from the trees on the section up to Chalet Renard means that I'd strongly speculate that the impact of wind on this section was completely insignificant.

In short, it just wasn't windy up there. With winds so light the direction it was coming from is virtually irrelevant.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Froome had a headwind for the last 6km. Mayo skipped the first 220km and finished just ahead of Froome.

I'm not disputing your conclusion as such, but isn't it a stretch to say Mayo finished "just ahead" of Froome? Isn't his record ascent in the ITT around 5 minutes / 8% faster than Froome's ascent this year?

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

So even if there was a tailwind there, they definitely did not take advantage of it (which is of course why proper analysis should only consider the climb from Saint-Esteve).

But if we discard the first part of the climb from the analysis, then the remainder of the climb should only be compared to ascents of similar profile / duration.

You can't meaningfully compare the final 14k segments of a 20k ascent, as in one ascent the riders may already be working hard and in the other they may be barely more than ticking over.

It's a bit like trying to draw anything too meaningful from who rides the fastest second half in a pursuit. If you've ridden the first half balls-out, you will ride the second half relatively "slowly", but could still beat a rival who coasted in the first half before blitzing the second half.

I'd also dispute the claim that the riders didn't take advantage of the tailwind early on. They can't not have benefited from it unless they rode with their brakes on. For a given speed, even a relatively low one, the stronger the tailwind, the less a rider has to work and the harder they can ride later on.