Supimilian said:Don't bother RR, you are already 'exposed as a paid shill'.
'This much we know'
True, time to go spend that money Murdoch gave me on hookers and blow.
-
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!
True, time to go spend that money Murdoch gave me on hookers and blow.
Re: Re:
No one's twisting the mistaken error you originally wrote. No one.
You wrote that the Ventoux climb could not be relied on due to a tailwind.
The power file you now claim backs you up in fact tears you a new one re: Ventoux being difficult to use. It isn't difficult at all. In fact. It's accurate to within 1 watt.
That's all I have to say on the matter. See you in twitterland, my friend.
Race Radio said:
No one's twisting the mistaken error you originally wrote. No one.
You wrote that the Ventoux climb could not be relied on due to a tailwind.
The power file you now claim backs you up in fact tears you a new one re: Ventoux being difficult to use. It isn't difficult at all. In fact. It's accurate to within 1 watt.
That's all I have to say on the matter. See you in twitterland, my friend.
Re: Re:
More revisionist history.
The day after the stage Vayer claimed Froome did 413 watts on Venoux. That number was repeated often here. The actual SRM file shows 388.
Perhaps Vayer's calculations were off because he did not factor in the tailwind?
Many other calculations were 400-405
http://quentin-leplat.org/2013/07/14/froome-dans-le-ventoux-plus-haut-cest-le-soleil/
Note, the error in their circulations....they specifically point out they did not factor in the tailwind in the first part of the climb
The file proves what I said, there was a tailwind the majority of the climb. That is why so many of the estimates were 400 watts + when the actual numbers were 388
Anyways, enjoy your stalking
Dear Wiggo said:
More revisionist history.
The day after the stage Vayer claimed Froome did 413 watts on Venoux. That number was repeated often here. The actual SRM file shows 388.
Perhaps Vayer's calculations were off because he did not factor in the tailwind?
Many other calculations were 400-405
http://quentin-leplat.org/2013/07/14/froome-dans-le-ventoux-plus-haut-cest-le-soleil/
Note, the error in their circulations....they specifically point out they did not factor in the tailwind in the first part of the climb
The file proves what I said, there was a tailwind the majority of the climb. That is why so many of the estimates were 400 watts + when the actual numbers were 388
Anyways, enjoy your stalking
Re: Re:
Ross Tucker today on radio said that 388 for the 3rd week in a GT is way up there.
You think Sky are clean? You think Froome is clean?
You still thin Little Richie Porte is clean?
It all looks very postal.
Race Radio said:
Ross Tucker today on radio said that 388 for the 3rd week in a GT is way up there.
You think Sky are clean? You think Froome is clean?
You still thin Little Richie Porte is clean?
It all looks very postal.
Re:
Am I just really dumb, or were you perhaps just partially wrong?
And yes, pretty much everyone gave most credit to vetooo's numbers, not some French dude. If not, you are free to find some quotes to prove otherwise.
Race Radio said:the sceptic said:Just saw this on twitter.. headwind from Chalet apparently.
Yup, side/headwind from the Chalet is pretty clear in all the videos. That would mean the majority of the climb had a tailwind.
Thanks for proving my point
Sorry Race Radio, but I certainly didn't get from your posts that the estimation done by vetooo was absolutely correct. In fact it seems like you wrote that the 80% of tailwind would mean that the estimation would overestimate his effort.Race Radio said:
Am I just really dumb, or were you perhaps just partially wrong?
And yes, pretty much everyone gave most credit to vetooo's numbers, not some French dude. If not, you are free to find some quotes to prove otherwise.
Re: Re:
Simple, he factored in a tailwind.
I did not come up with the idea of a tailwind. Several riders and commentators were talking about it. Ross Tucker pointed it out early
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-23368970
Ross factored in the tailwind and was spot on with his calculations
Ferrari did not factor in the tailwind when he made his calculations. That is why, using the formula he invented, came up 401 and not 388.
http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=139
Glad this can be finally put to rest. The file proves there was a tailwind
Netserk said:
Simple, he factored in a tailwind.
I did not come up with the idea of a tailwind. Several riders and commentators were talking about it. Ross Tucker pointed it out early
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-23368970
Ross factored in the tailwind and was spot on with his calculations
Ferrari did not factor in the tailwind when he made his calculations. That is why, using the formula he invented, came up 401 and not 388.
http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=139
Glad this can be finally put to rest. The file proves there was a tailwind
What are you talking about? Ferrari's formula got him at 5.88, which was correct.
Not vetooo's fault that Ferrari didn't inset the correct numbers.
Not vetooo's fault that Ferrari didn't inset the correct numbers.
Re:
Did you read the link I posted? It is Ferrari's website where he calculates Froome's performance on Ventoux. He comes up with 401W 6.08w/kg
Netserk said:
Did you read the link I posted? It is Ferrari's website where he calculates Froome's performance on Ventoux. He comes up with 401W 6.08w/kg
Let's start by assessing the time to climb the last 15 km (1389m of altitude at 9%) of the ascent:
- Froome, 2013: 47'12 "- VAM = 1765 m / h - 6.08w/kg = 401W
- Armstrong, 2002: 48'33 "- VAM = 1718 m / h - 5.92w/kg = 438w
- Contador 2009: 48'57 "- VAM = 1702 m / h - 5.87w/kg = 364w
...
- Froome, 2013: 47'12 "- VAM = 1765 m / h - 6.08w/kg = 401W
- Armstrong, 2002: 48'33 "- VAM = 1718 m / h - 5.92w/kg = 438w
- Contador 2009: 48'57 "- VAM = 1702 m / h - 5.87w/kg = 364w
...
Re: Re:
Are you seriously asking this question? You know the answer as i have answered it over and over and over. There is even a sticky with my answer.
Me pointing out the tailwind was an effort to add information to the discussion and insure accurate calculations. I said over, and over, and over, that Froome's attacks were insane. Unfortunately you have a few obsessed trolls who try to twist what I write into some defense of Froome, when that was clearly not the case.
Odd that these trolls did not go after Ross when he pointed out the same thing. Guess it is purely personal with them
Anyways, goodbye again folks. It has been fun
Benotti69 said:
Are you seriously asking this question? You know the answer as i have answered it over and over and over. There is even a sticky with my answer.
Me pointing out the tailwind was an effort to add information to the discussion and insure accurate calculations. I said over, and over, and over, that Froome's attacks were insane. Unfortunately you have a few obsessed trolls who try to twist what I write into some defense of Froome, when that was clearly not the case.
Odd that these trolls did not go after Ross when he pointed out the same thing. Guess it is purely personal with them
Anyways, goodbye again folks. It has been fun
Re: Re:
Did you see what numbers he used for the climb?.....
Can you tell me what this says for Froome on Ventoux????
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/498872795070472192
Tour de France 2013 - data from 6 major climbs #TDF
What formula is the numbers based on???
Did you read what I posted?Race Radio said:
Did you see what numbers he used for the climb?.....
Can you tell me what this says for Froome on Ventoux????
https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily/status/498872795070472192
Tour de France 2013 - data from 6 major climbs #TDF
What formula is the numbers based on???
Re: Re:
I've no view on it, I was just posting the data so people don't have to click the link. Should have made that clear.
Race Radio said:
I've no view on it, I was just posting the data so people don't have to click the link. Should have made that clear.
Re:
On the flip side that day they were up against a monster headwind
Just FYI, Contador was just holding Schleck 's wheel all up that thing, and Andy actually came in first. I know Andy is the fast becoming the Haimar Zubeldia of these forums, but still, give the man some props.King Boonen said:
On the flip side that day they were up against a monster headwind
Ventoux : Froome-2013 25secs better than Armstrong-Pantani 2000 -...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbO_te8cv7c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbO_te8cv7c
thehog
BANNED
Re:
I've not seen that video before. I was getting the link out for this thread and watched it. Certainly put things in perspective with regards to Froome.
Benotti69 said:
I've not seen that video before. I was getting the link out for this thread and watched it. Certainly put things in perspective with regards to Froome.
thehog
BANNED
Re: Motorised Bike
Yes, at 2:00 he is playing with his bars. Di2 does have top bar button though. But knowing what we know now, it certainly looks very suspect.
sniper said:
Yes, at 2:00 he is playing with his bars. Di2 does have top bar button though. But knowing what we know now, it certainly looks very suspect.
Re: Motorised Bike
So Vivax is killing both the Power data estimates thread and the Windy Mountain thread. Thank you, Vivax. We love you, Vivax. Pimp my ride, Vivax.
thehog said:
So Vivax is killing both the Power data estimates thread and the Windy Mountain thread. Thank you, Vivax. We love you, Vivax. Pimp my ride, Vivax.
Re:
and his quads look like Hoys. or a bodybuilder or powerlifter or weightlifter
Maxiton said:
and his quads look like Hoys. or a bodybuilder or powerlifter or weightlifter
thehog
BANNED
Re: Motorised Bike
Actually, I change my position on this. Froome is fumbling on the bars but to change gears he goes to the lever itself. He was using a motor. Cheat.
Stingray34 said:
Actually, I change my position on this. Froome is fumbling on the bars but to change gears he goes to the lever itself. He was using a motor. Cheat.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
Tour of the Alps 2024 (April 15 - 19)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 277
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2024 (March 18-24)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram