Archive for justcycling.myfastforum.org Just Cycling
 


       justcycling.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> The 3 GT´s
Mrs John Murphy

Vuelta St 14 Astorga- La Farrapona. Lagos de Somiedo 175.8km

Stage 14 Saturday 03 September Astorga > La Farrapona. Lagos de Somiedo 175,8 km





HuwB

Scarponi abandons after 26km.
Very interesting break composite, with 7 minutes lead after 80kms.
Looks as if the San Lorenzo ramp is going to be all out action.
HuwB

Kroon and Vanmarcke way down and out in the jungle.
Shades of Vino...
kathy

Peloton split in two.
kathy

I must have really put the KOD on Boots picking him for GC and the mountains Evil or Very Mad
Fontfroide

kathy wrote:
I must have really put the KOD on Boots picking him for GC and the mountains Evil or Very Mad


Do you think he knew you picked him or was it more cosmic?  

Me, I don't think you should feel that bad really.  I am, for example, utterly certain that my choice of Igor Anton for points and GC or whatever I said, was simply a bad choice.   Embarassed
kathy

Go, Dani! Very Happy
kathy

Fontfroide wrote:
kathy wrote:
I must have really put the KOD on Boots picking him for GC and the mountains Evil or Very Mad


Do you think he knew you picked him or was it more cosmic?  

:


I think I'm psychic Laughing - or do I mean telepathic?
kathy

Purito attacks after Dani's gone ahead.

Geox working with Katusha?
Fontfroide

A valley I would love to ride up, stopping now and again to "take a photo" of course.  Makes me feel comfortable just see them ride in countryside like this.  Very inviting.
Bartali

Moreno being 'annoying' as Huw predicted.  Interesting climb this ...
kathy

Yes, he's an annoying little devil, isn't he?  Wish Katusha would really give him his head - think he could do better than Purito.
HuwB

Bruseghin back in his old mountain domestique role.
Clearly, money has exchanged hands.
Bartali

Coming back together for he last 5km ...
Bartali

still waiting for some action .....
cyclingtv

at this rate I think they might stay away..
Bartali

Gruppetto slowing down ...
Bartali

FFS Nibs has blown!
HuwB

Nibali and Purito are dead!
Cobo flying!
Slapshot 3

Holy shit Wiggo and Fromey riding Nibs and Wacky off their wheels....never expected that.....
Bartali

I never thought it possible SS.  Questions!
Fontfroide

I love surprises.
Bartali

Froom and Wiggins the strongest men on the climb ... I think today's the day I stop watching professional cycling.
HuwB

Kessiakoff at 1-59
Nibs and Purito at 2-05.

A whole lot of Rouleurs beat them by quite a bit.
(and Carlos Sastre)
kathy

If Nibs can't climb a mountain faster than Chavanel, then he doesn't deserve to win the Vuelta.  Purito is not a suprise - he's a man for short sharp climbs, not long stretches like that.
HuwB

1 47 TAARAMAE, Rein COF 4h 39' 01''
2 61 COBO, Juan José GEO + 25''
3 63 DE LA FUENTE, David GEO + 29''
4 217 POELS, Wouter VCD + 40''
5 188 WIGGINS, Bradley SKY + 45''
6 183 FROOME, Christopher SKY + 45''
7 157 MOLLEMA, Bauke RAB + 45''
8 65 MENCHOV, Denis GEO + 45''
9 54 NIEVE, Mikel EUS + 55''
10 127 VAN DEN BROECK, Jurgen OLO + 1' 00''
11 117 PARDILLA, Sergio MOV + 1' 12''
12 215 LAGUTIN, Sergey VCD + 1' 15''
13 85 MORENO, Daniel KAT + 1' 17''
14 104 MONFORT, Maxime LEO + 1' 18''
15 103 FUGLSANG, Jakob LEO + 1' 24''
16 196 MARTIN, Daniel GRM + 1' 37''
17 108 ZAUGG, Oliver LEO + 1' 40''
18 148 SEELDRAYERS, Kevin QST + 1' 40''
19 161 SÖRENSEN, Chris SBS + 1' 42''
20 166 MAJKA, Rafal SBS + 1' 48''
21 131 KESSIAKOFF, Fredrik AST + 1' 59''
22 11 ROCHE, Nicolas ALM + 2' 02''
23 109 ROHREGGER, Thomas LEO + 2' 02''
24 56 TXURRUKA, Amets EUS + 2' 02''
25 66 SASTRE, Carlos GEO + 2' 04''
26 81 RODRIGUEZ, Joaquin KAT + 2' 06''
27 1 NIBALI, Vincenzo LIQ + 2' 06''

A strange, strage stage result from a 10% final 5km climb.

Cobo the only threat to the Sky double act? Confused
Slapshot 3

Bartali wrote:
I never thought it possible SS.  Questions!


They'll be asked, no doubt about that.
Boogerd_Fan

Ok... my plan was to get back to see the last climb, but we ended up walking in the woods a bit longer, missed it! Hopefully ES CZ will have something in the morning in the way of highlights show.

What the hell!??!

Nibs blown up by Froome/Wiggins.. I would say, in 24hrs time we'll know who has won this Vuelta. I still think that the Angliru could break Wiggins so hard that he will lose 1:25 to Nibali (if he can recover from today).  

Of course the biggest winner today (other than sky) looks to be Mollema. If he managed to distance Wiggo tomorrow, the question was always going to be - how to get rid of Nibs who was also 30seconds up on him.... that ain't the question anymore.

I think Mollema is going to take this tomorrow. I really do.
Bartali

kathy wrote:
If Nibs can't climb a mountain faster than Chavanel, then he doesn't deserve to win the Vuelta.  Purito is not a suprise - he's a man for short sharp climbs, not long stretches like that.


Agreed.  I'm not concerned by Nibs having a bad day, its the Froom/Wiggins double act that I question.  That said, the lack of attacking in the last 5km played to their strengths (and was no doubt due in no small part to them keeping the pace high).
Boogerd_Fan

Suspicious indeed. Although keeping pace constant & high, will be a lot harder to do tomorrow.
I still don't see them holding on. If they do this again on the Angliru, then i agree.
HuwB

The Shack's quest for the team comp didn't go so well today

+43:11 dropping them from 1st to 17th

Zubeldia and Machado go for a 20 minute packet a piece.
Fontfroide

Do some of you really think Wiggins and Froome are doping, whoops I mentioned the word that seemed the one you were all implying.  

Are you accusing Our Brad of doping becasue he is riding better than you expected?  

Just wanted to be clear what "the questions" will be about.
Fontfroide

Bartali wrote:
Froom and Wiggins the strongest men on the climb ... I think today's the day I stop watching professional cycling.


Can I offer the unsolicited advice that your decision, should it be taken, would be a bad one.  You would regret it for the rest of your life.
MS

Fontfroide wrote:
Do some of you really think Wiggins and Froome are doping, whoops I mentioned the word that seemed the one you were all implying.  

Are you accusing Our Brad of doping becasue he is riding better than you expected?  

Just wanted to be clear what "the questions" will be about.


I think it has more to do with the fact that the guy used to be a prologue specialist who was hours behind in the mountains and now he's dropping guys who've been strong climbers for years. Most had Wiggins as a favorite, considering his Dauphine performance.
MS

It bears mentioning that this is a pretty weak GC field. You've got Van Den Broeck and Nibali. Menchov is past his prime, Scarponi is out and then you've got a bunch of guys who are barely top 10 contenders year in and year out.

No offense to guys like Cobo and Fuglsang, but they're podium contenders this year?

It's a weak GC field.
Boogerd_Fan

I'd say the majority expected Wiggins to reach the Red jersey at the TT... but no-one expected him to consolidate that position this weekend. Mainly because on previous form (even the '09 Tour), a day with multiple HC climbs crucially breaks his TT rhythm.

The only other usual stumbling block, is on severe gradients - so it remains to be seen how well he goes on the Angliru, where I also thought he would lose red by going too far into the red, so to speak.

The shock today was that the Sky pair shelled out a host of climbers who we would've expected to at least keep up.
SlowRower

Bartali wrote:
I think today's the day I stop watching professional cycling.


Why today, Bart?

You endured the EPO-fuelled exploits of Mig, Ullrich, Pantani and Armstrong without "stepping down" and from what I can gather positively revelled in Basso's Fuentes-fuelled efforts.

Seems odd, therefore, to consider giving up on the sport today, particular before any power estimates have been provided.

My bet is that despite today, you'll keep watching!
Bartali

Contrary to popular opinion I hardly followed the sport throughout to Indurain Armstrong years - I spent the entire time watching video's of proper racing.

I don't put too much store in power estimates - you always have to consider the race circumstances and the other riders.  Boogies right in that tomorrow will confirm a lot, but, for FF's benefit I have always been suspicious of Wiggins and any other rider who, upon changing teams, goes from the back of the gruppetto to dropping climbers left right and centre. As for Froom?  Solid results in 2011 and he's maturing, but this is a ride that's putting some real quality in big trouble - lets face it he's looking stronger than Wiggins!
Slapshot 3

It's all about L'Angrilu now, if Wiggo can hang tough with those we "Expect" to see bouncing up then the race is his, he has enough of a cushion for everything else.

For me today was almost an uphill Chrono for Froome and Wiggo, no massive changes in gradient meant no huge change in rythym, it was perfect for them. No-one else could hold the pace simple as that. on the normal scheme of things Nibs should never have lost that amount of time on that climb so that asks question of his form. Wiggins is probably fresher than most of the rest opf the GC guys still left, Nibs and Wacky both have a Giro in their legs this year, it's a relatively weak field so it's playing into Wiggins hands.

The how and why and question are there every time someone wins a race these days so questions will be asked but unless there is a positive they will be unanswered.

While I'd love to see a Brit win a GT Wiggo doesn't do a lot for me, I can't get into fan mode when I watch him ride.
SlowRower

Bartali wrote:
Contrary to popular opinion I hardly followed the sport throughout to Indurain Armstrong years - I spent the entire time watching video's of proper racing.

I don't put too much store in power estimates - you always have to consider the race circumstances and the other riders.


But if Wiggo's suspiciousness disturbs you then you must surely have been reaching for the off-button during Basso's prime. Wiggo is eking out an advantage in this race with its relatively weak field (and as SS observes, the Wiggo-Nibs gap today is most likely due to Nibs weakness, as Wiggo was cenceding time elsewhere), whereas Basso was putting minutes into a typical strength Giro field.

Re power estimates, I was thinking that if they suggested he was climing at a sustained 6.4 w/kg then one would have to conclude "doper", whereas if it was 5.5 w/kg then one would conclude "opposition weakness rather than Wiggo strength". I'd imagine the numbers will tell us what they always do about Wiggo when he's on form - top end of believable ie circa eqiavalent to 5.8 watts/kg over 40 minutes.
Bartali

SR - I think you are missing the elephant in the room. Your power analysis is self-fulfilling.  You've simply decided upon a number which means doper and anything else is less.  The real question is how Wiggins went from GT nobody to tour contender seemingly upon leaving French teams.  Second question is where the hell has Froome come from this year?  Yound and the right age to make improvements for sure - but he has virtually no pedigree pre 2011.  Third question - why is Froome looking stronger than Wiggins?  Fourth question - If the top of that climb had sustained 10% bits then why couldn't proven climbers make an impact.

I'm not throwing around accusations simply stating that questions should be asked.
Bartali

Scrub 4 - I've checked the profile and it wasn't really a climb at all.
Mrs John Murphy

It's pretty suspect IMO. If it were one rider then fair enough - Wiggins rides into form, gets lucky, weak field, TTT and a ITT. But both Wiggins and Froome? It's like Vino and Kash all over.

I wonder what the reaction would be if Menchov and Cobo were sitting 1 and 2?
Boogerd_Fan

Bartali wrote:
Scrub 4 - I've checked the profile and it wasn't really a climb at all.


and that for me is the true answer to today... Sky lads chrono'ed up, real climbers didn't have the chance to launch any attack but simply to follow.. and some couldn't even manage that, due to form.

however when Indurain or Ullrich did that to climbers, it was more believable than Wiggo (who until 3 years couldn't go up a hill as fast as Cavendish!)

turning this on its head, Bart should be quite happy to see Nibs have an off day proving he's not on he juice. But same as at the Giro, one bad day is going to cost him GC places. If the Nibali of last weekend starts tomorrow, I still reckon we're going to see some good performance from him on Angliru. I reckon him, Purito, Cobo and hopefully Mollema will all be able to take time on Wiggo. Just depends how much.
Mrs John Murphy

Mollema wrote:
"I was absolutely at my limit today. Froome and Wiggins were riding like machines, they climbed at an incredible speed. But when I heard Nibali was dropped I had morale and just kept fixating on Wiggins wheel. I'm glad I could hold on"


Draw your own conclusions about Wiggins and Froome.
SlowRower

Mrs John Murphy wrote:
It's pretty suspect IMO. If it were one rider then fair enough - Wiggins rides into form, gets lucky, weak field, TTT and a ITT. But both Wiggins and Froome? It's like Vino and Kash all over.


The Froome factor is indeed troubling my Wiggo fanboy tendencies a smidge, it must be said. But conversely, the rest of Sky have been fairly unexceptional so far.

Maybe the real story is that previous top-tier riders e.g. Nibs and Rodriguez have had to modify their preparations relative to previous campaigns as the powers that be get more sophisticated at interpreting the passport data.

In the absence of a positive test, a confession or truly ridiculous climbing data from the Wiggins group today, we'll never know and so will only be able to speculate. This should suit everyone here, I would imagine!
kathy

I think they answer is that the opposition are running scared because of the increased doping controls, and are either not doping or doping a lot less.  Hence a more even playing field.  Apart from some very bad tactical moves by Moreno and a small attack by Txurruka, then Cobo's bid for the finish, which wasn't conclusive, no-one had a real go today.

We'll see what happens tomorrow!
SlowRower

Boogerd_Fan wrote:
...Wiggo (who until 3 years couldn't go up a hill as fast as Cavendish!)


Three years ago, Wiggo was first and foremost a track pursuiter though. Thus he falls outside the traditional definition of someone who discovers GT climbing potential in his late 20s. Prior to 2009 he had prioritised going as quickly as he could for approximately 4 minutes, and the training requirements for this are hugely different to those for GT contention. The only climbing he needed to do to satisfy his job description was to go a few metres up the banking in the team pursuit.
Mrs John Murphy

Is there any evidence to support the idea that riders have had to scale back their doping in order?

The idea that some how the peloton has cleaned up so 'clean' riders can come to the top seems a bit fanciful? Does Wiggins have a history of being able to produced 5.8 w/kg . Maybe Wiggins has simply upped his doping above and beyond anything he had done before? Maybe with Sky bankrolling him, they've been able to get him and Froome onto the best programe money can buy?

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=8839&page=50

Vuelta a Espana 2011, Stage 9, Final climb La Covatilla [last 5.0 Km]

Quote:
Bradley Wiggins

Elevation / Höhenmeter [m] : 365 m
Distance / Streckenlänge [Km] : 5.0 Km
Time in seconds / Fahrzeit in Sekunden [sec] : 835 = 13 min 55 sec = 13:55
Weight rider / Gewicht Fahrer [kg] : 72 kg [TeamSky.com]
Weight bicycle, clothes etc. / Gewicht Fahrrad [kg] : 8 kg

Grade / mittlere Seigung : 7.3 %
Average speed / mittlere Geschwindigkeit : 21.5 Km/h
Total weight / Gesamtgewicht : 80.0 kg

Power : 419.4 Watt
Power / kg : 5.8 Watt / kg

Source: [ http://www.rst.mp-all.de/bergauf.htm ]

Note: Strong wind - power output likely higher. ?


or pushing out 450 watts as he has claimed

Quote:
“Everyone was at his max,” he stated. “When I push 450 watts like I did on Sunday in such a difficult climb, who in the world can do more? Only Alberto Contador and Andy Schleck but they aren’t here. I’ve seen some guys attacking but they couldn’t maintain their speed and stay away. They even paid for their efforts.

“When I took the lead of the front group three kilometres away from the top, I rode fast despite the head wind. I’m pretty good at guessing when my adversaries aren’t well. For three kilometres, I’ve ridden like Miguel Indurain! I had never done that before. ”

http://road.cc/content/news/41613-br...-over-olympics
SlowRower

Bartali wrote:
SR - I think you are missing the elephant in the room. Your power analysis is self-fulfilling.  You've simply decided upon a number which means doper and anything else is less.  The real question is how Wiggins went from GT nobody to tour contender seemingly upon leaving French teams.  Second question is where the hell has Froome come from this year?  Yound and the right age to make improvements for sure - but he has virtually no pedigree pre 2011.  Third question - why is Froome looking stronger than Wiggins?  Fourth question - If the top of that climb had sustained 10% bits then why couldn't proven climbers make an impact.

I'm not throwing around accusations simply stating that questions should be asked.


Bart,

Sorry - we're having different conversations here.

The conversation I'm having is why Wiggo/Froome climbing suspiciously is potentially getting you reaching for the off-button whereas Basso's 2006 performances didn't. Basso's dodginess was of a different magnitude to anything that Wiggo or Froome have done this year. I'm not specifially defending Wiggo, although an unashamed Wiggo fanboy, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for now!

On the analytical front, my threshold for believable climbing is 5.7 watts per kg over ~40 minutes. This is what the likes of Lemond were doing at their peak pre EPO at the business end of a GT.  (Fully rested, the equivalent is 6.4 for an hour, which is what Boardman did for his hour record.) Thus 6.3 w/kg at this stage of a GT at the end of a hard stage is "definitely" suspicious, whereas 5.5 would not be. (It would not prove no doping, obviously.) It's obviously inexact, but on a forum such as this, concluding "don't know if rider x is doping" seems like a waste of time, so it helps me form a firm opinion! In such an inexact field, using LeMond as the benchmark for the upper threshold for natural(ish) performance levels seems as good a place to start as any. (From what I've read, Hinault and Mig pre EPO were at the same level.)

As per my response to MJM, Froome has certainly set my alarm bells ringing. Wiggo is too atypical re other current GT contenders to apply the usual assessments re believability of progression in my view, which is why numerical data is essential to assess him.
SlowRower

MJM - 5.8 watts/kg for 14 minutes is pretty tame against Pantani's 6.7 w/kg in his record ascent of Alpe D'Huez, over a duration 2.5 times longer.

Typically, you'd expect power to drop by at least 5% as the duration of exercise doubles, so Wiggo's output would equate to 5.5 watts/kg at best over an ADH type climb. (The power drop off in running, swimming and rowing is a lot higher than 5% as the duration doubles, so 5% is pretty conservative.) If memory serves, his efforts in the Dauphine over 30 minute climbs were circa 5.7/5.8 (believable). JRod was a 0.2 or 0.3 higher (potentially suspicious).

I read that Wiggo's power output in the pursuit was ~580 watts for the IP final in Beijing when he was supposedly 80kg, giving 6.25 watts/kg. Tricky to extrapolate this to longer durations, given the relative high anaerobic component to the IP, given its relatively short duration.
Mrs John Murphy

I think it is wrong to compare Pantani to Wiggins. What would be more revealing would be Wiggins vs Wiggins. What kind of power on a climb could Cofidis or Garmin Wiggins put out?
SlowRower

Mrs John Murphy wrote:
I think it is wrong to compare Pantani to Wiggins. What would be more revealing would be Wiggins vs Wiggins. What kind of power on a climb could Cofidis or Garmin Wiggins put out?


I recall from Le Grimpeur that Wiggo was at the top end of believable in the 2009 Tour. Same story in this year's Dauphine. There was a post in the CN clinic last night that gave figures of 6.2 w/kg for the final 15 mins of yesterday's climb, which is again entirely believable, unless they were going at that rate for the whole climb! Nibs and Jrod were at 5.7 for the same section, suggesting major underperformance on their behalves. Jrod was much higher over 30 mins in the Dauphine.

Wiggo's Cofidis road efforts are, in my view, irrelevant given he was a track rider in those days and not training or riding climbs to maximise performance thereon. That's why I posted his reported Beijing IP power data as this is the least bad measure of his capabilities pre 2009.

I always wonder at times like this what Boardman would have achieved in GTs if his pro career hadn't exactly coincided with the pre testing EPO era. He had a mighty big "engine".
Bartali

SlowRower wrote:
On the analytical front, my threshold for believable climbing is 5.7 watts per kg over ~40 minutes ...


So ... as per Ferrari himself, do we conclude that 2011 is not the 'return to clean racing' everyone was claiming after the Tour and that Wiggins, Froome and Cobo are deeply suspicious.  Perhaps Nibali hasn't lost his form after all??

http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=125

Quote:
The mountain stages at the Vuelta gave us some pretty surprising results...

The ascent up to La Covatilla, although affected by strong wind, saw all the main contenders finish within few seconds from each other, climbing the last 8km (8% gradient) in 23’45”, with a VAM = 1681m/h, equal to 6.00w/kg.
The stage was won by the talented Daniel Martin, sprinting over Mollema and Cobo, but it's Christopher Froome that impressed the most, albeit playing the role of gregario for Wiggins.
The next day time trial in fact confirmed the extraordinary condition of the SKY rider, who managed to place second, 23 seconds ahead of his captain, and conquer the Red Jersey.

The stage arriving at Lagos de Somiedo definitely gave us a better idea of the strength of the main players in this year's Vuelta: in the last 6 km of the climb at 9%, Cobo was the best scoring a VAM of 1747m/h (6.02w/kg), with the duo Wiggins – Froome at 1718m/h (5.94w/kg); Nibali gave in more than 1’30” with a VAM = 1610m/h (5.57w/kg).
The winner of the day, Rein Taaramae, managed to to climb the last 6km at 1651m/h (5.71 w/kg), despite being in a breakaway ever since the beginning.

The Angliru climb, in the decisive 15th stage, proposed an unstoppable Juan Josè Cobo, who was able to equal Contador's 2008 performance in the last 6.5km of the ascent:

COBO = 1900m/h (6.33w/kg)
FROOME and MENCHOV = 1849m/h (6.16w/kg)
WIGGINS = 1810m/h (6.03w/kg)
NIBALI = 1731m/h (5.77w/kg)

In the last 2 km at 15.5% gradient (311 m of difference in height, between 1224m and 1535m of altitude), Cobo climbed in 9'45" at 1913 m/h!
Biosphere

Bartali wrote:
SlowRower wrote:
On the analytical front, my threshold for believable climbing is 5.7 watts per kg over ~40 minutes ...


So ... as per Ferrari himself, do we conclude that 2011 is not the 'return to clean racing' everyone was claiming after the Tour and that Wiggins, Froome and Cobo are deeply suspicious.  Perhaps Nibali hasn't lost his form after all??

http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=125

Quote:
The mountain stages at the Vuelta gave us some pretty surprising results...

The ascent up to La Covatilla, although affected by strong wind, saw all the main contenders finish within few seconds from each other, climbing the last 8km (8% gradient) in 23’45”, with a VAM = 1681m/h, equal to 6.00w/kg.
The stage was won by the talented Daniel Martin, sprinting over Mollema and Cobo, but it's Christopher Froome that impressed the most, albeit playing the role of gregario for Wiggins.
The next day time trial in fact confirmed the extraordinary condition of the SKY rider, who managed to place second, 23 seconds ahead of his captain, and conquer the Red Jersey.

The stage arriving at Lagos de Somiedo definitely gave us a better idea of the strength of the main players in this year's Vuelta: in the last 6 km of the climb at 9%, Cobo was the best scoring a VAM of 1747m/h (6.02w/kg), with the duo Wiggins – Froome at 1718m/h (5.94w/kg); Nibali gave in more than 1’30” with a VAM = 1610m/h (5.57w/kg).
The winner of the day, Rein Taaramae, managed to to climb the last 6km at 1651m/h (5.71 w/kg), despite being in a breakaway ever since the beginning.

The Angliru climb, in the decisive 15th stage, proposed an unstoppable Juan Josè Cobo, who was able to equal Contador's 2008 performance in the last 6.5km of the ascent:

COBO = 1900m/h (6.33w/kg)
FROOME and MENCHOV = 1849m/h (6.16w/kg)
WIGGINS = 1810m/h (6.03w/kg)
NIBALI = 1731m/h (5.77w/kg)

In the last 2 km at 15.5% gradient (311 m of difference in height, between 1224m and 1535m of altitude), Cobo climbed in 9'45" at 1913 m/h!


Well I seriously doubt those numbers as there is a 1:1 relationship between the magnitude of the m/h value and the W/kg value. For that to be the case all 4 riders need to be the same weight and I really doubt that's the case. A quick Google suggests a 7kg spread.

I've commented before on how bad I've found Ferrari's use of numbers and methodology and that it's more about a fig leaf hiding what he really does than supposedly having some great insight into the physics and physiology of climbing.
SlowRower

Biosphere wrote:
Well I seriously doubt those numbers as there is a 1:1 relationship between the magnitude of the m/h value and the W/kg value. For that to be the case all 4 riders need to be the same weight and I really doubt that's the case. A quick Google suggests a 7kg spread.


Bio,

The linear relationship between m/h and w/kg holds true if

i) gradient is reasonably steep, so that the vast majority of energy goes into upwards rather than horizontal motion; and

ii) power is calculated rather than obtained from powermeters.

I use www.bikecalculator.com for power estimates (there are plenty of others that do the same job) and one of the inputs to this is rider mass, which obviously varies and another is bike mass, which is 8kg for everyone (7kg bike + 1kg kit).

Power is the calculated as that required to get the bike + rider over the specified distance and gradient at the specified speed. For an x% increase in the mass of bike and rider, the power also increases by x% for the same distance, gradient and speed, as one has to assume that all other factors are the same e.g. mechanical efficiency, impact of altitude across all riders, simply because there is no information available to do otherwise.

Expressed as multiple of just the rider's mass, the change isn't directly proportional., although the difference is not significant.

For example, a 70kg rider on an 8kg bike producing 400 watts gives 5.7w/kg per kg of rider and 5.1 w/kg per kg of total payload. (The watts figure on its own is meaningless, obviously. Pantani's

If a 50kg rider goes uphill at the same speed, then this will also require 5.1w/kg of total payload i.e. 297 watts in total i.e. 5.9 watts/kg of rider.

Basically, smaller riders are stuffed by having to lug a relatively larger bike uphill than a larger rival.

Thus, a 20kg range in rider weights only gives a 0.2kg range in w/kg for the same performance up a given climb, so for the Vuelta riders with a range of 7kg in bodyweight, the range of w/g all other things equal would be under 0.1kg. This is well inside the margin for error associated with things such as estimating wind speed, mechanical efficiency etc. and is thus not significant for this level of analysis.

If the power figures came from power metres you'd expect more variation, due to differences in efficiency, variations from average speed, amount of weaving around etc.
Biosphere

SlowRower wrote:


Bio,

The linear relationship between m/h and w/kg holds true if . . . .


We've discussed the flaws I perceive in Ferrari's VAM methodology and the nonsensical things he was claiming when the gradient increases. I might have had a chance of finding those original posts if you hadn't spent years building the doping haystack with MJM Wink

A bit more disclosure. Bearing in mind that I'm dismissive of Ferrari numbers on these matters, when I posted yesterday I just picked the Angliru numbers for the 4 main protagonists (as I perceived them)

Quote:
COBO = 1900m/h (6.33w/kg)
FROOME and MENCHOV = 1849m/h (6.16w/kg)
WIGGINS = 1810m/h (6.03w/kg)


giving

1900/6.33 = 300.16
1849/6.16 = 300.16
1810/6.03 = 300.17

which is a ridiculously linear 1:1 correspondence when there is a supposed spread of 7kg for the 3 riders (about a 10% variation). That was enough for me to discount them based on past experience as I concluded he was using VAM as the 'engine' in his calculations.

SlowRower wrote:
Basically, smaller riders are stuffed by having to lug a relatively larger bike uphill than a larger rival.


I'm not sure the rest of your analysis really bears out their supposed  stuffing but you do highlight the point I implied but didn't spell out, in that they all have to carry the bike up the hill and since it weighs the same for all of them, the smaller rider has to output a higher W/kg, since he has a smaller number of body kgs to generate the fixed number of watts for carrying a bike. From your numbers we should expect a variation of about 0.1W/kg for the 4 of them which isn't there. I know it's small, but that's not my point, the variation Ferrari reports is 500 times less (and seems more like a rounding error (isn't really there) if we start getting into significant figures) so I don't trust the numbers based on past experience of him.

Thanks for posting the calculations. Less difference than I expected when I wave my hands around. I know 0.1W/kg doesn't sound like a lot, but it's a bit over 1.5% of their outputs, and it's been a long time since a GT was won by a 1.5% margin - frantically doing mental calculations for this years Giro before I hit submit Wink

PS: Did your mum ever threaten to take away your calculator if you were a naughty boy?

PPS: Ferrari also uses a small w for Watt. Don't let his bad habits lead you astray Wink

       justcycling.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> The 3 GT´s
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum