stronz
Posts:447
 |
| 09/13/2013 08:22 AM |
|
6.83 W/kg...Anyone want to talk about this? Yeah it was a short climb, but still... |
|
|
|
|
stronz
Posts:447
|
| 09/13/2013 08:22 AM |
|
Here's the link.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/gazzetta-dello-sport-scrutinizes-horners-power-data-at-the-vuelta |
|
|
|
|
jmdirt
Posts:775
|
| 09/13/2013 08:58 AM |
|
I don't want to talk about it.
Don't let Cosmic see this... |
|
|
|
|
Keith Richards
Posts:781
|
| 09/13/2013 09:48 AM |
|
| C'mon...their calculations are way over the top. |
|
| -----
It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong. |
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 09/13/2013 10:06 AM |
|
I really hate all the armchair power analysts trying to extrapolate what watts the rider were pushing. Unless you have the actual data, there is simply no way to know.
|
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
stronz
Posts:447
|
| 09/13/2013 10:07 AM |
|
| I agree the numbers seem absurd. |
|
|
|
|
jmdirt
Posts:775
|
| 09/13/2013 10:24 AM |
|
| Dang Cosmic saw it! ;] At least we agree on this though. |
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 09/13/2013 10:40 AM |
|
Posted By Justin jmdirt on 09/13/2013 10:24 AM
Dang Cosmic saw it! ;] At least we agree on this though.
 |
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
Orange Crush
Posts:4499
|
| 09/13/2013 11:40 AM |
|
Well of course the Italians would be scrutinizing Horner, their favorite son is going backwards :-)
I agree, just on one climb these power analyses worth little, too many random factors.
But when you do it Vayeur's way and start averaging over half a dozen climbs in a single GT it becomes more believable, the random factors will start cancelling out. The verdict on the Froomster in 2013 Tour was a yellow card. Still the most unbelievable performance of the year is you ask me (but I've missed the last two stages in Vuelta). |
|
|
|
|
CERV
Posts:151
|
| 09/13/2013 11:50 AM |
|
I don't know where they even get those numbers for VAM, which should be pretty straightforward to calculate, but appear out to lunch.
http://www.climbbybike.com/profile_520/Pe%C3%B1a_Cabarga_Heras_profile.jpg
Pena Cabarga starts at 26m, ends at 569m, and is 5.9km long. The story claims the last 4.9km were done in 16:40. At 1km, they would have been at 126m, according to the profile. 569-126=443m ascent in 16:40. That works out to a VAM of 1594m/hour. That's not a protour winning performance.
Assume 4.9km is a typo, and they meant 5.9km, as that's what the actual climb is. Ifyou were to assume the entire 5.9km climb was done in 16:40, not just the last 4.9km, the ascent would then be 569-26-=543m.
543m climbed in 16:40 works out to a VAM of 1954m/hour.
Either way, story is out to lunch somewhere...... |
|
|
|
|
Pits
Posts:6
|
| 09/13/2013 11:52 AM |
|
| Vam shmam.... stop the madness. They're all riding faster times on the same climbs than were recorded two and three years ago. |
|
|
|
|
CERV
Posts:151
|
| 09/13/2013 12:04 PM |
|
| You realize comparing riders VAMs and comparing their timess for a given climb is exactly the same thing, right? |
|
|
|
|
Pits
Posts:6
|
| 09/13/2013 01:12 PM |
|
| Yes, Cerv... I am aware it is a time factor that ignores context. And that is why no one takes it seriously. |
|
|
|
|
stronz
Posts:447
|
| 09/13/2013 01:20 PM |
|
| I am very suspect of this metric as I really dont think there is a specific rate that a given rider climbs up hills. Just too mamny variables -- it even changes from hill to hill for the same rider. And not simply because of the grade. It changes due to the surface conditions, length of the climb, wind, equipment, etc. So I think it is possibly useful when you compare VAM for one rider using exactly the same equipment under exactly the same weather conditions. Possibly to learn what kinds of grades and equipment make that rider ascend fastest. i do not think it is useful to compare VAM amongst different riders using different equipment on different days on different hills. Nor do I think one can define a physiologic high limit. Anyone who has ever ridden up hills knows that some riders are really fast going up long 5% grade hills. Others kick ass on the really steep stuff -- 15-20% shorter grades. Their VAMs can range wildly. |
|
|
|
|
SideBySide
Posts:444
|
| 09/13/2013 01:52 PM |
|
If Horner is doping, based on this one climb, then anyone ahead of him must be doping better.
Frankly it would not surprise me if he was doping, but making calculations on one climb is sort of silly. Do you always climb the same hill in the same time. Perhaps he is just better than the others right no. Someone has to be the leader after all. Could it be a 41 year old, who knows? |
|
|
|
|