Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before
Quote | Reply
A link from the Science of Sport article to Bicycling article contains intriguing new info

Snippet:
As expected, the Spanish Cycling Federation panel convened to rule on Alberto Contador’s positive test for clenbuterol today overturned its initial recommendation for a one-year ban, and has instead cleared him of all charges.

I say “as expected” because Spanish media had for the better part of a week been predicting this would be the case, because Contador himself is not only cleared to start the Volta Algarve tomorrow but, lo and behold, he’s actually already in Portugal for it and registered, and because Contador and his lawyer reportedly taped a media interview saying they were “very content” with the RFEC’s decision … two hours before the decision was announced.
Handy.


After reading a lot of articles and comments yesterday, I was actually leaning towards the concept of Contador possibly being clean. I don't know if he had a transfusion, and I don't know how the Clen got in his system. HOWEVER... After doing the SUFFERFEST Angels this morning and watching him race (and bonk), I remembered a few things that always bothered me.

Contador seems to peak for every race. Most of the other cyclists peak for a few races, but are in bad form for others.

And this: Note that most of the other high achievers have either admitted doping, or have been caught/suspected.

The 2010 TDF numbers are actually pretty realistic, which leads me to believe that Contador was very likely doping before (Puerto, etc), and actually may have been a little bit clean in 2010. My impression of the Chaingate stage was that Contador was struggling a bit, and Andy would have dropped him had he not dropped himself. If a transfusion was involved, this would likely be the impetus from Contador's side. The thought of another big climb against someone that put the hurt on you would not be appetizing. The Science of Sport numbers on the Tourmalet seem to indicate that Andy might actually be clean, just with a great kick to separate.

Anyway, thought it was pretty interesting, better than the same old stuff I've been reading for the past few weeks.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [FisH2O] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wonder where Ricco would rank in that graph?

Despite what he did or didn't take, he sure was entertaining to watch!

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:

Despite what he did or didn't take, he sure was entertaining to watch!

Are you saying that if you knew for a fact that he cheated, you would have still been interested in watching him race his bike?
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [drewmc3656] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Do you watch baseball?

American Football?

Futball?

Skiing?

etc...?

Doping is an integral part of sports. All sports. It's like a virus or bacteria. You know it's there. You want it to go away or be eradicated. You might not see it or realize it's there anymore, but it is... I do not like it or agree with the practice.


But, that being said, I did find Ricco's many vicious attacks on the climbs in the TdF entertaining. It was entertaining to watch.

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No, in fact, I don't watch those sports.

And I don't enjoy watching someone who is cheating/lying providing entertainment at the expense of others who are riding clean.

Such a nonchalant/it's going to happen anyway attitude is what allows doping to continue.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [drewmc3656] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm hardly nonchalant about the subject. Frankly, I think the only solution to the issue of doping (as it pertains to cycling) is incessant testing.

Test everyone. Test at every stage of every race. Test amateurs and pros. It would be a huge expense and a huge PIA, but I really don't see another way to TRULY stop the doping.


Random testing does very little and catches very few, IMO. Random testing can be avoided or leaked ahead of time. Start the testing processes early and often. Many of the guys that are doping started long before they made it to the pros, so why would they stop when they get there? Test Cat1/2 guys. If they really want to go pro they'll have to get used to it anyway, and hopefully that will help clean up the problem.


I still thought Ricco's attacks were fun to watch. Take it or leave it.

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [FisH2O] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Verbier is shorter than those other climbs and apparently was with the wind that day, IIRC.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There already is tons of testing, it does nothing. The only way to truly stop it is informants, private investigations, and jail sentances. Unfortunately the people who makes billions off the athletes are able to generate huge PR smear campaigns to make sure this does not happen.

Ride Scoozy Electric Bicycles
http://www.RideScoozy.com
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
True, but they can detect plasticizers in your blood, which can be linked to blood transfusions.

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
X2 on Ricco. He had balls like few others and made it very exciting to watch.
Many forget he would have WON the TDF in 2008 if he didn't get popped for EPO.

I was looking forward to another futile attack on the Poggio at MSR...

With Contador being cleared, I have faith that Ricco will be back in time for the Giro :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [msuguy512] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wouldn't say it "does nothing."

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [FisH2O] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think the Armstrong Alpe d'Huez number from 2004 was the time trial, correct? I think there is some margin of error in there since he didn't ride 2 or 3 Cat 1 or HC climbs over 100 miles before he hit the bottom of the climb.

There are just too may factors at play for this chart to give too much insight into Contador's performance.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [Skippy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Skippy wrote:
I think the Armstrong Alpe d'Huez number from 2004 was the time trial, correct? I think there is some margin of error in there since he didn't ride 2 or 3 Cat 1 or HC climbs over 100 miles before he hit the bottom of the climb.

There are just too may factors at play for this chart to give too much insight into Contador's performance.

Not sure on the Armstrong. Lots of variables in there but they have done a good job trying to normalize. Never going to be perfect, but gives one something to compare performances. The link to the 2010 Tourmalet is very interesting, they have actual SRM data from Horner & Sorensen to work from here
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wpcouch wrote:
I wouldn't say it "does nothing."

it does nothing because they just cheat in ways the tests can't detect.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [Skippy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
the argument basically is that until EPO there was an upper bound nobody was ever exceeding

then all the top guys were exceeding it, and almost all of them have been caught doping or are being accused by like 9 ex teammates and had an unofficial test confirm it.


Skippy wrote:
I think the Armstrong Alpe d'Huez number from 2004 was the time trial, correct? I think there is some margin of error in there since he didn't ride 2 or 3 Cat 1 or HC climbs over 100 miles before he hit the bottom of the climb.

There are just too may factors at play for this chart to give too much insight into Contador's performance.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wpcouch wrote:
I wouldn't say it "does nothing."

Really? In light of the Contador decision, I would say what good does it do? Even with a positive test, nothing resulted of it.

It's very saddening.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [NateC] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That had very little to do with the test itself, and was, IMO, purely politics.

It seems as if UCI will appeal to the CAS soon

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [FisH2O] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Contador blew up at P-N 2009 and missed the podium. Lance then took the opportunity to light his teammate up in the press, which is about all he achieved during his comeback. Besides that, Contador does a handful of stage races every year that all suit him so it's no real surprise that he always looks strong.

For that chart you pasted, wasn't it later proven to be based on incorrect assumptions?

Lastly, if we want to talk about eye-opening performances then Andy's final ITT at TDF would be right at the top: he suddenly overcame his biggest weakness and held pace with a guy who has been a top TTer his entire career.

I'm not making a case for El Clenbutolero being clean, just that he's hardly the only one.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jackmott wrote:
wpcouch wrote:
I wouldn't say it "does nothing."


it does nothing because they just cheat in ways the tests can't detect.

There are plenty using doping methods that ARE detectable. New guys are getting popped for doping every day, you just don't hear about it as often because they aren't all FL, AC, RR, etc...

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Carl Spackler wrote:
I'm not making a case for El Clenbutolero being clean, just that he's hardly the only one.

yeah, its pretty telling how supportive schleck is of contador I think



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Sufferfest Vid "angels" shows the blow-up in spectacular fashion. You get to hand Contador his ass. He then returns the favor later on...

Not sure about the assumptions - I am guessing you can pick apart any comparison like this if you apply yourself. I do remember reading something about the length of various courses being inaccurate in various comparisons like this.

I do think it is interesting to note that the Tourmalet stage data shows that Andy & Contador weren't that much faster, they just got away from the rest then held it. Makes is somewhat believable that they weren't doping.

Couldn't you say the same thing about Sastre's 2008 TDF TT effort vs. Cadel? Sad to think we have to choose between doping and rising to the occasion...
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [FisH2O] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Corrected link to the 1st post:

LINKY


G

http://brokeniron.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [c.dan.jog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
c.dan.jog wrote:
The Verbier is shorter than those other climbs and apparently was with the wind that day, IIRC.

Sure. But he's higher than all the listed other climbs, including a doped up to the gills Pantani.

Citizen of the world, former drunkard. Resident Traumatic Brain Injury advocate.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [wpcouch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And likely drinking liquids out of plastic bottles.

Styrrell

Styrrell
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [jandev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's not just shorter, it's a lot shorter: 7-8km and parts are steep. That would inflate the VAM/HR.

The graph is not as definitive as some are pointing it out to be. The difference between the highest and lowest VAMs is 5-6%. If he had to do a climb twice as long as the Verbier would he slow down?

Anyway, I'm not defending Contador. And I'm certainly not saying he was clean or doped and pointing to this data set to argue one way or the other doesn't make a lot of sense.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [styrrell] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
styrrell wrote:
And likely drinking liquids out of plastic bottles.

Styrrell

I always thought, why not go back to storing your blood in glass bottles like they used to do.
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [styrrell] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your understanding of the test is obviously limited since this does not matter.

Also, like the other guy said they can go to glass bottles. When the testing protocol has to be stated prior to the test, then it is very easy for athletes/doctors to determine what you can do to get around them. It is not that difficult. For example: I can get 3 missed tests before a failure. For the time period I am on drugs I hide until i get 2 misses, then I have to ease up for a while. This is called the 3 strikes plan and has been mentioned for many years. There are lots of ways around the test. If you know you can't be tested at night and if you take a certain dose it is out of your system within 8 hours then there you go. Just because you are tested and it doesn't come up positive means nothing. It is no big suprise the PR firms don't want the public to actually understand how the tests are performed and they can keep chanting the "he is the most tested athlete" garbage.

Ride Scoozy Electric Bicycles
http://www.RideScoozy.com
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [TriDavis] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm sure they will now. I dislike doping as much as the next guy, but i also believe in fairness. this is peoples livelihoods and reputations afterall. Even the people that did the plasticizer test stated that they couldn't be sure it was due to an IV vs normal environmental factors, but many fans see it as proof positive.

I really wish they would release the blood passport numbers. AC didn't test positive for Clem the day before, then did the next day. If the conspiracy theorists are correct and the Clem came from previous doping administered by IV transfusion, there should be an increase in HCT levels I would think.

Styrrell

Styrrell
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [Skippy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Skippy wrote:
I think the Armstrong Alpe d'Huez number from 2004 was the time trial, correct? I think there is some margin of error in there since he didn't ride 2 or 3 Cat 1 or HC climbs over 100 miles before he hit the bottom of the climb.

That can't be true because that is the excuse I am using for not beating Pantani's time up Alpe d'Huez last summer. I did not get that nice 100 mile, 2 HC climb warm up before I hit the bottom. :-)

Skippy wrote:
There are just too may factors at play for this chart to give too much insight into Contador's performance.

Seriously, I agree. WAY too many factors. As you mentioned, how long was the climb? When in the Tour did they hit it? First week? Two days before the end? Big difference. And what about tactics? Realisticly, Armstrong's two wins on Alpe d'Huez, the TT and "the look" should be among the fastest as in either case it was full gas from the bottom of the climb.

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava
Quote Reply
Re: Interesting Contador insight I hadn't heard before [nslckevin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nslckevin wrote:
Skippy wrote:
I think the Armstrong Alpe d'Huez number from 2004 was the time trial, correct? I think there is some margin of error in there since he didn't ride 2 or 3 Cat 1 or HC climbs over 100 miles before he hit the bottom of the climb.


That can't be true because that is the excuse I am using for not beating Pantani's time up Alpe d'Huez last summer. I did not get that nice 100 mile, 2 HC climb warm up before I hit the bottom. :-)

Skippy wrote:
There are just too may factors at play for this chart to give too much insight into Contador's performance.


Seriously, I agree. WAY too many factors. As you mentioned, how long was the climb? When in the Tour did they hit it? First week? Two days before the end? Big difference. And what about tactics? Realisticly, Armstrong's two wins on Alpe d'Huez, the TT and "the look" should be among the fastest as in either case it was full gas from the bottom of the climb.

From the article in question - responses to some of these questions. Not saying there isn't still some questions

Wind

It's been reported that there was quite a strong wind blowing up the valley on the climb. Alex very helpfully calculated what impact a wind would have on the required power output on the climb. It turns out that with NO WIND, the power output required on the climb is approximately 422W. A tail-wind speed of 3m/s (10km/hour) reduces the power output required to 387W, which is a pretty sizeable difference. Of course, the climb cannot have had a tailwind all the way up - it had hairpins and so there will have been headwinds and tailwinds. However, this is an average tailwind, and it seems reasonable. I tried to watch for signs of strong winds on the climb, but must confess it was not noticeable.

Also, in the graph above, there is no controlling for the wind. Perhaps LeBlanc had a mighty tail-wind on Hautacam in 1994? Perhaps Pantani faced a head-wind in 1997 and could even have been faster? It's impossible to factor that in, which is why it can be risky making judgements in isolation! That is why averages over longer time-periods provide more meaningful information than once off events. The average power output on climbs over the course of a Tour tells you more than single climbs (but more on that in other posts). However, it's safe to say that wind can have a substantial impact on climbing power calculated from ascent time.

Climb length

Many have been quick to point out that the climbing rate should be higher, given that Verbier is a shorter climb than most of those done at the end of Tours. This is certainly a factor, since most of the climbs in the above list are 35 minutes long (Hautacam) or even longer (Alpe d'Huez). Soler's climb in 2007 was short - 22 minutes, but the difference in length is certainly partly responsible. Therefore, Contador's record VAM is at least partly due to a shorter climb.

I say "partly", because I don't believe that the effect of length is as great as many seem to believe. It's certainly a factor, I don't wish to dismiss it, but not as large as one might first thing. For example, when the Tour did the time-trial on Alpe d'Huez in 2004, the climbing times of all the main riders was only just marginally faster than when the same climb was done at the end of a 200km stage (all the other times in that list above). Similarly, long climbs like the Tourmalet and Mont Ventoux are climbed only a few percent slower than the shorter climbs, and so while length plays a role, and would account for some of Contador's record ascent rate, it's not as simple as saying "shorter equals faster".

Race situation

I will say that the way this Tour had gone, the first big finish was always going to be spectacular. The Tour was effectively dormant for 8 days, and the Pyrenees were done with minimal attrition. Therefore, given the situation and the way that the race had developed, the climb was always going to be fast. This again illustrates how isolated climbs can't be taken out of context, and is the reason one should look at a collection of climbs to reduce the impact of these confounders as much as is possible.

Doping?

Finally, I did mention in yesterday's post that given the change in pro-cycling over the last few years, one would expect a drop in climbing rates, not new records. People will wonder about what this record ascent means - it's only natural given cycling's history!

I've hopefully managed to explain some of the other factors that must be considered in the Contador climb, but this question remains, without a doubt. It would be naive to dismiss it out of hand. I will say that performance analysis of single performances does not constitute proof of anything. In fact, it's a weak method of inferring doping. That was never my intention in yesterday's post, by the way (in case it came across that way). The better approach is to look at all climbs and work on averages, as I did for Tour winners from 1989 to 2001 in a previous post.

Why? Because doping has an effect on the repeatability of the performance, just as much as it affects performance acutely. Many will think only of the acute doping effect, but in fact, most of the doping products exert an even bigger effect on recovery, and hence the ability to produce this level of performance over and over. Think testosterone, growth hormone, cortisone, insulin - all are used to reduce stress response or improve post-exercise recovery. Even EPO would have this effect. Therefore, one cannot infer too much from a once-off performance. Rather, you have to look at a collection of performances, which also partly addresses variability provided by wind speed, temperatures and race situation.

In time, however, this performance will be placed into context - one of perhaps 10 climbs in the 2009 Tour, just as there may have been 10 climbs in 2008, 2002 or 1996. At that point, one will get a better idea of what is happening, and hopefully the analysis we did of the Tour winners 1989 to 2001 will be comparable to what is happening now.

Conclusion

That's the short analysis of Contador's climb. It was spectacular, without a doubt - a record in the Tour, even factoring in wind and climb length. There are too many unanswered questions regarding wind, absolute power, gradients and distances, however, which is a pity. Hopefully the discussion and the great debate it produces is worth the absence of a definitive answer! Certainly it has generated a lot of discussion, for which we thank you once again!
Quote Reply