Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier
Quote | Reply
From Science of Sport's analysis of Contador's climb: http://www.sportsscientists.com/...-contador-climb.html

He has the highest VAM ever recorded in the Tour. What is disturbing to me is the last time this happened - last year - it was Ricardo Ricco, who then immediately got popped for CERA. 2nd on the list below Contador is Riis, who admitted to taking EPO in the 96 TdF. Below him are several performances from Pantani, who had a less than stellar track record regarding drugs, both PED and otherwise.

Does anyone else find this really, really disturbing? I actually find this surprisingly supportive of the "Lance is clean" argument, since his best performance - which was in the 2004 Alpe d'Huez TIME TRIAL, when they ONLY did the Alpe climb, nothing else, no hard lead in, etc. - is 8th on the list. EIGHTH! For a sub-1hr time trial effort.

I'm a Contador fan, in that I just like to see someone who is clearly at the top of their game. But this just doesn't sit well with me.


"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | Facebook - Rappstar Racing | @rappstar

Ask me about: DiamondBack Bikes | Zipp | 1st Endurance | Normatec - $100 off RAPP2017 | Quarq | SRAM | MatchRider | Kiwami | ROKA
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dude, as I have been warned by the masses, you should take care in what you are insinuating here. You don't want to get yourself banned.
Last edited by: aerobike: Jul 20, 09 21:13
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shorter climb than the others, they dawdled the rest of the day, hell, the rest of the tour to date almost...

Forget speedwork. Speedwork is the icing on the cake and you don't have a cake yet. - MattinSF

Basically they have 9 tenants, live life to the fullest, do not turn the cheak, and embrace the 7 deadly since. - TheForge (on satanists)
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
interesting analysis to say the least

Member HED, Cervelo, De Soto Mafia
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [aerobike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're right on .... I hope Dan isn't a Contador fan or the Rappstar is banned for sure .... Cera or not ;-)
Dave
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Plus he shot at the camera, a clear indication he was 'shooting up'.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not disturbed, just not surprised. Dude, it's professional cycling.


_________________________________________________

Yes, I shave my legs. Yes, I am comfortable with this. I am enlightened.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [aerobike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Dude, as I have been warned by the masses, you should take care in what you are insinuating here. "God-willing," you don't want to get yourself banned.


so you were insinuating that AC took peds like Floyd in your other retard post? I can swear that you said that you did not insinuate anything in that post.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [aerobike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am saying that I am disturbed by someone setting a record that is much faster than records set by people that either admitted to doping or were busted for it. I am saying that this is disturbing because the most recent time this happened, the individual who set the record was then immediately busted for doping.

Ross does a good job of addressing the issue of doping in the blog post - saying that it's naive to jump to conclusions either way - and that most likely the results over the entire tour - i.e. repeatability - matter more than a single performance. I.e., a tailwind, discrepancies about the actual grade, etc. all could play a role.

I don't think what I am saying is - in large part - any different than if I posted a listing of all of the swimming world records that have been broken with the LZR suit and asking if people were disturbed by that. Unfortunately, history has taught us to be cautious.

I actually wish that - for comparison - they had done an analysis of Andy Schleck's VAM and also Pelizotti. If those guys really had very high VAMs, then it would be reasonable to conclude that wind (and perhaps misinformation about the climb's grade/length) played a role.

However, as the data is presented, I find it troubling. I say this as someone who thinks that cycling has done a very good job of trying to clean up the sport, much moreso than NFL, MLB, etc. where they just sweep it under the rug and/or don't even seriously enforce it. I am *not* disturbed when they catch someone. I think it means that the system is working.

I also think it's important to note that I think there is a big difference between inferring something by performance relative to others (i.e., "it is disturbing that Contador climbed so much faster than Andy Schleck, Pelizotti, etc.") as compared to performance relative to past performers, especially when those past performers are established cheaters.

EDIT: I am DEFINITELY not insinuating that Contador is doping. I am simply saying that I find it troubling that Contador is so much faster than folks who did. I also found it interesting, regarding those who have argued that Lance is clean (including Lance himelf), that his own performances were very strong - relative to his competition - but were not overwhelmingly strong compared to historical performances. I think, for example, that is much more compelling than Ed Coyle's paper (which has been attacked/defended endlessly) on Armstrong's efficiency gains for those who support Lance.


"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | Facebook - Rappstar Racing | @rappstar

Ask me about: DiamondBack Bikes | Zipp | 1st Endurance | Normatec - $100 off RAPP2017 | Quarq | SRAM | MatchRider | Kiwami | ROKA
Last edited by: Rappstar: Jul 20, 09 14:16
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting for sure:


-----------------------------------------
Donate now to the war on ALS
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [OldFart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
Dude, as I have been warned by the masses, you should take care in what you are insinuating here. "God-willing," you don't want to get yourself banned.


I can swear that you said that you did not insinuate anything in that post.
And I wasn't.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
yeah, I find it pretty disturbing.

At first I thought 'there was a huge tailwind and his calculations are off'. Then I saw C Anker Sorenson's power file. Assuming that his SRM is calibrated correctly (and that's a big assumption with any pro's SRM), it would appear there wasn't a massive tailwind effect. Sorenson did something like 5.6 w/kg over the same period and lost 4 minutes to Contador? That's not passing the sniff test to me.
Last edited by: roady: Jul 20, 09 14:25
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
From Science of Sport's analysis of Contador's climb: http://www.sportsscientists.com/...-contador-climb.html

He has the highest VAM ever recorded in the Tour. What is disturbing to me is the last time this happened - last year - it was Ricardo Ricco, who then immediately got popped for CERA. 2nd on the list below Contador is Riis, who admitted to taking EPO in the 96 TdF. Below him are several performances from Pantani, who had a less than stellar track record regarding drugs, both PED and otherwise.

Does anyone else find this really, really disturbing? I actually find this surprisingly supportive of the "Lance is clean" argument, since his best performance - which was in the 2004 Alpe d'Huez TIME TRIAL, when they ONLY did the Alpe climb, nothing else, no hard lead in, etc. - is 8th on the list. EIGHTH! For a sub-1hr time trial effort.

I'm a Contador fan, in that I just like to see someone who is clearly at the top of their game. But this just doesn't sit well with me.

Not really...what actually disturbs me is how many people are suckered into thinking VAM is the "be all and end all" of evaluating climbing performance, when in reality it's just a poor proxy for W/kg.

Check out Alex Simmon's final post in the comments from that blog's previous entry:

http://www.sportsscientists.com/...or-takes-yellow.html


Quote:
On the basis of these revised values for gradient and distance:

Speed is revised to 22.36km/h on an 8.21% gradient.

Maintaining other assumptions per my previous post:

Tailwind (m/s) ___ Watts ___ W/kg
0 ___ 391 ___ 6.52
1 ___ 381 ___ 6.34
2 ___ 372 ___ 6.20
3 ___ 365 ___ 6.09

More than plausible 20-min power from a world class climber.

I agree with Alex...



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just really hope that he is in the Usein Bolt category...one in 5 billion humans..a cut above the rest. Of course, I am hoping that Usein is also clean.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He did compare Andy's climb in the previous article and it was 1837 VAM which should put him 3rd on the list. Armstrong's 1764 for the day was equal to his 2001 Alp d'Huez climb and we know where he finished on the day so the way I look at it the top 5 or 6 on this climb should all be on this list.

JJ


Beta testing this sig line. The old one was so old I can't remember where I got it from. Or maybe I'm so old I can't remember where I got it from. I forget.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The easy with which he did it was very disturbing to me. He was not exactly gasping for air as he blew the best in the world away.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [roady] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
yeah, I find it pretty disturbing.

At first I thought 'there was a huge headwind, and his calculations are off'. Then I saw C Anker Sorenson's power file. Assuming that his SRM is calibrated correctly (and that's a big assumption with any pro's SRM), it would appear there wasn't a massive tailwind effect. Sorenson did something like 5.6 w/kg over the same period and lost 4 minutes to Contador? That's not passing the sniff test to me.

You DO realize that Sorenson buried himself for the opening kilometers of that climb, right? Something like 450W for the first 4 minutes! He averaged only 355W for the total duration of the climb (when his current FTP is apparently closer to 380W) and he'd recorded a maximum 20minute power of 388W on stage 9, i.e. 6.1W/kg.

You might need some antihistamines or something to help you "sniff" a little better ;-)



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JR,

Not going to comment on this, but the first time I really felt like I was watching a fraud was when Johann Muelhagg, the German/Spanish Nordic skier dropped completely a fully rested a tapered world class field of nordic skiers, at altitude at the Olympic Games 30K Skate in Salt Lake City. Muelhagg made the rest of the best guys in the world look like a bunch of club skiers. As the race wrapped up and he had put over 2:00 minutes into all the best skiers in the world, for the first time, I said to myself, "He's on something", and it turned out that I was right.


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I am saying that I am disturbed by someone setting a record that is much faster than records set by people that either admitted to doping or were busted for it. I am saying that this is disturbing because the most recent time this happened, the individual who set the record was then immediately busted for doping.

Except the problem is that in this case, the supposed "record" is the result of using a half-assed estimation....



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
From Science of Sport's analysis of Contador's climb: http://www.sportsscientists.com/...-contador-climb.html

He has the highest VAM ever recorded in the Tour. What is disturbing to me is the last time this happened - last year - it was Ricardo Ricco, who then immediately got popped for CERA. 2nd on the list below Contador is Riis, who admitted to taking EPO in the 96 TdF. Below him are several performances from Pantani, who had a less than stellar track record regarding drugs, both PED and otherwise.

Does anyone else find this really, really disturbing? I actually find this surprisingly supportive of the "Lance is clean" argument, since his best performance - which was in the 2004 Alpe d'Huez TIME TRIAL, when they ONLY did the Alpe climb, nothing else, no hard lead in, etc. - is 8th on the list. EIGHTH! For a sub-1hr time trial effort.

I'm a Contador fan, in that I just like to see someone who is clearly at the top of their game. But this just doesn't sit well with me.

Not really...what actually disturbs me is how many people are suckered into thinking VAM is the "be all and end all" of evaluating climbing performance, when in reality it's just a poor proxy for W/kg.

Check out Alex Simmon's final post in the comments from that blog's previous entry:

http://www.sportsscientists.com/...or-takes-yellow.html


Quote:
On the basis of these revised values for gradient and distance:

Speed is revised to 22.36km/h on an 8.21% gradient.

Maintaining other assumptions per my previous post:

Tailwind (m/s) ___ Watts ___ W/kg
0 ___ 391 ___ 6.52
1 ___ 381 ___ 6.34
2 ___ 372 ___ 6.20
3 ___ 365 ___ 6.09

More than plausible 20-min power from a world class climber.

I agree with Alex...



I saw Alex' post, but I don't agree with some of his assumptions--and I think Sorenson's file is in conflict with is as well.

-weight (I don't know how much he weighs--130 seems a little low, even at the end of the day, but who really knows)

-CdA there's no possible way his CdA is anywhere close to .28, particularly since he was standing for most of the climb. I'd suggest it could literally be almost double that figure

-wind. I didn't really see any indications of a straight wind that strong, and the climb had switchbacks. Sure, there probably was a prevailing wind, and by all accounts it was a tailwind. People normally over-estimate wind-speed though. Still, the best indicator to me at least is Sorensen's file (and keep in mind he was in a group for most of the climb--he was on the front of the group for a brief period).
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
yeah, I find it pretty disturbing.

At first I thought 'there was a huge headwind, and his calculations are off'. Then I saw C Anker Sorenson's power file. Assuming that his SRM is calibrated correctly (and that's a big assumption with any pro's SRM), it would appear there wasn't a massive tailwind effect. Sorenson did something like 5.6 w/kg over the same period and lost 4 minutes to Contador? That's not passing the sniff test to me.

You DO realize that Sorenson buried himself for the opening kilometers of that climb, right? Something like 450W for the first 4 minutes! He averaged only 355W for the total duration of the climb (when his current FTP is apparently closer to 380W) and he'd recorded a maximum 20minute power of 388W on stage 9, i.e. 6.1W/kg.

You might need some antihistamines or something to help you "sniff" a little better ;-)
Yep, I looked at it--and I looked at his power AFTER that 4 minute section as well. You're right, his absolute time would have been better if he'd paced it differently (i.e. if he were riding for himself). I'm still sniffing!!
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i agree that most performances that seem too good to be true have been proven to be too good to be true. however, does the calculation take into account that jens then fabian were at the front absolutely turning themselves inside out for a couple k before contador took off, and that he didn't ride the entire thing solo? and just looking at the landing page of that study shows that the gradient and distance of it could be well off, potentially making the vam # wonky.

as an aside, what about wellington at kona and roth? when you're talking about 'too good to be true' performances, those are both up there. not insinuating in any way that she's cheating, just saying that big performaces do happen.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks Tom. As always, more than one side to every story. Thanks for your input. As always, a voice of reason. Nice to see that there are other numbers that tell a different story.


"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | Facebook - Rappstar Racing | @rappstar

Ask me about: DiamondBack Bikes | Zipp | 1st Endurance | Normatec - $100 off RAPP2017 | Quarq | SRAM | MatchRider | Kiwami | ROKA
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [roady] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
From the Science of Sport site:




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.
in all likelihood the wind effect probably creates a number somewhere in the middle, which doesn't seem all that crazy for ~20 minutes.
Quote Reply
Re: Is Anyone Else Disturbed By This? Re: Contador's Ascent of Verbier [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
From the Science of Sport site:




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.
in all likelihood the wind effect probably creates a number somewhere in the middle, which doesn't seem all that crazy for ~20 minutes.
But that was for a straight tailwind the whole way. As Ross further stated, with the switchbacks, it would be headwind/tailwind, which isn't clear how that'd factor in.


"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | Facebook - Rappstar Racing | @rappstar

Ask me about: DiamondBack Bikes | Zipp | 1st Endurance | Normatec - $100 off RAPP2017 | Quarq | SRAM | MatchRider | Kiwami | ROKA
Quote Reply

Prev Next