YouTube has tons of Vuelta coverage. Some stages are almost 2 hours of coverage and they have the last 4 or 5 km as well

Some people feel his weight is closer to 62 kg. Plus, these efforts are after a long stage- where you are easily 1kg or more lighter, due to fluid loss. Lastly, these efforts are nearly 3 weeks in a grand tour, where a body will produce 5-10% less power due to fatigue, reduced RBCs, etc. So, a fresh 6.1 w/kg climber (like the genetic freak - Lemond) was 5.7 w/kg climb 3 weeks into a grand tour. Cycling continues to do what it knows best...

Here's a good chart that shows the power output for the final climbs of grand tours- when fatigue / reduced output would have set in from a non-doping competitor. Lemond is the only athlete in this chart who has never been implicated of doping.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/...power-estimates.html

Note that for all years, the power output has been "normalized" by expressing it relative to body weight. This is important, because Indurain, for example, was much larger than Pantani. Pantani at a power output of 350W was thus the equivalent of Indurain riding at around 500W. So, to compare them, one either has to express power output per kilogram, or express it for a standard weight. I've taken the approach of expressing it relative to body weight. I'll post more on the effect of body weight on performance in the mountains once we get closer to Mont Ventoux.
Also, just as an addendum to the post in response to a comment by Will below, I must make the point that all the ABSOLUTE power outputs were calculated using the rider mass PLUS the mass of the equipment (bike and gear, assumed at 9kg for calculations), and then expressed relative to rider weight (see footnote).


It makes for some interesting reading - Greg Lemond averaged 5.7 W/kg on the final climbs during both his Tour wins. Then Indurain started off with an average power output of 5.3 W/kg, followed by 4.91 W/kg, and then it began to climb, so much so that when Indurain won his fifth Tour in 1995, his average power output on the final climbs of the mountain stages was an incredible 6.35 W/kg. (Just to labour the point - if you want to work out the ABSOLUTE power output for each rider, just multiply the power I've shown by the rider's mass. For Indurain, multiply by 80kg and you get a value of 508W)

That high power output was maintained for the next four years, Riis averaged 6.47 W/kg, Ullrich 6.33 W/kg, and then Marco Pantani set the 'record' when he averaged 6.63 W/kg during the 1998 Tour.

you have to remember that this was a short climb on Pena, all things considered. Draw conclusions after files from today is released.

You can extrapolate this 16 min climb back to a longer climb, and the w/kg would still be well north of 5.7 and firmly in the extraterrestrial range. Cycling, more of the same, but at least its a fun show to watch. It's funny watching a grandpa beating froomes best ascent time. I wonder if Lance is blushing.

fwiw, 5.7 isn't the "magic number"

Vaughters was quoted as saying it's more around 6.0.

5.7 at the end of a tour. 6.0 / 6.1 at the beginning of a grand tour.

I would expect less falloff in the Vuelta, where the stages are shorter. The Angliru stage was only 88 miles and under 4 hours. A similar stage in the TdF would be well over 100 miles.

Being skeptical is ok too. Cycling should be scrutinized. But, Horner did finish 13th at the Tour last year, so if he didn't partake in the Vuelta that may be why. Also, the previous year he had a bad crash, and was out of contention for a while. With regard to Nibali, he said that he wasn't in top form starting this Tour, and he also made a crazy early break at over 7k to go. As, in most recent Tours in memory such breaks, if they are premature, won't go unpunished. Nibali made a few flurry of attacks after that as well. Attacks that could of easily burned his matches, and that Horner covered in Froomey style. I would love to see the data on Nibali's 3-20 second surges, and how much that could sap that athletes power in the event they are reeled back in. Unfortunately, there is no concrete evidence of how much this can hurt on athlete in the long run, but, everyone who has raced know there are only so many matches you have. When Nibali cracked, he definitely slowed according to the video. He might have been riding 430, but he definitely backed off. Horner didn't really go any faster it seemed, rather Nibali fell apart. Sure I am somewhat skeptical about it as well, it is hard not to be. But, in an age where the winning-est athlete has been caught and given a life sentence, it is hard to see that everyone in the peloton would be that stupid to continue doping. The reason it was so prevalent in the past is that no-one got caught, and if your competitors were doing it and getting off scott free, you were likely to do it too. Now, that many, if not most athletes got caught in the last 7 years, it is hard to imagine that doping would be as trendy in professional cycling, and as systematic. Because clearly if you are on something now, you can be caught ten years down the line.

I will hope that Horner is clean and use the information I know of him to help establish that. Plus, since the shit hit the fan in the last few years from all the caught dopers who are informing agents of other dopers, Horner's name hasn't been discredited yet. Though there will always be information out there no matter how clean an athlete is to discredit him or her, such as his loyaly to Bruyneel (maybe he didn't know Bruyneels dark side as he joined his squad in Lance round 2). Also, the fact that he backed Lance and Bruyneel in recent years (even as recent as after Armstrong was stripped) might suggest he was clean. Because why would he back the captain of the sinking Armstrong ship, unless he didn't really now it was all the captains fault. Just like there is information on every dirty athlete to make him or her look clean. I will believe that Horner is the former, unless proven otherwise. Because even in the darkest days of cycling, there were probably some clean athletes as well.

---

Running is the best source of fiber that I know of...

Well I do not wish to drag his name throught the dirt so instead of posting I for example, private messaged Jack, with a post. ..............I do think all the cyclists that were around 13 tyrs ago knew...........Why would someone after the busts and publicity? .Not directed toward Horner at all.............but right after Festina what happened? Right after and even during Puerto what happened?......but enough of this. I do not plan to post more and beat a dead horde to death with out more substantial eveidence. Whats been said is enough. .Horner could of hit the perfect storm of peak form and others mistakes....

I don't know what to think about Horner but I'm liking Nibali more and more after. He has grit and doesn't give up, going all the way to cracking himself. His aggressiveness might hurt him at times but he certainly makes it exciting to watch.

On a lighter note, my vuelta has been made. Don't know If you guys watch on universal sports or not but they have been answering questions from twitter all vuelta long. And low and behold they have scraped enough of the bottom of the barrel and read my twitter question. I asked if yesterday's final climb was the most chaotic moments in pro cycling. And if not what was.

Pretty sure people are going to be asking me for my autograph

---

_________________________________________________
When all is said and done. More is usually said than done
Ba Ba Booey

I'll ask due to your sig line..............................but to hijack the thread, what you think of an IM the same year after an 100 ultra. How many weeks min to recover then train bike swim before bringing back the run...............I am 53 and do to compete against myself so my IM goal would be around 12 to 12:30

http://www.rtve.es/...a-ciclista-a-espana/

---

______________________________________________________

Horner set 2nd fastest time ever up angrilu climb, on the second to last day of the tour. That's a head scratcher, as the people he beat on the all time list, many have served bans. Time to go get his favorite beet juice.

Not a Horner apologist (though I'd really love for him to be clean) and what I'm about to say is a synthesis of things I've read in various places.

It really may not be all that surprising that Horner had this kind of Vuelta. He's always been a strong climber. But he's suffered a lot of ill-timed injuries, he's always sucked at time trials and he's always had to ride the grand tours in service of others. This time around was a rare harmonic convergence of good health, good form, him being designated the supported team leader and (perhaps as important as anything) a race that did not include a long time trial near the very end to knock him off his game.

Here's hoping it's legit!

I've been a big Chris Horner fan for many years. Wonderful to see him pull it off at age 42.

Is that like extrapolating an IM time from an Olympic time? Where did you learn this extrapolation method anyways, Twitter University? Come on, it's not a math equation and any extrapolation is really speculation.

Yep, Horner is old. Yes, he was a teammate of that guy. Yes, Horner, Levi and that guy hung out a lot.

But for me what is most incredible is the at Grand Tour was won by a guy with that many spacers on his bike!

---

Suffer Well.

Just thought I'd throw this out, since I haven't seen it mentioned yet.
According to Phil Chapman, Horner's power data "is only slightly better in the Vuelta compared to the Tour 2010" (see quote from wattage email group below).
According to the UCI's doping suspicious list leaked from 2010 TdF based off individual biological passport data (http://www.cyclingnews.com/...-2010-tour-de-france), Horner rated a zero on the index. Not suspicious in the slightest.

Quote:

Phil Chapman Sep 14 06:01PM -0700

Having collected Horner's data over the years for my lectures to show sport
science students what pro cyclists can do, I have to agree with Hunter.
Nothing much has changed in terms of Horner's power performance. His power
is only slightly better in the Vuelta compared to the Tour 2010 on the
Tourmalet stage behind Schleck and Contador. At a reported 65kg this puts
his FTP (for a full hour!) in the 6.0-6.1 W/kg range. Quite physiologically
reasonable.

Having said that, this is a loooong way from the new 6.5W/kg top rung
espoused by Hunter, for a Grand Tour winner.

Cheers

Phil

91 years since a GT was won by a 36-yr-old (Fermin Lambot), and no one older than that has won one till today.

Let's give CH the benefit of the doubt for a few posts . . . . I wasn't able to watch the race, so can some of you velominati explain the tactics/strategy/teamwork/nutrition/training/acclimation to course/opposition that enabled him to beat the field?

---

_____________________________________
What are you people, on dope?

—Mr. Hand

I don't think anyone posted this article from before the 2011 Tour of California, where Horner said he dropped 10 lbs from 150 to 140 lbs (63.6 Kg)
http://velonews.competitor.com/...our-de-france_176735
During his layoff for his knee injury, I will bet that he did the same sort of dietary prep to come into the Vuelta lean and mean.

I'm not sure if troll....but


1) Astana and Nibali have come out and said that Nibali is not riding at his best. In fact, his power is about 5% down (10-20w) from what it was in the Giro.

2) The other big competition, Purito and Valverde rode a tough Tour and are pretty exhausted. While they did perform pretty well, they are certainly not in the best shape.

3) Niabli began to unravel in the third week. He began to cede time to most riders in the last bit of the Pyrenees. Not much time, but little bits. the other riders could smell the blood in the water.

4) There was only one TT and it featured a climb.

5) Horner was consistent throughout the race. He even benefited from not being a favorite on 2 stages where he made large time gains early on from attacking and the others letting him ride away.

6) Niabli had the leaders jersey pretty early on (on and off). With many summit finishes, it took quite some time for him to get back to the hotel to rest/recover. This could account for #3.

7) Horner started the Vuelta fresh and had peaked specifically for this event. He had to shine as his contract was going to run out soon. Other GC men peaked for other events and this was simply a way to finish off the year/run in for worlds.

8) Nibali was forced pretty early to have to respond to a number of hard attacks from Purito and Valverde, as he had to defend the jersey. Horner very rarely had the responsibility to do so.



And to the poster earlier about the Angliru time, look at the video. There is a tailwind for most of the climb, and from the flags a pretty strong one too. I wouldn't be surprised if it did get close to breaking a record. I'm not saying Horner never partook in anything in his past, but having met the guy, he is as honest and charismatic as they come. I would be very surprised if he did purposely dope for this event. I just can't see him doing it.

I spent more than an hour interviewing him for an article once. I can say this: as far as racing is concerned, he is very strategically savvy and you can see it when he's out on the road against other riders and I think you saw it on Angliru where he repeatedly reeled Nibali back in slowly, never going so hard as to blow up. I think it's a great win and I hope to see him on a team mixing it up again next year.

Great post.

Does Horner publishing his Bio Passport data help anyone's feelings about Horner being clean?

http://www.chrishornerracing.com/

The wife and I were having a discussion about this - if you were a young athlete, why would you consider cycling as a career if you knew you would get accused of doping and there was nothing you could do to prove you weren't? Could you imagine if every touchdown or sack was accompanied by a chorus of doping accusations? Even track runners don't have to deal with this, and they have more than proven that they can't be believed.

Why only cycling?