Tour Cyclist's Greatest Challenge - To Go Slower
Anton Berlin
Cyclists’ Alpine Times May Hint at Past Doping
By JULIET MACUR
LES ROUSSES, France — When the riders in the Tour de France head into
the Alps on Sunday, tackling the first high mountains of this year’s
race, all eyes will be on them. Stopwatches will be ticking.
“I think the simplest way to figure out if the sport is clean or not
is to time some of the climbs,” said Jonathan Vaughters, the team
director of Garmin-Transitions, who is an outspoken antidoping
advocate. “It’s not an exact science, but it gives you an idea of
what’s going on. For me, it’s something I pay attention to. I want to
know whether I’m wasting my time.”
Vaughters watched the Critérium du Dauphiné in June and timed the
defending Tour winner Alberto Contador as he raced up L’Alpe d’Huez, a
route with 21 switchbacks and one of the legendary climbs in cycling.
Vaughters looked at his stopwatch and was satisfied. “It was about
four minutes slower than the winning time in 2001,” he said. “Ah,
good.”
In most sports, progress is measured by advancement. Runners go faster
on the track. Athletes strive to break records.
But in cycling, a sport plagued by doping problems, some measure its
progress in a different way: by how much it has regressed in terms of
times on steep climbs, particularly since the 1990s and early 2000s,
when doping was thought to be rampant.
Though the exact starting point of the Alpe d’Huez climb has changed
slightly over the years, the Italian rider Marco Pantani still holds
the record at 37 minutes 35 seconds, set in 1997, as well as three of
the unofficial top five times. He made those climbs before a test for
the blood booster EPO was available. At that time, some riders have
said, top cyclists often used EPO to increase endurance.
Riders with at least 7 of the unofficial top 16 times up L’Alpe d’Huez
have tested positive, like Floyd Landis and Iban Mayo; have admitted
to doping, like Bjarne Riis, Richard Virenque and Alex Zülle; or have
been implicated in a doping scandal, like Jan Ullrich.
Ullrich, the 1997 Tour winner, retired from the sport after being tied
to a Spanish doping ring. His former coach, Rudy Pévenage, was quoted
by the French sports newspaper L’Équipe last week saying that he had
organized Ullrich’s visits to a blood-doping doctor in Spain.
Based on that history, it makes sense that some climbing times have
slowed with the advent of tougher antidoping tests, said Aldo Sassi,
an Italian exercise physiologist and longtime cycling coach who trains
the riders Cadel Evans and Ivan Basso.
“The speeds are lower in the climbs because there is no doping now, or
less doping, in my opinion,” Sassi said. “If you look at Pantani’s
times, the power he produced was very close to 6.8 watts per kilo, and
that is something no one can explain if you have physiological normal
conditions for any athlete.”
Sassi, like nearly every top coach now, uses computers affixed to
riders’ bikes to determine how much power those riders are producing.
Sassi said he could also calculate those numbers the old-fashioned
way, with math.
Over his decades in the sport, he has concluded that no rider can
produce more than an average of 6.0 to 6.2 watts per kilogram of his
weight over a ride of 30 to 40 minutes. In the power numbers he
calculated from the 2009 Giro d’Italia, Sassi found that only one top
rider — Denis Menchov of Rabobank — produced more than 6.0 watts per
kilogram on a climb, kicking out a 6.1. Yet a rider who was later
suspended for doping at that race, Danilo DiLuca of Italy, was
producing power on another climb at a rate much less than 6.0, Sassi
said.
“There is always a gray area,” he said.
Sassi said that determining the exact power-to-weight numbers for
riders in the past was not easy because of the variables involved. He
would need to know things like the length of the climb, the rate of
ascent, the weight of the rider and bike, and the weather conditions.
“So for Pantani, for Armstrong, I’m just not sure,” he said.
Lance Armstrong, who is trying to win the Tour for the eighth time,
holds two of the top four unofficial times up L’Alpe d’Huez. His team
manager, Johan Bruyneel, said those fast times should not cast a
shadow on Armstrong, who is under federal investigation for fraud and
doping during the years he rode on the United States Postal Service
team.
One of Armstrong’s top times up L’Alpe d’Huez was in the 2004 time
trial, when he went full bore up the mountain, with no race tactics in
play or other riders to deal with. He finished in 37:36.
“There’s no way you can measure one time against another,” Bruyneel
said. “If a rider is going full gas from the bottom, that’s one thing.
But most of the times, that wasn’t the case. But that won’t keep
people from talking.”
Eyebrows were raised last year at the Tour when Contador sped up the
Verbier climb, leaving other riders in his wake.
He had zoomed to the top of a 5.5-mile ascent with a 7.5 percent
average grade in just under 21 minutes, and he later refused to answer
questions about how he had performed so well.
Vaughters said it was possible to do without doping because it was a
very short climb. But Greg LeMond, a three-time Tour winner, wrote in
the French newspaper Le Monde that he was skeptical of the
performance.
“There is something wrong,” LeMond wrote, likening Contador’s
performance to a Mercedes winning a Formula One race. “It would be
interesting to know what’s under the hood.”
LeMond had performed calculations that showed that Contador’s maximum
oxygen intake in that climb was out of the realm of possibility. Some
exercise physiologists agreed with him and his calculations. Others
did not.
The same debate arose when Landis won the now infamous Stage 17 of the
2006 Tour. He crossed the finish line in Morzine, the same town
hosting the finish Sunday, after an improbable solo breakaway that set
him up for the victory. It was an effort so incredible some people
thought it was too good to be true.
And they were right. He later tested positive for testosterone on that
day and was stripped of the Tour title.
But his former trainer, Allen Lim, who now works for Armstrong’s
RadioShack team, said it was possible for Landis to have produced that
performance. He said Landis had produced even more power over a longer
ride during training.
“In and of itself, these racers are doing amazing, unbelievable things
on a daily basis because they are already a tiny part of the
population, a very small percentage of the world,” Lim said. “They are
already different. It’s when a rider has no history of good
performances, then has massive changes. Now that’s when you should
raise a red flag.”
There have been some discussions among exercise physiologists of
testing individual athletes’ peak performances to determine each one’s
peak power output and use it as a baseline to determine possible
doping. Any future performances above that output would raise a red
flag.
But some say that would never work. The reasons behind amazing
performances cannot necessarily be proved, they said. Sometimes, they
just happen.
“When people are put into extreme situations, like when you see when
people’s kids are trapped beneath cars and they are able to lift up
that car, they can go to unknown depths of human performance,” said
Matt Parker, the head of marginal gains for Team Sky. “Performances
like that come out in sports once in a while, too. So when someone
does something incredible, why not believe it?”
i,fred
Anton Berlin <truth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/sports/cycling/11climb.html
>
>Cyclists=92 Alpine Times May Hint at Past Doping
>By JULIET MACUR
>
>LES ROUSSES, France =97 When the riders in the Tour de France head
>into
>the Alps on Sunday, tackling the first high mountains of this year=92s
>race, all eyes will be on them. Stopwatches will be ticking.
>
>not
>is to time some of the climbs,=94 said Jonathan Vaughters, the team
>director of Garmin-Transitions, who is an outspoken antidoping
>of
>what=92s going on. For me, it=92s something I pay attention to. I
>want to
>know whether I=92m wasting my time.=94
>
>Vaughters watched the Crit=E9rium du Dauphin=E9 in June and timed
>the
>defending Tour winner Alberto Contador as he raced up L=92Alpe d=92Huez,
>a
>route with 21 switchbacks and one of the legendary climbs in cycling.
>four minutes slower than the winning time in 2001,=94 he said. =93Ah,
>good.=94
>
>In most sports, progress is measured by advancement. Runners go faster
>on the track. Athletes strive to break records.
>
>But in cycling, a sport plagued by doping problems, some measure its
>progress in a different way: by how much it has regressed in terms
>of
>times on steep climbs, particularly since the 1990s and early 2000s,
>when doping was thought to be rampant.
>
>slightly over the years, the Italian rider Marco Pantani still holds
>the record at 37 minutes 35 seconds, set in 1997, as well as three
>of
>the unofficial top five times. He made those climbs before a test
>for
>the blood booster EPO was available. At that time, some riders have
>said, top cyclists often used EPO to increase endurance.
>
>d=92Huez
>have tested positive, like Floyd Landis and Iban Mayo; have admitted
>have
>been implicated in a doping scandal, like Jan Ullrich.
>
>Ullrich, the 1997 Tour winner, retired from the sport after being
>tied
>by the French sports newspaper L=92=C9quipe last week saying that
>he had
>organized Ullrich=92s visits to a blood-doping doctor in Spain.
>
>Based on that history, it makes sense that some climbing times have
>slowed with the advent of tougher antidoping tests, said Aldo Sassi,
>an Italian exercise physiologist and longtime cycling coach who trains
>the riders Cadel Evans and Ivan Basso.
>
>or
>less doping, in my opinion,=94 Sassi said. =93If you look at Pantani=92s
>times, the power he produced was very close to 6.8 watts per kilo,
>and
>that is something no one can explain if you have physiological normal
>
>Sassi, like nearly every top coach now, uses computers affixed to
>Sassi said he could also calculate those numbers the old-fashioned
>way, with math.
>
>Over his decades in the sport, he has concluded that no rider can
>produce more than an average of 6.0 to 6.2 watts per kilogram of his
>weight over a ride of 30 to 40 minutes. In the power numbers he
>top
>rider =97 Denis Menchov of Rabobank =97 produced more than 6.0 watts
>per
>kilogram on a climb, kicking out a 6.1. Yet a rider who was later
>suspended for doping at that race, Danilo DiLuca of Italy, was
>producing power on another climb at a rate much less than 6.0, Sassi
>said.
>
>
>Sassi said that determining the exact power-to-weight numbers for
>riders in the past was not easy because of the variables involved.
>He
>would need to know things like the length of the climb, the rate of
>ascent, the weight of the rider and bike, and the weather conditions.
>
>
>Lance Armstrong, who is trying to win the Tour for the eighth time,
>team
>manager, Johan Bruyneel, said those fast times should not cast a
>shadow on Armstrong, who is under federal investigation for fraud
>and
>doping during the years he rode on the United States Postal Service
>team.
>
>time
>trial, when he went full bore up the mountain, with no race tactics
>in
>play or other riders to deal with. He finished in 37:36.
>
>said. =93If a rider is going full gas from the bottom, that=92s one
>thing.
>But most of the times, that wasn=92t the case. But that won=92t keep
>people from talking.=94
>
>Eyebrows were raised last year at the Tour when Contador sped up the
>Verbier climb, leaving other riders in his wake.
>
>He had zoomed to the top of a 5.5-mile ascent with a 7.5 percent
>average grade in just under 21 minutes, and he later refused to answer
>questions about how he had performed so well.
>
>Vaughters said it was possible to do without doping because it was
>a
>very short climb. But Greg LeMond, a three-time Tour winner, wrote
>in
>the French newspaper Le Monde that he was skeptical of the
>performance.
>
>performance to a Mercedes winning a Formula One race. =93It would
>be
>interesting to know what=92s under the hood.=94
>
>LeMond had performed calculations that showed that Contador=92s maximum
>oxygen intake in that climb was out of the realm of possibility. Some
>exercise physiologists agreed with him and his calculations. Others
>did not.
>
>The same debate arose when Landis won the now infamous Stage 17 of
>the
>2006 Tour. He crossed the finish line in Morzine, the same town
>hosting the finish Sunday, after an improbable solo breakaway that
>set
>him up for the victory. It was an effort so incredible some people
>thought it was too good to be true.
>
>And they were right. He later tested positive for testosterone on
>that
>day and was stripped of the Tour title.
>
>RadioShack team, said it was possible for Landis to have produced
>that
>performance. He said Landis had produced even more power over a longer
>ride during training.
>
>things
>on a daily basis because they are already a tiny part of the
>are
>already different. It=92s when a rider has no history of good
>performances, then has massive changes. Now that=92s when you should
>raise a red flag.=94
>
>There have been some discussions among exercise physiologists of
>one=92s
>peak power output and use it as a baseline to determine possible
>doping. Any future performances above that output would raise a red
>flag.
>
>But some say that would never work. The reasons behind amazing
>performances cannot necessarily be proved, they said. Sometimes, they
>just happen.
>
>when
>people=92s kids are trapped beneath cars and they are able to lift
>up
>that car, they can go to unknown depths of human performance,=94 said
>Matt Parker, the head of marginal gains for Team Sky. =93Performances
>like that come out in sports once in a while, too. So when someone
Thanks for posting. I think this is more than just a gray area. While I agree
that it can work I just can't see how it would be enforced.
i,fred
Kurgan Gringioni
"Anton Berlin" <truth...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:361dc738-37db-4a74...@x18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/sports/cycling/11climb.html
::
:: LeMond had performed calculations that showed that Contador’s maximum
:: oxygen intake in that climb was out of the realm of possibility
Dumbass -
That ruins the article right there.
Lemond performing calculations?
thanks,
Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
B. Lafferty
The only people who believe this stuff are Euro gym teachers and award
winning Irish sports writers.
K. Fred Gauss
The writer has never seen the "brain fart" video.
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
<truth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/sports/cycling/11climb.html
>
>Cyclists’ Alpine Times May Hint at Past Doping
>By JULIET MACUR
>
>LES ROUSSES, France — When the riders in the Tour de France head into
>the Alps on Sunday, tackling the first high mountains of this year’s
>race, all eyes will be on them. Stopwatches will be ticking.
>
>“I think the simplest way to figure out if the sport is clean or not
>is to time some of the climbs,” said Jonathan Vaughters, the team
>director of Garmin-Transitions, who is an outspoken antidoping
>advocate. “It’s not an exact science, but it gives you an idea of
>what’s going on. For me, it’s something I pay attention to. I want to
>know whether I’m wasting my time.”
>
[ Nothing of any consequence snipped. ]
Nonsense.
The problem with this approach is obvious even to a blind man: The
Tour does not follow the same route ever year.
How can you compare performnce on a climb from one year with
performacne on a climb ON A DIFFERENT ROUTE from another year?
In order for this approach to be even partially accurate, energy
outputs would have to be measured while riders are on the same course
year in and year out.
Anton Berlin
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's an interesting and innovative idea!
Have the bicyclists racers in the tournament pedal their velocipeds on
the same paths sometimes.