i hope the interwebz realize that it's not JUST the gradient that makes people walk....

even the flanders u see people walking. why? they apparently aren't smart.... no. Because the steepness is compounded by the fact when one person in front slows or blowsup, u are forced* to get off suddenly. Then now you have to get back on the bike.... on a 20% climb (forget the 27%), it's hard without someone pushing you to restart.... support cars with mechanics arent exactly behind every rider on those roads.

My bad....didnt read the post correctly.

Difference is this is a stage race, and Flanders is a one-day, so if you get caught behind the carnage the first time up the hill your entire week is wasted, as it was for Phinney.

If the climb was restricted to near the end of the stage it would have been better.

I did a semi-race this weekend which opened with Marin Ave in Berkeley: not as nasty as this, but still 24% in sections. I definitely wanted to be near the front, and I was, as further behind guys were seriously traversing and walking and generally being in the way. Once to the top I relaxed a bit, as I didn't have the fitness to hammer the 195 km.

added: BTW, anyone know for sure what low gears any of the top riders were using?

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

Slick roads can make it hard to get up steep grades while standing on the pedals. Might've been more manageable grinding it out with too-tall gears if the wheels gripped.

Also, while Shimano and Sram drivetrains can be rigged to accept mountain bike cassettes (avoiding the triple), I'm not aware of a Campy cassette with a cog larger than 29t (at least for 11spd), and I assume teams would have to stick with the sponsor equipment.

Thanks for the chuckle!

_________________
ciclismo-espresso.com

Third message on this thread sums it up and guys still keep arguing about this!? If you can't hack it, just *bleeping* pack it up and take up drinking or something, but under no circumstances is a triple an acceptable option.

_________________
http://demarere.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

By that logic shouldn't they all be on fixies?

Is op trolling maybe?

Any of those guys would get up that on 34x29.

What happened was the slowing in front to a standstill making re-start impossible.

I don't think anyone needed a triple on this, and to be honest a fit amateur would not need a triple either.

I'd be looking at 34x29 max, and might try to get away with 34x25 ... LOL

sadly I think the OP is completely serious judging by his previous comments and threads generated.

I rode Filbert in a 34/26. It was daunting, but not as bad as I'd feared once I got going. First half was 31%, second half 32%, according to my modeling of power data.



Pros are obviously a lot stronger.

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

you need no triple front, a mtb cassette and 34t front is more than enough AND triple cranksets tend to have a much wider q-factor, and that would be really really wrong. it happened in the past, when pros change the q-factor they hate it, cause they are used to a biomechanical setup, and if you change that setup, specially if you change it to worse, it's really really bad. triple is not for pro's.

_________________
Happy Trails !!!
MTB / Giant Xtc '05 / 8.7Kg
ROAD / La Perla Negra - FM015 / 7.0Kg

dang low 40 cadence and 400+ watts. ouchie

Suspect I'm a lot heavier at 75kg than you DJ, but based on my power data from somewhat similar climbs I'd be chucking out about 700W going up a climb like that (not quite as steep I grant you)

Don't like stuff that steep, but not about to surrender to a triple!

I seem to recall Roberto Heras using a triple to fly up some steep stuff a few years back.
In terms of climbing, I would not be calling him a pussy myself. (There are other terms to apply to many riders of that generation, admittedly.)
You can't win a race if you don't finish.