HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28302 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 1269, 1270, 1271, 1272, 1273, 1274, 1275 ... 1887  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Posts: 7412
Location: Los Angeles / Glendale, California
Ok, Karsten, going by your reasoning it doesn't matter, so what's the big deal in not making that available? Apparently it's not being used, so there's no loss in having it not visible, right? Why the resistance then? If it genuinely isn't being used, then you don't need it. Done! Having it removed doesn't harm your ability to win, makes doubters happy. Win-win. Done.

Or no... ? You still want them in there? Why?

_________________
Exp001 || TeamLACBC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:05 am
Posts: 74
Hi all,
I have some questions that some of might be able to answers.
I am wondering when riders sign with a team, do they sign some kind of confidentiality agreement not to disclose their team's training methods to others or in case they sign with new teams ?
Also I don't get it why teams are reluctant to release the data if they are truly riding clean. I mean unlike Formula 1 cars which use engineering and can be replicate, Cycling uses human body and if you don't have then you don't have it, no ?
Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:09 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:44 am
Posts: 1410
^ this too. my only example of 'what happened' was mick rogers.

last year he was dropping fools in the mountains riding on front for ages, then where was he on ventoux , and if he was training with wiggins / froome, why does he not shed light to the public/riise ? I too asked about confidentiality while riding the metro to work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:57 pm
Posts: 27
Prend has a valid point - power meters can equate to dull racing with attacks being nullified through nothing more than mathematics.

If you take that to the extreme who knows you could theoretically win a GT. Ultimately the sport does come down to numbers and that is what we all watched and moaned about last year. Sky have collected and analysed a huge amount of data taken from each stage and matched that data with a rider capable of producing the required figures.

Obviously this didn't happen at the first attempt and the GC rider isn't going to be suited to every stage but as long as he matches the criteria well enough you stand a good chance of reaching the podium in Paris.

You can argue that you need PEDs to reach the required figures but that goes against the principle of the team and everything that Dave Brailsford works towards - A numbers guy wants consistency other the whole plan is flawed. I don't see how doping can produce the accuracy that he requires on a regular basis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:29 pm
Posts: 589
Well by that logic, they should just get everyone in a lab to measure who has the highest power/weight ratio and award them the Tour.

There, wasn't that easy.

_________________
K2

Do you suffer more when you train, or cannot train?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Posts: 1763
Location: Canada
It's up to:
1) ASO: Design Tours so there is room for team tactics, and for different power profiles. Spend some time where there's lots of high winds, and changing forecast. This way, there's always room for "on the spot" team tactics and opportunities.
2) The ProTour: Make some rules about maximum budgets allowed to hire cyclists. Like there is in Hockey, in the NHL. This way, it isn't always the richest team that's hiring the best talent, and winning every single year. Is there such a rule in UCI Pro Tour Cycling ?

Louis :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:57 pm
Posts: 27
The main point is the level of control that a power meter can give you. If someone attacks it gives you a point of reference and from there you can establish how you should react / respond. Everything becomes very calculated and riders no longer race on pure instinct.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:44 am
Posts: 1410
MikeyT wrote:
The main point is the level of control that a power meter can give you. If someone attacks it gives you a point of reference and from there you can establish how you should react / respond. Everything becomes very calculated and riders no longer race on pure instinct.


MikeyT, real question, do you race bicycles? (not a jab at you), I am merely implying that real life doesn't happen like this.

lets remove speedometers from and rev counters from motorsport. 'a driver should be able to 'feel' how fast he or she is going in the corner'.... lets make racing about instincts.

this is not a looking at head unit thing, this is a team sky has a 'strength' having 1 or 2 members of their team that are just making other PROs look like amateur hour. I doubt anyone is so precise (not to mention our own tools aren't that precise) to distinguish between 6.6 vs 6.5, and 'if i ride at 6.5, then my competitor will still be able to hang in there'. The difference is large between froome and others. So large that i personally dont think a power meter would change the way any of them ride or even the outcome of the tour, but certainly there isn't any 'real' reason to remove them. Just as there isn't a reason to remove aero fabric, or new helmets, or bike frames.

flashback to when i was actually good at something, but in highschool soccer (futbol, football for you international blokes), we had the coach's son who would throw a ball in from inside of the opposing team's half into the box. We essentially had a corner kick any time we had a throw in. Sure wasn't pretty, and i hated playing like this being a center midfield as we were 'playing' for a throw in all game. We were called out by other teams, they knew it was coming, they still didn't do anything about it. We continued to get throw in, score goals, and win championships. 4 in a row to be exact and we were at one point ranked #7 in the country for high school soccer teams. It would be stupid to not use a team's strength to succeed. Just as it would be silly to change the rules of a sport simply because it wasn't entertaining to spectators. Different conversation if a team cheated to 'obtain' their strength....

maybe you all can join spectating with this guy if you are boared Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 7:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 6:58 am
Posts: 833
Location: 604
MikeyT is that how you race?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 3950
Location: Bay Area
prendrefeu wrote:
Ok, Karsten, going by your reasoning it doesn't matter, so what's the big deal in not making that available? Apparently it's not being used, so there's no loss in having it not visible, right? Why the resistance then? If it genuinely isn't being used, then you don't need it. Done! Having it removed doesn't harm your ability to win, makes doubters happy. Win-win. Done.

Or no... ? You still want them in there? Why?


I'm saying powermeters should still be used, not that teams should not release the data. I think Braislford is full of shit in that regard. Release the digits.

I think its useful for other things and since its strategically moot, leave it. I also think if people think that's what's making racing boring to them then they clearly don't understand training with power and bike racing.

_________________
Don't take me too seriously.
Bike
Strava


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:35 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:43 pm
Posts: 2924
Location: Canada
powermeter? dull racing? mathematics?

Do any of you guys actually race high enough a level, with a PM during races? The last thing I do when racing is watching my PM screen. Who gives a shit about what power your going during a race, if you're maxed out, you're maxed out. There is no perfect race conditions. You wont always be in position to put out a predictable power output given positionning, matches burnt, fatigue, what happened before, etc.

I lol hard at the stupid "racing with a PM is cheating" thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:22 pm
Posts: 902
Location: London
Agreed. The last 2 days on this thread make the comments on Cycling News look insightful.

_________________
Snacking on carrot sticks - Where did it all go so wrong?
-
Finsbury Park CC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm
Posts: 1150
HUMP DIESEL wrote:
My question is "Why can there not be extraordinary human beings?" Why can there not be per a generation a guy who is just better? Why does everyone have to get a trophy, or get to play or get to participate. Why do we do this? Did anyone feel that Michael Jordan was doping during his time with the Bulls? He was an extraordinary athlete, a showman who made his opponents look sub-par, but we loved him, why is it that in cycling you cannot have a person who is just better?

We are our own cancer, we are eating ourselves from the inside out, destroying our own sport through speculation and doubt. We know Merckx used steroids, but we still put him on high, why do we do the new generation the way we do?

HUMP



^this :thumbup:

_________________
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a.... clean cyclist!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Posts: 7412
Location: Los Angeles / Glendale, California
Ok, so you're maxed you are maxed out. Got it. And I do agree there are more factors at play, but simultaneously we're looking at a team that DOES run the numbers and does calculate it through: Sky.

We're not talking about devinci, kwalker, nathanong or other racers here. Nor are we talking about Quintana and other racers not on Sky.
We're talking about the approach team Sky does, no? The discussion hasn't come up here and elsewhere prior to Sky's method. But now we're talking about it, two years in. They're on another level entirely and taking an entirely different approach. Karsten's own posts are all about how Sky calculates it through, has meticulous training programs, etc:. That's really great - and will innovate the future of the sport, surely - which, maybe at some point when you're on a solid, organized team at a very high level and you too can have your team scout the course many months ahead of time, run the calculations of the potential for your rivals, the numbers you need to succeed, and just hit that mark while hoping that other factors (punctures, weather, crashes) do not hamper the plan. If that all happens and you've trained your team to be able to match that mark to a close enough degree, you've figured it out.


Finally, for that common argument that this isn't 'entertainment' : No, it is not entertainment in the sense that we as an audience do not want to see scripted scenarios or fixed races... but you're kidding yourself if you think ANY sport at the professional level is not for entertainment. Do you think these results have meaning in the world? No, they don't. Professional level sports want you to watch, to follow your favorite teams and players. The more you watch, the more you will buy the same equipment, wear the same clothes, attend their events, see the advertisers' adverts, ingrain that sponsor's name in your mind and so on. If it wasn't entertaining in any significant way, you are less likely to watch. You believe that it's the athlete, the power of the human body, achieving things and sparking dreams. Sure, there's some o of that, but it's entertainment. It is not deciding land ownership, wars, food provisions, or the future of mankind. It's entertainment. We race on the amateur level for what? Our own personal desire for competition, maybe some bragging rights, or for a few to fulfill whatever baggage is elsewhere in the psyche, to take what we love to do (ride a bike) to another level. Maybe some people make it to the pros: that's fantastic, they get to get paid to do something they love, taking it to another level. But as long as there is an audience that is intently paying attention, to the audience it is entertainment.

If it isn't for entertainment, ask yourself: what is the point of professional sport in the world? What does it do?
It keeps us entertained. It has people talking about it on rest days. It supports a range of industries and media. If it wasn't entertaining, there will be not enough audience to support it continuing. It is entertainment.

_________________
Exp001 || TeamLACBC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Posts: 2311
Location: On the bike
I don't know if this article by Michael Puchowicz has been posted yet, but it is a good take on things. I am most intrigued by the analysis of Vayer:


Quote:
the work of Antoine Vayer, a French journalist and former trainer for the infamous Festina cycling team, 6.37 w/kg for the 23 minute effort puts Froome well into the "miraculous" level of human physiology. This is a level of performance not seen in the Tour de France before the introduction of EPO. It is a level of performance that has all but disappeared following Operation Puerto and the introduction of the Athlete Biological Passport.




http://www.outsideonline.com/fitness/bi ... mance.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:23 pm 


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28302 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 1269, 1270, 1271, 1272, 1273, 1274, 1275 ... 1887  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: glepore, remymartin78, Yahoo [Bot] and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. 2015 'PRO' cycling discussion

in Cycle Chat

Frankie - B

0

1107

Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:20 pm

Frankie - B View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. New Bike Discussion - Emonda, BH, or Bianchi Infinito CV

in Road

jefftillack

9

449

Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:26 am

kgt View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Cycling in Burlingame

in Cycle Chat

KH1

6

288

Tue Oct 21, 2014 5:59 am

Dalai View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Cycling in skiathos!

in Cycle Chat

Beancouter

2

392

Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:13 pm

Beancouter View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Cycling Technology

in Road

YinYang

4

1189

Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:12 pm

coloclimber View the latest post


It is currently Sun Dec 28, 2014 7:56 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB